I almost never write about abortion. In reference to Peggy Noonan's column of today, though, I think I have to do so this once.
The Rick Warren debate mattered. Why? It took place at exactly the moment America was starting to pay attention. This is what it looked like by the end of the night: Mr. McCain, normal. Mr. Obama, not normal. You've seen this discussed elsewhere. Mr. McCain was direct and clear, Mr. Obama both more careful and more scattered. But on abortion in particular, Mr. McCain seemed old-time conservative, which is something we all understand, whether we like such a stance or not, and Mr. Obama seemed either radical or dodgy. He is "in favor . . . of limits" on late-term abortions, though some would consider those limits "inadequate." (In the past week much legal parsing on emanations of penumbras as to the viability of Roe v. Wade followed.)That won't do. You can't "let" a baby live. A baby will not live if you do not care for it. At that moment -- the one being discussed, when a baby has survived an abortion attempt and is now delivered and alive -- we must make a decision. We must accept the child into the human community and care for it, or let the baby die.
As I watched I thought: How about "Let the baby live"? Don't parse it. Just "Let the baby live."
Which is it, Senator? That was the question: that is what he is trying to talk around. But there is no talking around it. You care for the child, or you choose to let the baby die.
The Romans did. The Vikings did. And so do we.
If that is what you want, swear to it.