What Men Choose with Choice

Demographer Judith Blake was most influential in persuading abortion advocates to go through the courts rather than through the legislatures to achieve their goal of abortion-on-demand. Her 1971 Science magazine article, "Abortion and Public Opinion," showed that the American people were resistant to the radical demand of unlimited abortion. Thus, going through state legislatures to achieve the movement's goal would ultimately prove unsuccessful, she wrote.

But Dr. Blake did not counsel despair or defeat for the radicals. Instead, she noted that there was one demographic that consistently polled high for abortion on demand. This cohort was young men with Ivy League degrees. These young men were not in a position to bring on the desired revolution in American law, she conceded, but their fathers were. Judith Blake noted that the fathers of the pro-abortion demographic were then sitting on the benches of the federal courts.

Thus, the movement lunged at the opportunity presented by a case like Roe v. Wade. Abortion radical Lawrence Lader founded NARAL. He spoke for the movement when he said: "Abortion is central to everything in life and how we want to live it."

And so it has proved to be. Forty years of unlimited abortion has given us a broad social acceptance of "choice" within the ranks of the elites. Nowhere is this more evident than in Washington, D.C., where NARAL is sponsoring a gala event called "Men for Choice."

As Dr. Blake's findings make clear, abortion would free these up and coming young professionals from unwanted wives, children, obligations, and duties they'd rather not shoulder. And how much better for them if they could pose as bold defenders of women's freedom to choose.

In celebrating choice, we see Hunter Biden, son of the vice president, lending his name to the NARAL fundraiser's marquee. He comes by his support for choice naturally. As a U.S. senator, Joe Biden was a leading Catholic for choice on the Judiciary Committee for decades.

Biographer Paul Kengor has written of Joe Biden's famous run down the platform of the AMTRAK station in Wilmington, Delaware. Biden rushed to embrace, with tears of joy, his Senate colleague, Warren Rudman. The New Hampshire Republican had reassured Biden that David Souter would be a reliable vote for abortion on the U.S. Supreme Court. As Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Joe Biden had taken a huge risk in voting for President George H.W. Bush's Delphic nominee, a man plucked from the obscurity of the forests of the Granite State.

Once Souter lined up unreservedly with the pro-abortion bloc on the high court, Joe Biden could relax. His political future among the Democrats was secure.

It should be noted that when men say they favor choice, they are saying they favor it for someone else. For the women. For the unborn children they bear.

This highly approved moral stance brings to mind the massive body of work of Sen. John C. Calhoun. Calhoun's famous Disquisition on Government went on at considerable length to demonstrate with mind-numbing logic the good of slavery. The South's "peculiar institution," the revered South Carolinian argued, was a positive good. It benefited the nation, the South, the slaver-holder, and it even benefited the slave.

Abraham Lincoln was able to dismiss Calhoun's stacked tomes and dense arguments with a quip: Though volumes have been written to show the good of slavery, we never hear of the man who seeks the good of it by becoming a slave himself.

We never see the man who chooses choice for himself. Science today shows us the one whose fate will be chosen -- by others. By Joe and Hunter Biden. We can see the child in the womb as never before. At this stage of development, the choices for killing the child are limited. One of those choices is dismemberment. See the child within the womb and consider whether we would choose such a fate for anyone we love.

We are constantly told that Science must determine all our actions, not religion, or tradition, or sentiment. Only Science with a capital S. But Science clearly shows this being to be one of us. We cannot in conscience take the amoral Barack Obama dodge and say the question is "above our pay grade."

The media loves to grill pro-life politicians on choice. One question they never ask them is this: "When Roe v. Wade overturned the abortion laws of fifty states, those laws were all located within the homicide code. What scientific evidence convinces you that the unborn child is not a human being?"

The rest of us do have a choice. We can refrain from running down that AMTRAK platform to embrace Joe and Hunter. We can exercise that much freedom of choice. We can do it for those yet unborn who are denied their freedom to choose.

