Mugger is still excellent reading:

I don’t agree with the Justice Department’s attempt to obtain the medical records of women who’ve undergone abortions in scattered cities across the country. The procedure is legal, and the government has no right to that information.

That said, a March 19 Los Angeles Times editorial on the subject was appalling. The paper said: "Of all the moments when a patient consults with a doctor, few could be sadder than when a woman concludes she must end a pregnancy. Sadder still is when this occurs after the first trimester, and it’s true that one technique [the Times can’t possibly use the term "partial-birth abortion"] used in late-term abortions can be grim. With anguished deliberation, the American people and the judiciary have decided that women should have the right to make a choice."

I’m generally pro-choice, although ambivalent about third trimester abortions since it seems a woman after six months ought to have come to a conclusion about having a child. But the Times trivializes far more serious visits to a physician by saying that "few" moments are "sadder" than when a woman decides to terminate a pregnancy. Sadder than when a doctor tells a patient she has ovarian cancer at the age of 29? More heartbreaking than a diagnosis of premature Alzheimer’s Disease? Worse than receiving the news that you’re going blind or deaf at a rapid pace? I don’t think so.

And while it’s true that the decision to have an abortion is wrenching for some individuals, for others, such as the devotees of horrid special-interest groups like NOW, Roe v. Wade amounted to a get-out-of-jail-free card. Let’s call a scalpel a scalpel: It’s true Justice has overstepped its bounds, but the Los Angeles Times’ view on abortion is just as sickening.

Indeed.