英语访谈节目:Roe案件判决四十年后 堕胎权利仍有争议

GWEN IFILL:Would you like to respond?

CHARMAINE YOEST:I think that Nancy is discounting where the American people are looking at commonsense things like parental consent.

You know, even my friends who disagree with me on abortion are saying, well, if my daughter is going in for a major medical procedure, I want to know about it. The question becomes, is there—there's not an abortion that the abortion lobby ever wants to see reined in.

Even this last year, we had a debate over sex-selection abortion and whether or not you should be able to abort a baby just because she's a little girl or because the baby might be disabled. There is never a regulation that they are willing to sign on to and be reasonable about.

GWEN IFILL:Well, let's step back for a moment and think philosophically a little bit about this argument, because I know that you and I have had arguments about what abortion should be and the gray areas and what should be allowed and what shouldn't be for decades now.

So, you step back. And we have now a generation of women who came of age at a time when Roe was law and it was never challenged. Where are those women going and how are you speaking to them, the post-Roe generation?

NANCY KEENAN:Well, and there are several. But I think what the good news is, is that this millennial generation, under 30, there are 76 million of them in this country, and they share the pro-choice values.

They believe that women should make this decision, and not a politician. In addition, we have to—they have to connect that personal—those personal values by acting politically. So I believe there is enormous hope for the future, for this generation to act much more progressively, much more actively in the political arena once they decide to run for office, once they decide to vote for people.

They're going to take those pro-choice values with them.

CHARMAINE YOEST:That just doesn't square up with what we're seeing in the actual data.

And even Nancy herself has said in interviews that she was stunned last year when she saw how many young people were flooding into Washington, D.C., for the March for Life. There are two groups of people that are creating a real dynamism in the pro-life movement. One are young people, who are demonstrably more pro-life than their parents were.

And the second is this whole increasing community of women who have survived abortion themselves and who are willing to come forward now and say that they regret their abortion. They feel betrayed. They feel like they were not given all the information that they needed by the women and the men who claimed to be representing their interests.

GWEN IFILL:But has the argument shifted now from where it used to be, from legality, whether this should be legal, to access to these procedures?

NANCY KEENAN:I think it's absolutely where the debate has become, because it is legal in this country and the fact that the access has become difficult for women because of the barriers that the anti-choice movement has put in front of these women.

A 24-hour waiting period sounds like a pretty good idea until you live in the middle of South Dakota or Nebraska, and the closest clinic is several hundreds miles away and that you have made a decision. You have thought about it. And now you go and you have to travel, maybe have day care or child care for your children, get a hotel, and then come back and think about it for 24 hours?

Women think about this. They understand the complexity of it. They know what their decision is, because it's their life, their story. And I think that's where the disconnect is. Who do you trust?Who decides?There's the million-dollar question. Who decides?Does she or the government?

CHARMAINE YOEST:Women feel betrayed by an abortion industry that has put money and profits over women's health.

There are over a dozen clinics that are being investigated today across this country for unsafe, unsanitary conditions. And the abortion lobby does everything they can, everything they can to keep from having commonsense regulations put in place. We regulate veterinary clinics better than we do abortion clinics in this country. And that is outrageous.

That is not serving American women. And American women are the ones who are speaking up and saying, enough.

GWEN IFILL:As this debate moves to the states and as it moves to these incremental efforts to undermine Roe, is there a danger that Roe might just collapse, it may always continue to exist, but basically be cannibalized from within by all of these other efforts?

NANCY KEENAN:You know, I think that there—we always have to be vigilant.

And I think that we have to make sure that people that are elected to office understand what is at stake here. And that's freedom and privacy. But I do believe that the people in this country share the values of being pro-choice. And they're not going to let that happen.

GWEN IFILL:And is that your goal, ultimately, that Roe just doesn't matter because it's been taken apart from inside?

CHARMAINE YOEST:You know, Gwen, it's interesting. We stand with North Korea and China as the only—only four countries in the entire world that don't regulate abortion after viability.

We can do better as a civilized country of—not only for babies, but also for women, for protecting women's health.

GWEN IFILL:Charmaine Yoest of Americans United for Life, and Nancy Keenan, president, outgoing president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, thank you both very much for a civilized conversation about abortion.

CHARMAINE YOEST:Thank you, Gwen.

NANCY KEENAN:Thanks, Gwen.

GWEN IFILL:Online, health correspondent Betty Ann Bowser examines how public opinions on abortion have and haven't changed over the years. And from the NewsHour archives, see our 1992 reporting when the Supreme Court revisited the "Roe v. Wade" decision and upheld it.