Response to Steve re Mary Ann Glendon

Very quickly, too quickly: Mary Ann Glendon's work has sought to show the range of responses that an honest confrontation with abortion can bring about. Rather than pretending not to know whether the child is alive and human a la Roe, Europe (at least at the time of her book) candidly admitted the truth but focused on problems of enforcement. She turned in particular to Germany, where the Court and the Legislature debated not whether but how best to protect the unborn child. Since it is so easy to keep a pregnancy hidden in the first 12 weeks, criminal law has little ability to stop such abortions (because no one but the mother and the abortionist know about them). But still, even in these early weeks, punishment can be withheld only if other, more successful methods of protection can be found. The Court here says that becuase the child is so dependent on his/her mother, it cannot ultimately be secured without changing the mother's will to be pro-life (in the first 12 weeks). This in turn is largely a problem of removing the obstacles (no apartment, bad work hours, oppressive boyfriend) that inhibit her natural motherly tendencies, and providing overtly pro-life affirmative supports (e.g. counseling which describes the child and his/her right to life).

Suffice to say that our US debates never get past square one because so many in the USA want to lie. (Though perhaps this is because we are MORE dedicated to human equality and therfore fear that admitting the truth will requiring punishing abortion exactly as we punish other murders.)