This is a very interesting news story about abortion trampling the rights of women and hurting them. I'm not sure why this is such news, but it still seems like a shocker to read that 64% of women who have abortions report feeling pressured to have one. Or that women are constantly being forced to have an abortion by their parents, their boyfriend's parents, their boyfriend, their abuser, etc. Also, that homicide is the number one cause of death for pregnant women - not even pregnancy complications, but out right murder - grim state of affairs.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061130/OPINION01/611300307/1008

Abortion as violence to women and children

I don't know about you, but I never evaluated closely how abortions are done. Here is a description from one crisis pregnancy center on your options for abortions. If this isn't violence to women and to children, I don't know what is!

The following is a description of the various types of surgical and chemical abortion procedures performed in the United States.

RU-486 (Mifepristone)RU-486, or Mifepristone, is a chemical method of inducing abortion. It is taken only when a woman is pregnant, up to seven weeks after the beginning of her last menstrual period.
The drug works by blocking progesterone, a crucial hormone during pregnancy. Without progesterone, the uterine lining does not provide food, fluid and oxygen to the developing fetus.
This procedure requires three visits to the abortion provider. During the first visit a dosage of Mifepristone is taken. Then, two days later, a second drug is taken that stimulates the uterus to contract and expel the fetus. Finally, 12 more days later a follow-up examination is required to ensure the fetus has been expelled.
According to one manufacturer, bleeding and cramping are normal occurrences with this procedure. Side effects may include nausea, headache, vomiting, diarrhea, dizziness, fatigue and back pain. Additionally, one out of 100 women require surgical intervention to stop heavy bleeding. 1
Suction-AspirationIn this method, the cervical muscle ring is first paralyzed and stretched open. A hollow plastic tube with a knifelike edge is inserted into the uterus. Suction is used to remove the fetus, and the placenta is cut from the uterine wall.
Dilation and Curettage (D & C) This procedure is similar to suction-aspiration, though rather than a suction tube this method relies on a loop-shaped steel knife called a curette. The curette is inserted into the uterus and the fetus and placenta are scraped away. Bleeding can be very heavy with this method.
Dilation and Evacuation (D & E) This type of abortion is done after the third month of pregnancy.
First, the cervix is dilated. Then, Laminaria sticks (made of sterilized, compressed seaweed) are commonly inserted into the cervix. When inserted, the Laminaria sticks absorb moisture and expand, causing the cervix to enlarge. A pliers-like instrument is inserted through the cervix into the uterus and used to tear away parts of the fetus. Once outside the womb, the fetus may then be reassembled to ensure that all body parts have been removed.
ProstaglandinProstaglandin is a hormone that is used to induce labor in mid- and late-term pregnancies. To prevent a live birth, the fetus may be injected with drugs and killed prior to delivery.
Dilation and Extraction (D & X) This procedure, commonly referred to as ?partial-birth? abortion, is also used in mid- and late-term pregnancies (from 4 to 9 months).
First, ultrasound is used to identify how the fetus is facing in the womb. Then, forceps are inserted through the cervical canal into the uterus and used to pull the fetus feet first and face down (breech position). The body is then pulled out of the birth canal, except for the head which is too large to pass through the cervix. While the fetus is still alive, surgical scissors are inserted into the base of the skull and spread to enlarge the wound. A suction catheter is then inserted into the skull and the brain is removed. Finally, the skull collapses allowing the fetus to pass completely through the cervix.
NOTES: 1. What Every Provider Should Know, MEFEPREX / Danco Laboratories (http://mifeprex.com)

http://www.awomansconcern.org/boston/questions/abortion

Election Results on Pro-Life Issues

Hadley Arkes on NRO sums up the matter pretty well in yesterday's article - http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ODRlNmE1YzlkYmI3YWZjNjA1ZTk0N2FiMWI1MzZjMzg=

Looks like approximately 14 pro-life seats were lost in the House, the leadership in place in at least the House and possibly the Senate, is not pro-life, and it is expected that no serious pro-life legislation will be put on the floor during the 110th Congress.

The biggest upcoming fight will be the appropriation riders (provisions that specify how funds are spent and have to be renewed every year) that protect things like the moral status of embryos (Dickey-Wicker), the conscience of medical providers (Weldon-Hyde), and no funding to foreign aid providers who provide abortion (Mexico City Policy). This fight will begin in the next few days and weeks for FY07 appropriation bills and then be picked up again in the Spring for the FY08 bills.

Also, note that Prop 85 in CA (parental notification for minors seeking abortions) is on its way to failure. The abortion ban in South Dakota failed. Human cloning and Embryonic Stem Cell research were both made a constitutional right in the state of Missouri.

November 7, 2006 will not be remembered as a good day for those fighting to remove the ugly specter of abortion in our country.

Follow up on Evangelical public policy article

This is a second interesting article about Evangelicals in public policy. A defense that Evangelicals aren't crazy, don't want a theocracy, and aren't given enough credit for all the good things that have come about from their efforts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/07/AR2006110701228.html?referrer=email

Evangelical Public Policy - Setting a new tone

Here's a very, very interesting article by Michael Gerson (former speechwriter and policy advisor to the President) on the new face of Evangelicalism (specifically, though it includes the public face of our Catholic friends as well, more on that later...) as it interfaces with public policy. I think Mr. Gerson is right-on in a lot of what he says.

I'd love to hear what you all think - either by posting comments here or by emailing me (for those of you who know my email address!)

Newsweek article here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15566389/site/newsweek/