Lawrence Lader was scarcely a household name, but reading his long, glowing obituary in The New York Times last spring brought back memories. In 1966 Lader published a book called Abortion arguing the pro-abortion side of the debate. Consulting it while writing a book on the other side, I couldn’t help admiring the polemical skills he brought to bear in a very bad cause.
Lader was a veteran propagandist for contraception and abortion and a founder of the group today called NARAL Pro-Choice America. His book helped set the stage for the 1973 Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade and was cited several times in that notorious decision. Feminist author Betty Friedan called him the founding father of the abortion movement. God rest his soul.
Poor Lader. If he was following events at the time of his death, he must have been dismayed by the drift of things. Whatever the future may bring, the days of unrestricted abortion on demand appear to be drawing to an end. As one news analysis put it, “The view from the pro-choice side is this is a fight they are losing.”
Polls support that. A Harris poll that misleadingly worded its question to suggest Roe v. Wade allowed abortion only in the first three months of pregnancy nevertheless found that support for Roe had fallen below 50% for the first time in 30 years. Forty-four percent said they'd back a law like one in South Dakota barring all abortions except to save the mother's life. One count a while back found that all 50 states either had laws putting limits on abortion or were considering them. Twenty-six states had laws forbidding abortion after the 12th week.
And now the Supreme Court, in the term getting underway October 2, has before it two cases that could produce the most important abortion-related ruling in at least 15 years. The oral arguments are scheduled for November 8, with a decision likely next spring.
At issue is the constitutionality of a federal law enacted in 2003 banning the hideous procedure called partial-birth abortion. This is the technique, more infanticide than abortion, which involves partly delivering an unborn child, then killing it by suctioning out its brain.
Several lower courts have struck down the federal law because of a 2000 Supreme Court decision which overturned a similar state law from Nebraska. But there are grounds for thinking — or anyway hoping — for a different result this time around. The basis for overturning the law in Nebraska was the absence of language to allow exceptions in case of medical necessity. Wisely, the framers of the federal law were at pains to amass a body of expert testimony affirming that medical circumstances never make the partial-birth abortion procedure necessary.
Changes in the membership of the Supreme Court since the Nebraska ruling may be even more relevant to the outcome. The addition to the court of Chief Justice John Roberts (replacing pro-life William Rehnquist) and Associate Justice Samuel Alito (replacing pro-choice Sandra Day O'Connor) is widely believed to represent a net gain of one vote for the prolife side. The outcome in 2000 was 5-4 in support of partial-birth abortion; this time it could be 5-4 the other way. And that — so it's thought — might even lay the groundwork for overturning Roe v. Wade.
Lawrence Lader in 1966 called abortion “the dread secret of our society.” He helped make it a high-visibility fact. And also more dread than ever. Four decades later, an end to this madness could be approaching.
Russell Shaw is a freelance writer from Washington, D.C. You can email him at RShaw10290@aol.com.
To purchase Shaw's most popular books attractively priced in the Catholic Exchange store, click here.
