Why aren’t ultrasounds common ground in the abortion debate?

An Oklahoma court has thrown out a state law requiring women to see the ultrasound picture of their babies before getting an abortion. Pro-choicers and pro-lifers agree that ultrasounds result in fewer abortions, so the former decry the practice while the latter are all for it. But First Things blogger Keith Pavlischek raises the question: Aren’t the pro-choicers saying they want to reduce the number of abortions? Wouldn’t ultrasounds be part of the “common ground” between the two sides that President Obama and moderate evangelicals claim to be looking for?

Both the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute and the pro-life Focus on the Family agree that the widespread use of ultrasounds for women contemplating abortions will reduce the number of abortions. The use of ultrasounds in pregnancy counseling, in other words, is a proven “abortion reduction strategy.”

The most charitably disposed might think that this is common ground that pro-life and pro-choice Americans have been looking for. It is something we can come together on. After all, isn’t that what Jim Wallis, Tony Campolo, Joel Hunter, David Gushee and the rest of President Obama’s ostensibly pro-life moderate and progressive Evangelical supporters been trying to sell us this past year or so.

So why aren’t pro-choicers and pro-lifers collaborating on required ultrasound laws?