Abortion: Can the GOP and Democrats Compromise?

We read that Hilary has proposed a compromise position on abortion. Condolezza Rice describes herself as mildly pro-choice. Most people assume that political posturing motivates Hilary’s position emphasizing the word “rare” in “safe, legal and rare.” Condi Rice’s position is assumed to be genuine. E.J. Dionne puts it all down to G.O.P cleverness in handling the issue.

Political posturing or not, there is a moral case to be made for the compromise position.

In May, 2004, I quoted this extract from George McKenna’s Atlantic Monthly article:

"In this debate I have made my own position clear. It is a pro-life position (though it may not please all pro-lifers), and its model is Lincoln's position on slavery from 1854 until well into the Civil War: tolerate, restrict, discourage. Like Lincoln's, its touchstone is the common good of the nation, not the sovereign self. Like Lincoln's position, it accepts the legality but not the moral legitimacy of the institution that it seeks to contain. It invites argument and negotiation; it is a gambit, not a gauntlet."

If you would like to read McKenna’s argument in detail, click here.

My own guess is that compromise is impossible. McKenna’s case is persuasive. However, to paraphrase an old cigarette commercial, both sides – prolife and prochoice - would “rather fight than switch.”

Click here to see how the abortion debate has embittered the nation’s political atmosphere.