One of the alleged takeaways from Day Three was that the Left tripped up Judge Kavanaugh on the issue of abortion. They say his statement referencing contraception drugs as "abortion-inducing drugs" shows that he's out of touch and holds some archaic, anti-abortion view of the issue.
Not exactly. There's a bit more to the real story...
First, that was precisely the argument being made in the Priests For Life case being referenced. The question centered around whether employers could choose not to provide birth control as part of health insurance. The litigants argued that it violated their deeply-held religious beliefs to pay for medical care that could cause an abortion.
Second, Kavanaugh's characterization of contraceptive and "morning-after" drugs as potentially "abortion-inducing" is correct. By definition, "contraception" is a process that prevents conception -- the fertilization of the egg. Any mechanism or chemical that acts after the egg is fertilized is no longer a "contraceptive." It is now an abortifacient. Oral "contraceptives" are, in fact, potentially abortifacient, because one of the ways the chemicals work in the woman's body is to prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterine wall. It's considered a "backup" effect with the primary effect being to prevent conception. But it IS there. And one never knows what mechanism is at work. The same is true for the "Plan B" or "morning after" pill.
I wrote a paper on this in grad school many moons ago. You can read a good article on this here. In recent years, the medical community has attempted to backtrack from this understanding. But that certainly can be seen as a response to enormous political pressure.
What I think is more fascinating is that the more we actually dialogue on the issue of abortion, the more impossible to defend the pro-abortion position becomes. Consider Sen. Feinstein's uncomfortable words yesterday:
"I don't want to go back to those death tolls [or "totals"] in this country, and I truly believe that women should be able to control their own reproductive systems, within, obviously, um, some concern for a viable, ah, fetus."
Um... ah... Here are some uncomfortable death tolls, Senator.
As my office associate just remarked, how can she speak of "death tolls" with a straight face? Or how about her "obviously... some concern for a viable... fetus?"
Hopefully, the end of our abortion death toll nightmare is near. This next session of the Supreme Court, which begins October 1, could hear a lower-court appeal that may well mark a shift away from this Court-induced nightmare.