Demographer Judith Blake was most influential in persuading abortion advocates to go through the courts rather than through the legislatures to achieve their goal of abortion-on-demand. Her 1971 Science magazine article, "Abortion and Public Opinion," showed that the American people were resistant to the radical demand of unlimited abortion. Thus, going through state legislatures to achieve the movement's goal would ultimately prove unsuccessful, she wrote.

But Dr. Blake did not counsel despair or defeat for the radicals. Instead, she noted that there was one demographic that consistently polled high for abortion on demand. This cohort was young men with Ivy League degrees. These young men were not in a position to bring on the desired revolution in American law, she conceded, but their fathers were. Judith Blake noted that the fathers of the pro-abortion demographic were then sitting on the benches of the federal courts.

Thus, the movement lunged at the opportunity presented by a case like Roe v. Wade. Abortion radical Lawrence Lader founded NARAL. He spoke for the movement when he said: "Abortion is central to everything in life and how we want to live it."

And so it has proved to be. Forty years of unlimited abortion has given us a broad social acceptance of "choice" within the ranks of the elites. Nowhere is this more evident than in Washington, D.C., where NARAL is sponsoring a gala event called "Men for Choice."

As Dr. Blake's findings make clear, abortion would free these up and coming young professionals from unwanted wives, children, obligations, and duties they'd rather not shoulder. And how much better for them if they could pose as bold defenders of women's freedom to choose.

In celebrating choice, we see Hunter Biden, son of the vice president, lending his name to the NARAL fundraiser's marquee. He comes by his support for choice naturally. As a U.S. senator, Joe Biden was a leading Catholic for choice on the Judiciary Committee for decades.

Biographer Paul Kengor has written of Joe Biden's famous run down the platform of the AMTRAK station in Wilmington, Delaware. Biden rushed to embrace, with tears of joy, his Senate colleague, Warren Rudman. The New Hampshire Republican had reassured Biden that David Souter would be a reliable vote for abortion on the U.S. Supreme Court. As Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Joe Biden had taken a huge risk in voting for President George H.W. Bush's Delphic nominee, a man plucked from the obscurity of the forests of the Granite State.

Once Souter lined up unreservedly with the pro-abortion bloc on the high court, Joe Biden could relax. His political future among the Democrats was secure.

It should be noted that when men say they favor choice, they are saying they favor it for someone else. For the women. For the unborn children they bear.

This highly approved moral stance brings to mind the massive body of work of Sen. John C. Calhoun. Calhoun's famous Disquisition on Government went on at considerable length to demonstrate with mind-numbing logic the good of slavery. The South's "peculiar institution," the revered South Carolinian argued, was a positive good. It benefited the nation, the South, the slaver-holder, and it even benefited the slave.

Abraham Lincoln was able to dismiss Calhoun's stacked tomes and dense arguments with a quip: Though volumes have been written to show the good of slavery, we never hear of the man who seeks the good of it by becoming a slave himself.

We never see the man who chooses choice for himself. Science today shows us the one whose fate will be chosen -- by others. By Joe and Hunter Biden. We can see the child in the womb as never before. At this stage of development, the choices for killing the child are limited. One of those choices is dismemberment. See the child within the womb and consider whether we would choose such a fate for anyone we love.

We are constantly told that Science must determine all our actions, not religion, or tradition, or sentiment. Only Science with a capital S. But Science clearly shows this being to be one of us. We cannot in conscience take the amoral Barack Obama dodge and say the question is "above our pay grade."

The media loves to grill pro-life politicians on choice. One question they never ask them is this: "When Roe v. Wade overturned the abortion laws of fifty states, those laws were all located within the homicide code. What scientific evidence convinces you that the unborn child is not a human being?"

The rest of us do have a choice. We can refrain from running down that AMTRAK platform to embrace Joe and Hunter. We can exercise that much freedom of choice. We can do it for those yet unborn who are denied their freedom to choose.