More than 35 years after the momentous court decision legalizing abortion, we are much farther away from a national solution to that volatile issue than ever before. And with the two sides glowering at each other and even threatening more violence and murders, a solution seems impossible.

But we must solve it. And solve it in a sensible, democratic way with both sides giving a little. Although I oppose abortions, except for reasons of incest, danger to the mother’s health, and rape, I know I have no right to impose my moral and religious views on others who disagree with me.

Nor — on the other hand — do they have a right to require me to pay for the abortions, treatment, and care of others. But since it has become impossible to reach a solution by calm negotiation, the only sensible way left is to submit the issue to a national referendum, the result of which would become federal law and policy.

Nobody would be completely satisfied, of course, but at least the civil conflict that now seems certain to split the nation would be averted.

Would the various pro-abortion groups ever agree with the pro-life groups on a national referendum? I doubt it. That’s why I believe that the rest of us, who are in the middle of this never-ending debate, should put our foot down and demand that something like the national referendum I’ve suggested be allowed to happen.

How should the referendum be worded to assure a cessation of hostilities between the pro-abortion and pro-life factions? Very carefully, a comedian might say. But I think there is a plausible and sensible way to construct such a referendum.

Accepting the premise that there should be at least three choices in the referendum, try this on for size:

Which would you approve:

  • a. A total ban on all abortions and severe punishment for those who do not obey the law;
  • b. A law permitting any abortion, provided an accredited physician performed it, or
  • c. A law permitting only those abortions in cases of rape, incest, or clear danger to the pregnant mother?

If one or two more choices should be needed, they could be added. The choice selected by the largest vote probably would leave many disappointed, but at least the nation would finally have a mandate that would end the hostilities.

Does anybody have a better solution? I doubt it.