Abortion Debate and the New Pill
The newly developed French pill, RU-486, may finally be the answer to contraceptive failure and unintended pregnancy. RU-486, when taken within days of a missed menstrual period, breaks down the lining of the uterus and brings on a period, thereby preventing a possibly fertilized egg from implanting and growing.
Most Americans will undoubtedly welcome this breakthrough, since every woman will be able to self-administer this pill in the privacy of her home. This private act will render the abortion debate moot.
Already, anti-abortion/anti-contraception advocates are speaking out in alarm. Cal Thomas, former associate of Jerry Falwell, urged the Food and Drug Administration to reject RU-486 partly because “the United States has never had a national debate on abortion.”
Where was Thomas between 1966 and 1972 when 17 state legislatures liberalized or repealed their ban on abortion, and 28 other legislatures were debating the issue? Where has Thomas been since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1973 that a woman had the right to decide, prior to fetal viability, to terminate her pregnancy? And still, bill after bill has been voted upon in Congress and in state legislatures on various aspects of the right to abortion since 1973.
Twenty years of tedious and divisive debate should be enough for anyone; unless, of course, one’s power is based on one’s anti-choice position. As a woman, wife, and mother of four, I resent anyone using my right of reproductive choice for political gain.
S.F. MOSER
La Jolla
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
