> This seamless web stuff sounds nice, but serious opposition to
> abortion is pretty recent and has a lot to do with anxiety about
> women's independence. I'm not inclined to give it much slack.
>
> Doug
I wouldn't say that people like Bonior and Kucinich aren't sincere in their beliefs, but they are pretty uncharacteristic of the anti-choice movement. Mary Steinfels is another example of this type. She made the "seamless web" argument in _Dissent_ a while back. All they accomplish is the erosion of a fundamental right. And they have a lot of truly unsavory bedfellows.
They are indeed not even very characteristic of Catholic opinion. The "seamless web" stuff (actually I think the phrase was "seamless garment") originated with Cardinal Joseph Bernardin of Chicago, who was one of the few relatively "liberal" prelates. I'm sure he was sincere too. He was raked over the coals in many Catholic circles, and roundly trashed in the broader anti-choice movement, on the grounds that his prescriptions would divert attention and energy from achieving the real goal, which is criminalizing abortion. Speaking as a born-and-raised but long since ex-Catholic, (though I remain in touch with developments in the Catholic universe via family still in the fold) I would say that this stuff has little true resonance outside of the remaining Catholic left, a small and beleaguered group in an ever-more conservative church. It means little to the people in the pews, and for the actively anti-choice element, it's at best window dressing, a case of crocodile tears. Cutting these guys slack only gives aid and comfort to the religious right, with which they're allied on this issue. I'm far more worried about them than about any lingering eugenicist sentiment among Planned Parenthood's membership. And yes, it is really about the independence of women. Like I say, "Ecrasez l'infame!" (Voltaire's slogan against the ancien regime church, should anyone need a gloss). No slack.
Jacob Conrad