“Free abortions on demand without apology” is a call for equal access to a constitutional right. More importantly, it’s a promise that feminists won’t ignore the needs of all women in favor of tailoring messages to the mainstream. Because being pro-choice means doing what’s right, not what’s popular.Like most liberals, her reasoning is muddled at best. There is, of course, no express right to abortion. Roe v. Wade found instead that the government had a limited right or ability to prohibit abortions due to a person's right to privacy. In other words, the "right to abortion" is founded on the government not being able to interfere with private medical decisions. Valenti wants the opposite--she wants the government fully involved with an abortion, even to the extent of arguing that the government (i.e., you and I through our taxes) should pay for her or any other woman to have an abortion.
There are, also, moral considerations at play here. First, and foremost, is the deliberate killing of an unborn child. Second, is forcing people to support policies with which they do not agree. Abortion on demand is not a public good, nor an enumerated power of the federal government. Rather, abortion represents a negative right--a right to be left alone. It is, therefore, unlike issues such as defense spending (a public good and enumerated power) or building highways (a public good and related to commerce). Accordingly, that abortion on demand is highly offensive to significant (actually, the majority) of Americans, would suggest that it is an activity to which persons should not unwillingly be forced to support. Third is the racial element. It should not be lost in this argument that Planned Parenthood had its genesis in eugenics and socialism--the same ideas that underlay the death camps of World War II Nazi Germany. It should be no surprise that both require institutionalized killings of so-called "undesirables."