Wasn't this article posted by the nineteen-year-old writer herself a few months ago? What makes it so notable to you that you thought it deserved to be reposted? I'm always interested in gaining insights into the editorial decisions made by FR and its associates.
BTW, do you think the article strenghtens or weakens the pro-life position? If I recall correctly, many posters (including myself) disagreed with its premises.
In my opinion, the pro-life movement has been somewhat inneffective because of a psycological inability to accept the finality of the Roe vs. Wade decision. Significant progress for the pro-life movement has only happened when they have accepted the constraints imposed by and then worked around these constraints…It is so essential that the right-to-life movement in America galvanize behind the idea the logic, not morality, will be what wins the day in this fight, because sometimes, despite the rightness of the intentions, morality has to be left out of the game. Morality doesn’t bind everyone together. The only thing that does that is humanness and the logic of protecting ourselves; and that is what has to be appealed to if we are going to make a difference in the fight to lessen and eventually eliminate abortion. Wasn't this article posted by the nineteen-year-old writer herself a few months ago…
Come on , twice is OK, encourage young conservatives. If 19 year olds can fight our wars, they can write articles. Just don’t let them drink. :>)
I admit though, the idea that morality is to be left out of the issue, doesn’t work, it is the issue. “Protecting ourselves” (from overpopulation) is the logic of China.