COLUMN RIGHT : The GOP’s Soul Is on the Line Over Abortion : The party has already caved in on taxes and affirmative action.

With abortion once more in the headlines, there’s pressure from an organization called Republicans for Choice for the GOP to abandon its opposition to abortion. Ann E.W. Stone, the national chairman of the organization, believes that young people, women and independents are “clearly” pro-choice, and that the party would increase its appeal by accommodating them.

It’s worth asking: If Republicans were to surrender on abortion, as they earlier did on the tax issue, what would the party then stand for? Fiscal responsibility, did someone say? Republicans have controlled the White House for almost 12 years now, and when last heard of, the budget deficit had risen to $400 billion. It’s hard to think of anything that Republicans believe in that Democrats don’t already support.

The GOP has been more enthusiastic about the defense budget. But that is no longer a relevant issue in American politics. There are right-wingers today who support defense cuts that even liberals would think twice about.

It’s been clear for some time now that, on almost every issue, the GOP is disposed to agree with whatever the system churns out. Affirmative action? The GOP leadership is for it. When the Democrats wanted a new civil-rights bill--and one that eliminated the presumption of innocence for employers--the Republicans went along. More money for the schools, more money for the environment? George Bush wants to be the education President and the environment President. Aid for Russia? It will be packaged and delivered.

Abortion is the only major exception to this general spirit of acquiescence. If the Republicans were now to abandon the one position that clearly differentiates them from the Democrats, it would become embarrassingly clear that the party stands for nothing at all. Far from expanding the party’s appeal, the repudiation of the pro-life plank would probably be a fatal step. Social conservatives long ago abandoned by the Democrats would have no further reason to retain any association with the GOP. The activist element in the pro-life movement may be comparatively small, but as Operation Rescue showed last year in Wichita and now in Buffalo, it is very intense and will never accept the legitimacy of abortion. If their energy and passion were suddenly to be withdrawn from the GOP, the party would lose its moral compass and would not long survive.

The Republican Party was born in the 19th Century out of opposition to slavery (or its extension to the territories). If in this century the party can no longer muster the will to oppose abortion, a moral issue comparable in magnitude to slavery, its demise will be appropriate and even reflect a certain historical symmetry. The GOP will have gone the way of the Whigs.

Ann Stone is realistic enough to see that not much change is to be expected in the GOP this year. George Bush is going to be renominated and, to give him his due, he has not yet wavered on the abortion issue so far. Stone would like the platform language to represent opposition to abortion as the President’s position, not the party’s. This probably won’t happen, though. At the convention, Stone will be up against the still-formidable Phyllis Schlafly and her organization, the Republican National Coalition for Life.

It’s also possible that a ruling in the Pennsylvania case now before the Supreme Court will reverse the 1973 Roe vs. Wade ruling. Contrary to what many people imagine, this would tend to defuse the issue at the federal level, not intensify it. States would be permitted to pass their own laws on abortion, and so be free to act permissively or restrictively. In most cases, however, (certainly in California) abortion would remain legal.

Still, the country-club element within the GOP (which Stone represents) usually prevails in the long run, and the Republican leadership in the years ahead may well find a way to rid itself of the discomforting anti-abortion plank. This would be disastrous for the party, but maybe not so bad for the country as a whole. It would provoke the political realignment that seems long overdue. The immense political dissatisfaction that many people feel today results from the sense that the two main parties are engaged in bogus combat, pretending to slug it out while in fact propping one another up.

We really would like something different, which no doubt is why so many voters are enthusiastic about Ross Perot right now. No doubt he, too, will disappoint (although his pro-choice, vaguely pro-business position seems to be just what Stone’s group is looking for). But if the Republicans ever do switch on abortion, giving up even the pretense of offering an alternative, it will be all over for them and something more interesting will take their place.