Abortion Debate

Both sides of the abortion debate will be focusing on Baltimore today, when the City Council is expected to approve a first-in-the-nation law imposing new regulations on faith-based organizations that try to steer women away from the procedure. The measure, introduced by council President Stephanie C. Rawlings-Blake at the behest of Planned Parenthood of Maryland, would require that crisis pregnancy centers that do not provide abortions or birth control post signs saying so. Proponents frame the effort as a matter of public health.

The Germantown clinic featured in today's story, “ Maryland abortion protest target takes fight to protesters ,” has been a focal point of the abortion debate over the past few years. Dr. LeRoy Carhartarrived there in late 2010. That year, Nebraska had banned abortions after 20 weeks. Carhart, who performs both early- and late-term abortions, still lives in Nebraska and travels to Maryland to work at the Germantown clinic. Michael Martelli, director of the Maryland Coalition for Life, said Carhart's arrival in Maryland was a “catalyst for the … rising up and unity” of many groups that oppose abortion.

Readers such as John Rutkowski must not understand that Garry Trudeau's series on the forced ultra-sound law for women seeking abortion is no attempt at being funny ("Idiotic 'Doonesbury' strip on abortion insults readers," March 20). "Comic" strip is a misnomer for Doonesbury, which is why The Sun runs the strip on the op-ed page and not the "funnies" pages. I must also take issue with the series being a jab at all those with "some" morals and religious convictions. Apparently, those who don't feel the jab are totally lacking morals and religious scruples.

My 16-year career in two legislatures (eight in the Maryland General Assembly and eight in Congress) included many debates on the most divisive issues of our time: Capital punishment, affirmative action, war and peace, impeachment, entitlement reform and abortion rights were guaranteed to generate partisan strife and emotional debate. No issue generated more emotion than a woman's right to choose. Intense, emotional debates produced a unique lexicon, as legislators debated the merits and implications of "judicial bypass," "parental consent," "partial birth" and the many complexities attendant to Medicaid (taxpayer)

Give Gov. Parris N. Glendening credit: He's not afraid of a fight. He has guaranteed a nasty one by including in his budget provisions loosening restrictions on abortions for Medicaid recipients. But it's an important fight, one that is long overdue.Only two years ago, Maryland came as close as possible to a democratic settlement of the abortion debate. Voters in November 1992 approved, 62-38 percent, a ballot measure ensuring women in Maryland would continue to have access to legal abortion, even if the Supreme Court overturned Roe vs. Wade.

Five hours of hearings on the abortion issue yesterday changed no minds. The subject is well known to all 188 members of the General Assembly. Every delegate and senator has taken a position. In 1991, unlike 1990, legislative leaders have made it clear the matter will be voted upon in both the House and the Senate.Pro-abortion advocates have the upper hand. A majority of lawmakers seems committed to giving women the same right to an abortion in the initial stages of pregnancy that the Supreme Court stipulated in its Roe vs. Wade decision.

If new delegates in Annapolis thought they had gotten a good taste of the legislative process, they may want to revise their impressions later this week. The subject under consideration on the House floor tomorrow afternoon and evening is Gov. Parris N. Glendening's budget for fiscal year 1996. But the real focus of the debate falls in his courageous but controversial decision to lift restrictions on funding for Medicaid abortions.Since 1980, Maryland has allowed Medicaid funds to pay for abortions only in cases where the mother's life or health is seriously threatened, or in cases where pregnancy results from rape or incest or when the fetus is deformed.

BOSTON -- At least they won't be showing the cartoon in the Supreme Court. For once we will hold this debate without the infamous line drawings that look straight through a woman, as if she were an invisible vessel, to the perfect Gerber baby lying within. That's been the defining image, the most graphic of graphics ever since the pro-life movement invented the phrase "partial-birth abortion" as another strike on the public opinion front. The Supreme Court prefers the Constitution to the cartoon.

ANNAPOLIS -- The most intense abortion debate in Annapolis so far this year is not between the usual supporters and opponents. It's simmering within the abortion-rights movement as some legislators and advocate groups disagree over what shape their legislation will take.The arguments are centering on the issue of parental notice: Should a parent be told before a girl has an abortion?The question has provoked hard-fought battles in other states. Anti-abortion groups say the measure is a necessity.

IF THE PROCEDURE known as "partial-birth abortion" has turned into a dream-come-true opportunity for opponents of legalized abortion to make inroads among traditional pro-choice advocates, the drug known as RU-486 could represent the movement's nightmare. By providing a non-surgical way to end a pregnancy, the drug, which the Food and Drug Administration has said it will approve soon, removes some of the pro-life movement's best tools for appealing to public opinion.It is easy to find out which hospitals or clinics perform surgical abortions and target them for the public protests that make many women shy away from seeking out these services.

