EDITORIAL: Ban on ghastly procedure a necessity

Partial-birth abortion is now unequivocally banned in Virginia, and that is a good thing.

Legislation introduced in the House of Delegates by Del. Bob Marshall passed the General Assembly and became law in 2003.

Since then, a panel of a federal appeals court twice killed the law, but Wednesday, that appeals court overturned the previous rulings of its panel.

The restoration of the law was the right decision for many reasons, least of which is that the General Assembly of the state passed the law with bipartisan support, thus representing the majority will of
the people.

However, the biggest reason that the court made the right decision is that partial-birth abortion is a horror: A baby is partially born — feet first — and then whoever is performing the abortion sucks out the
brain and removes the dead baby. When described in reality, the sterile term “partial-birth abortion” takes on new meaning.

Abortion, if it must be legal, should at least be rare . . . and early — abortion should never be taken lightly, and if it is to be done, it should be done when the fetus is not far-developed.

That means restricting it. Partial-birth abortions are more common later in pregnancy. By restricting the partial-birth procedure, the law accomplishes the two-fold goal of making abortion both rarer and
more likely to be performed earlier in the pregnancy.

Courtney Jones, manager of grassroots organizing for the Virginia League of Planned Parenthood, said, “We do believe that the court’s opinion will place an undue burden on women.”

We disagree. It may place a burden, but it is not undue. It is a burden that forces women and doctors to plan and consider their decisions more carefully. With a procedure as serious in its implications as abortion, forcing those who would perform or receive it to more thoughtfulness, is a good thing.

Other opponents say the ruling could deter doctors from performing legal abortions. We don’t see how.

William E. Thro, a former Virginia solicitor general who argued the case for the state in October, said that the law does not affect accidental partial-birth abortions.

And Judge Paul V. Niemeyer, wrote in the Wednesday’s majority opinion that Virginia law already protects doctors who are trying to save a patient, and thus would protect them if they had to perform the
procedure for the good of the mother.

It seems there is nothing to fear.

The court is to be commended for recognizing the fallacy of its own panel, and Bob Marshall should be commended for bringing this law into our state in the first place.

It is possible that the appeals court’s ruling will now go on to the U.S. Supreme Court. If that happens, we hope it, too, will see the wisdom of upholding the ban.

It is what the people want, it is practical and it is right.