Shocking Sanity From Thom Hartmann: Late-Term Abortion is 'Murder'

How rare to hear anything rational and compassionate from the left when it comes to abortion.

A seldom-seen departure from this persistent dynamic was heard on libtalker Thom Hartmann's radio show yesterday during a discussion with one of his callers. (Audio after the jump)

Not only did Hartmann take a bite out of the left-wing sacred cow that is the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion in 1973, he condemned abortion in the late stages of healthy pregnancy as, yes, "murder" (audio) --

The Supreme Court never should have decided Roe v. Wade. This is outside their, you know, it's not part of their job, it's not their job description, it's not in the Constitution that the Supreme Court gets to write law and policy. In fact, if anything it's the opposite. Article Three, Section Two says the Supreme Court shall operate under regulations established by Congress. Congress makes the laws! So when the Supreme Court said there are three trimesters and we're going to set up different standards for each one of these three trimesters, they were breaking the law.

But, more importantly as Ruth Bader Ginsburg pointed out, there was a growing women's rights movement that was growing in concert with the abortion rights movement in 1973, 'cause the birth control pill had only been on the market for 11 years, the Catholic Church was going whole, full-tilt boogie against it, and these two movements were producing a really healthy national conversation about, you know, yes, we all agree there needs to be some regulation on abortion. Nobody would want a normally developing child to be aborted in the ninth month. That's insane. That is murder. Eighth month? Probably murder. Seventh month? You know, like I said, the Supreme Court said viability, if it can be viable outside the womb, then it's a human being and it's fully protected. And the point of viability has diminished over time as medical science has gotten better and better and better at dealing with premature babies.

That's a discussion that America needs to have. That's a conversation that should be had in a legislature, in a legislative context.

Agreed, it's a conversation we should be having -- if only more liberals could bring themselves to have it. (Conservatives, on the other hand, are quite comfortable with this discourse). Speaking for myself, it's an exchange I don't recall having with pro-abortion liberals I've argued with for years.

Hartmann does get it wrong when he claims "no one" wants a "normally developing child" aborted (note that he said "child," not "fetus") in the ninth month. An obvious exception here is any Democrat running for office. In fairness, many Democrats claim "personal" objections to late-term abortion -- but their qualms oddly never rise to the level of action. Democrats are more inclined to align themselves with the obscene perspective of Nancy Pelosi, who trumpets such abominations as "sacred."

As with many conservatives, I'm also wary when liberals suggest further "dialogue" on any issue, which is merely code for -- let's keep talking until you come around to my point of view.

Jack Coleman
Jack Coleman
Ex-liberal from People's Republic of Massachusetts