Readers such as John Rutkowski must not understand that Garry Trudeau's series on the forced ultra-sound law for women seeking abortion is no attempt at being funny ("Idiotic 'Doonesbury' strip on abortion insults readers," March 20). "Comic" strip is a misnomer for Doonesbury, which is why The Sun runs the strip on the op-ed page and not the "funnies" pages. I must also take issue with the series being a jab at all those with "some" morals and religious convictions. Apparently, those who don't feel the jab are totally lacking morals and religious scruples.

Both sides of the abortion debate will be focusing on Baltimore today, when the City Council is expected to approve a first-in-the-nation law imposing new regulations on faith-based organizations that try to steer women away from the procedure. The measure, introduced by council President Stephanie C. Rawlings-Blake at the behest of Planned Parenthood of Maryland, would require that crisis pregnancy centers that do not provide abortions or birth control post signs saying so. Proponents frame the effort as a matter of public health.

Both sides of the abortion debate will be focusing on Baltimore today, when the City Council is expected to approve a first-in-the-nation law imposing new regulations on faith-based organizations that try to steer women away from the procedure. The measure, introduced by council President Stephanie C. Rawlings-Blake at the behest of Planned Parenthood of Maryland, would require that crisis pregnancy centers that do not provide abortions or birth control post signs saying so. Proponents frame the effort as a matter of public health.

A Baltimore City Council panel is set to take a key vote today on controversial legislation that would require pregnancy clinics that don't perform abortions or distribute birth control to post signs stating just that. The legislation would affect four clinics in Baltimore. It has drawn attention from people on both sides of the abortion debate who think the city council bill could become a model for legislation in other cities and towns across the county. City Council President Stephanie C. Rawlings-Blake introduced the measure after meeting with abortion rights advocacy groups.

If legalized abortion led to the drastic 1990s decline in crime, as some people think, will a decline in abortion lead to a crime surge? That question came to mind as activists last week marked the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Although the "pro-life" and "pro-choice" groups don't agree on much, both found something to celebrate in the big news of the day: U.S. abortion rates have fallen to a 30-year low. The New York-based Guttmacher Institute, whose research is cited by both sides in the superheated abortion debate, reported that abortions fell to 1.2 million in 2005 from a peak of 1.6 million in 1990.

The most intense battleground in the abortion debate these days revolves around a simple question: What do women need to know before they terminate a pregnancy? South Dakota lawmakers want to compel doctors - under penalty of a month in jail - to tell women that the abortion they seek will kill a "whole, separate, unique, living human being." South Carolina is on the verge of requiring women to review ultrasound images of their fetus with a physician before consenting to end the pregnancy.

A Baltimore City Council panel is set to take a key vote today on controversial legislation that would require pregnancy clinics that don't perform abortions or distribute birth control to post signs stating just that. The legislation would affect four clinics in Baltimore. It has drawn attention from people on both sides of the abortion debate who think the city council bill could become a model for legislation in other cities and towns across the county. City Council President Stephanie C. Rawlings-Blake introduced the measure after meeting with abortion rights advocacy groups.

Both sides in the bitter abortion debate, which has played out in Pennsylvania as intensely as anywhere, have been using taxpayer money to advance their causes.On one side, an abortion-rights legislator -- Democratic Rep. Karen Ritter -- has distributed $500,000 from the state's general fund to provide family-planning services, including birth control, around the state -- services that the state legislature expressly voted not to provide.Anti-abortion forces find this outrageous."We object to our tax dollars being funneled into organizations like Planned Parenthood that are in the forefront of the abortion-rights movement," said Mary Beliveau, legislative coordinator of the Pennsylvania Pro-Life Federation.

Here we are again at the anniversary of the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision on abortion. While the March for Life legions rally in the cold to protest that decision, NARAL Pro-Choice America and other groups celebrate a "woman's right to choose." Catherine Callaghan, co-founder of Feminists for Life of America, taught linguistics at Ohio State University. She once remarked: "Choose is a transitive verb; it requires an object. Finish the sentence - choose what?" Ah, but the main point of saying "right to choose" and "pro-choice" and "the choice issue" is to avoid the word abortion.

FIRST JOHN ROBERTS. Then Samuel Alito. In the view of some people, all that is needed now to overturn Roe v. Wade is the right case. I am not as sure as I once was that it would be a bad idea. Not because I want to see abortion outlawed. Criminalize abortion and only rich women will have safe ones. No. I want abortion to remain legal, and therefore available to poor women and young women and women without the resources to navigate a black market system. But I might like to see abortion rights re-argued -- in state legislatures instead of the U.S. Supreme Court.