Natural birth vs. Caesarean delivery?

I just read an article which claimed that "an influential, expert panel" had decided that Caesarean sections were "not necessarily riskier than natural delivery and may be safer in some ways for the mother and baby in MANY cases"! It excused itself by saying they didn't outright endorse the procedure, but didn't see any reason to discourage all the plethora of women clamoring for C-sections these days. Oh they gave plenty of scientific evidence, saying it shouldn't be done until the baby's lungs were mature enough or on women who wanted more than two or three children. They really catered to women in their 40's, which is the new hip age to have a child late in life, don't you know? But what about the marvelous wonder of natural childbirth, the work towards the goal, the labor to bring that life within you forth, and then the instant bonding, the moment you see and hold the little baby that was nurtured in your womb, a part of you for nine months? There are so many natural birthing clinics now, with professional midwives who are medically up-to-date and really know their stuff, and above all, are compassionate and caring. Even in many hospitals now you can have natural childbirth, with a midwife. And this, mind you, is in contrast to Caesarean section, which requires major aenesthesia, and is a major invasive surgery, which opens up your abdominal cavity, no matter what the antiseptic precautions, to bacteria, and trauma. It exposes delicate organs. Of course a woman should discuss her choice of this procedure with her doctor. But proponents of both sides said they expected the panel's report to encourage more women to request C-sections, more doctors to condone them, and of course more insurance companies to shell out for them. The final blow? "More than 1 million of the 4 million babies born each year in the U.S. are delivered by Caeserean." What a cold, brutal truth. What do YOU think, people?