Note: This “Moore to the Point” commentary aired on NewsTalkSTL on Thursday, May 26th. Audio included below.
Social media is the least likely place to resolve differences – if anything, it seemingly stokes them, further increasing our political and cultural divides. So it’s probably the last place to look for reasoned discourse on a topic as thorny as abortion.
But it can sometimes spark a meaningful conversation – and even inspire an Op-Ed. I was reminded of one such spark last week when a witness testifying at a US House hearing on abortion left Democratic Representative Jamie Raskin scrambling to reclaim his time. In response to his assertion that she was calling for a nationwide ban on abortions with no exceptions for rape and incest, witness Catherine Glenn Foster replied: “If we added rape and incest exceptions, would you vote for it?”
READ RELATED: RedState LIVE! Is Happening Now: Never Let a Crisis Not Make You Famous
Years ago, I was challenged on Twitter on that very point and it inspired me to ask: If true compromise were on the table — if those who fall in the “pro-choice” camp were assured that abortion would remain a legal option in cases of rape, incest, and life of the mother — how many of them would agree to it?
I have yet to receive any takers on that proposition. So, I’m forced to wonder, are these exceptions intended to prove the rule? Or swallow it whole?
Source:
