The headline on Page A3 of the Dec. 28 Portland Press Herald shouts: “Abortion likely to be a 2016 election litmus test.”

And within the article, the reporter notes that “nearly all of the Republican (presidential) candidates favor overturning the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide.”

Perhaps that message appeals to some voters. The reality is that when politicians running for national office talk about taking away rights particular to women that have been the law of the land for over 40 years, they don’t mean the rights of all women.

Regardless of the legality of the procedure, the women in the politicians’ lives – wives, daughters, girlfriends, mistresses – will always be able to have a safe abortion without the government peeking into their lives.

These aren’t the women whose rights the politicians are bandying about to get votes. No, it’s the rest of us. But unknowingly, we fight among ourselves over which words we like best, while none of it applies to those who would take away our rights.

But there is a litmus test on which voters of all stripes could agree: Who among this year’s crop of wanna-bes is pro-life enough to create policy that protects the young lives already born? On that topic, all seem to be quiet.

Eunice Buck Sargent