The right’s response to the Prevention First Act

It’s been exactly a month since Harry Reid unveiled his Prevention First Act and NARAL began asking anti-abortion activists to join them in an effort to reduce unwanted pregnancies. Let’s see how it’s gone so far.

First, on the Hill, Reid’s proposal has generated considerable interest, and to date, has picked up 22 co-sponsors. Alas, Senate Republicans apparently aren’t interesting in preventing unwanted pregnancies — of the 22 supporters of Reid’s bill, 21 are Dems, and the other is Jim Jeffords, an independent who caucuses with the Dems.

As for NARAL’s outreach to its ideological rivals, the ball, as Amy Sullivan put it, has been in the court of abortion opponents. Most expected the right to reject NARAL’s challenge, but few conservatives were stepping up to explain why they’d oppose curtailing unwanted pregnancies, which in turn, would reduce the number of abortions.

This week, Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, explained why he sees NARAL’s proposal as “unacceptable.”

“Beware of altruism. It is based on self-deception, the root of all evil,” wrote fiction author Robert Heinlein. He could very well have been talking about abortion lobby NARAL’s new advertising campaign. NARAL’s delusive new ad calls on the right-to-life movement to work with the abortion movement in helping “more women prevent unintended pregnancy.” We are happy to see NARAL give lip service to an objective the life movement has had since its inception. Unfortunately NARAL’s actual agenda does not merit the same praise. NARAL offers up the same tired and failed solution it has offered in the past – increase money and access to condoms and the morning-after pill by supporting Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) legislation titled the “Prevention First Act.”

The bill specifically states that its goal is increased condom distribution coupled with more than doubling taxpayers’ monies to deceptively titled “family planning.” The bill also bars any money going to organizations that promote abstinence only programs. In addition, the bill forces hospitals that receive federal funds to provide the morning-after pill on demand. This is obviously no compromise.

Actually, it is; the FRC simply doesn’t like the terms of the compromise.

To hear Perkins tell it, he’ll support NARAL’s and Reid’s drive to reduce unwanted pregnancies, so long as it doesn’t include contraceptives, family-planning programs, or comprehensive education on sexual health.

This is instructive. The right’s most ardent opponents of abortion want to ban the procedure and will actively oppose any effort to decrease pregnancies that lead to abortion. “Compromise,” in their minds, means getting everything they want with no exceptions. Good to know.