Tim Rollins Photo courtesy of Beth Rollins

In the 27 years since the controversial Roe v. Wade decision by the Supreme Court which made abortion a legal right for women anywhere in the country, we need to take a look at what that decision has wrought. In that time, over 35,000,000 babies have been aborted – more than the entire state of California or put another way, the combined populations of New York State and Texas. Thirty-five million – many of whom could have been placed in the loving homes of childless couples to be nurtured, educated and raised to be valued, productive, contributing members of society. These same 35 million, had they been allowed to survive and develop to adulthood, could have had the opportunity to acquire selected professional skills of which our nation is in such dire need right now.

While the economy is in overall good shape right now with nearly full employment, there are certain areas in select professions that are crying out for talented and qualified people to step up to the plate and fill vacancies that have existed for (in some cases) extended periods of time. But I digress.

When the Supremes ruled on this issue, they essentially took away the rights of the states to set rules for this most personal of all decisions. If, as the pro-choice element is so fond of parroting, that the choice is ‘between a woman and her doctor’, then what right does the Federal Government have getting into the issue by making a ruling on the matter? If anything, you would think that a pro-choice mentality would feel that it is between the mother, her doctor and the State Medical Review Board – not the Feds. But no, they had to push their agenda all the way to Washington – the road to their personal version of the land of ‘Oz’, with (in this case) the Supremes functioning as wizards. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In my OpinioNet (http://www.opinionet.com) column of October 5th called The Right to Life, I mentioned that abortion is by far the most divisive issue of our time, and that there were even disagreements on it within my own family. Not only am I opposed to abortion on moral and religious grounds, I am also opposed to the circumventing of the Tenth Amendment in this case, and that is exactly what the Feds did when the Supremes made this a federal matter. Making it a federal right did not make abortions any easier to get, and that is for a number of reasons.

First, in the majority of the United States, a woman cannot get an abortion in her own county. There are a host of reasons for that. First, many counties do not have abortion clinics or Planned Parenthood offices. Second, fewer and fewer doctors are willing to perform abortions. That is due in part to medical malpractice insurance premiums going through the roof. Third, many of these doctors have come to the conclusion (due to advances in medical research over the ensuing years) that a fetus is indeed a child well before it is born and their Hippocratic Oath precludes them from knowingly doing harm to another living person. Even the most ardent pro-choicer would have to concede that. And lastly, most doctors just simply don’t want to get their heads blown off by a radical fringe doing something many of them would simply prefer not doing.

There is talk about the next U.S. President having the opportunity to put three or even as many as four justices on the Supreme Court, and that the winner of this election is by and large going to be in the driver’s seat as to which way the Court leans. Right now, the Court seems to be at a perfect ideological balance. John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer are on the Left. You have Sandra Day O’Connor, David H. Souter and Anthony M. Kennedy in the middle - and you have William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas on the Right. This easily explains many of the 5-4 decisions that have come down from the Court over the last couple of years since Breyer took his seat.

Governor George W. Bush (R-TX) has indicated that he would select justices along the likes of Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas – two of the most conservative members of the Court. This has civil libertarians, women’s groups and assorted others in a sheer panic. There are those who believe that should such a shuffle be made to the High Court, that Roe v. Wade would end up in a judicial trash heap, which is where I think it belongs – but not for the reasons that most pro-life people do.

To me, although I strongly oppose abortion with limited exceptions as I have explained previously, I believe that Roe v. Wade should be scrapped from the federal legal system on account of the fact that it is a state matter. It should be addressed by individual state legislatures and state courts, not in federal court. That is what is meant by States Rights as specified in the Tenth Amendment.

As to the long term solution of abortion, it all boils down to this: I have to agree with a statement Elizabeth Dole made when she was campaigning for President before she dropped out of the running - and that was that a constitutional amendment against abortion is not the answer at this time.

The reason I say this is that you simply cannot legislate misbehaving people to behave all of a sudden. These changes come about as people are taught or reminded of the sanctity of all human life – and not just the children that were planned. As they do this, they find themselves (in the overwhelming majority of the cases) appreciating how much joy and lasting happiness children can bring into their lives.

My wife and I have five children between us. Each of us has two children from our first marriages, and we have a little boy between us. Although I can’t speak for her on this issue, I can say that because I was older when my youngest was born, I appreciate him a lot more – and that doesn’t mean I love my other children less. I love them as equally as I can. It’s just that the ensuing years between the birth of my second (1983) and third children (1996) has taught me all the more about the value of life and the life experiences I have had have substantially deepened my ability to love, accept and appreciate others without conditions or qualifications.

The key to eliminating the scourge of abortion is through education and like I said earlier, teaching others the sanctity of human life – something that is not reinforced in the often sick society we live in wherein there is a wanton and depraved indifference for human life. Changing the hearts and mindsets of people requires that they take a closer look around them and see what really matters for them. Once that is done, then a constitutional amendment can be enacted.

Such an action would be then both long overdue and warmly welcomed, wouldn’t you think?

• Photo courtesy of the United States Supreme Court (http://www.supremecourtus.gov)

Copyright © 2000 by Timothy Rollins.
All Rights Reserved.

-Published with permission