19.
The
moral discussion is being accompanied more or less everywhere by serious
juridical debates. There is no country where legislation does not forbid and
punish murder. Furthermore, many countries had specifically applied this
condemnation and these penalties to the particular case of procured abortion.
In these days a vast body of opinion petitions the liberalization of this
latter prohibition. There already exists a fairly general tendency which seeks
to limit, as far as possible, all restrictive legislation, especially when it
seems to touch upon private life. The argument of pluralism is also used.
Although many citizens, in particular the Catholic faithful, condemn abortion,
many others hold that it is licit, at least as a lesser evil. Why force them to
follow an opinion which is not theirs, especially in a country where they are
in the majority? In addition it is apparent that, where they still exist, the
laws condemning abortion appear difficult to apply. The crime has become too
common for it to be punished every time, and the public authorities often find
that it is wiser to close their eyes to it. But the preservation of a law which
is not applied is always to the detriment of authority and of all the other
laws. It must be added that clandestine abortion puts women, who resign
themselves to it and have recourse to it, in the most serious dangers for
future pregnancies and also in many cases for their lives. Even if the
legislator continues to regard abortion as an evil, may he not propose to
restrict its damage?
|