Abortion has become the latest issue where Obama has attempted a
maladroit move to the center. In an interview with a Christian magazine,
he said:
I have repeatedly said that I think it's entirely
appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term
abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for
the health of the mother. Now, I don't think that "mental distress"
qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a
serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are
real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to
term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in
place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions.
He also tries to spin his vote against a bill in the Illinois
legislature that extended legal protection to children who survive
botched abortions. But Obama's comments on "mental distress" being
an invalid health exception to a late-term abortion ban go against
the standard set by
Doe v. Bolton, the companion case to
Roe v. Wade. It also contradicts Obama's co-sponsorship
and continued support of the Freedom of Choice Act, which would
among other things essentially codify the
Roe/
Doe
regime, including requiring mental-health exceptions that would
render most late-term abortion bans essentially meaningless.
Now, via Yuval Levin, I see that Obama has
moved to clarify his position:
My only point is this -- historically I have been a
strong believer in a women's right to choose with her doctor, her
pastor and her family. And it is ..I have consistently been saying
that you have to have a health exception on many significant
restrictions or bans on abortions including late-term abortions.
In the past there has been some fear on the part of people who,
not only people who are anti-abortion, but people who may be in the
middle, that that means that if a woman just doesn't feel good then
that is an exception. That's never been the case.
I don't think that is how it has been interpreted. My only point
is that in an area like partial-birth abortion having a mental,
having a health exception can be defined rigorously. It can be
defined through physical health, it can be defined by serious
clinical mental-health diseases. It is not just a matter of feeling
blue. I don't think that's how pro-choice folks have interpreted
it. I don't think that's how the courts have interpreted it and I
think that is important to emphasize and understand.
It isn't clear to me whether Obama is promising to make
mental-health exceptions more rigorous or whether he is (falsely)
claiming that the existing definitions are more rigorous than some
pro-lifers would have people believe. But this does seem to be
another case of Obama trying to move to the right and then take all
the substance of his shift back.
UPDATE: John McCormack has more.
topics:
Abortion
