Giving An Inch, Taking a Mile.

Those who believe abortion should not be legal find the Stupak-Pitts amendment to the health care bill not sufficient, proving that all this talk about common ground is wishful thinking on the part of Democrats. There is no compromise when your work is to eliminate the most common medical procedure for women in the US.

What do "pro-life" conservatives say the amendment does not do?

Yes the Stupak amendment does limit funding for abortion in a public option. However do not consider the health care legislation, pro-life. It expands funding for contraceptives, some of which are abortifacient. It increases funding for Planned Parenthood and that is completely unacceptable. There is no conscience clause for pro-life health care providers, and it does force pro-life firms to provide coverage for abortionists. It also makes provision for euthanasia.

The Hyde amendment which prevents use of federal funds for abortion still allows funding of hospitals and health care clinics that provide reproductive services including contraception and abortion (in the broadest sense of the term, including both medically necessary abortion and so-called "elective"). Stupak-Pitts would further limit women's access to such resources. Are hospitals the next target on the "pro-life" plan of attack?

When the objective is to render a legal service inaccessible to women, there is no compromise.

(Note "pro-life" concerns regarding end of life care and conscience clause protections being commonly thrown into the discussion.)

Stupak-Pitts hurts women and does little to satisfy "pro-life" activists. It's no compromise when only one side once again cedes ground.