Yesterday, Republican Alabama governor Kay Ivey signed into law a bill introduced by Republican, female state representative Terri Collins that would almost effectively ban all abortions in the state of Alabama, with no exceptions for rape or incest. This law follows several other restrictive abortion laws throughout the country, and was followed today by another strict abortion law in Missouri. Most of these laws are aimed at being sued so they can advance through the appeals process to a now conservative-leaning Supreme Court in order to chip away at Roe v. Wade, so the effect of many of these laws is up in the air until they've been ruled upon by the courts, which will be a long process, but for now, these are major victories for the pro-life movement and for human rights in general.
Opponents of these laws will throw a variation of arguments out against the laws that all tend to fall apart when actually looked at. The pro-choice crowd's main arguments tend to be that "men should not make laws about women's bodies", "abortion is healthcare/a human right", "abortion is only 3% of what Planned Parenthood does", and, of course, "my body, my choice". When examined with science, facts, and common sense, all of these arguments fall apart.
"Men should not make laws about women's bodies" is the common sentiment on Twitter following the passing of new laws, specifically that of Alabama yesterday. The pro-choice crowd is ignoring three glaring facts. The first being that the Alabama law was introduced by a woman, Terri Collins, and signed into law by a woman, Kay Ivey. The second being that Roe was decided by a Supreme Court made up entirely of men, and that if we, for some reason, decided to go by that logic, Roe would be overturned, allowing the states to decide for their own about abortion. Many states already have trigger-laws in place which would ban abortion upon an overturning of Roe. I can't speak for the gender makeup of who voted for the trigger laws, but there are no doubt Republican women who had parts in the trigger laws, just like the Alabama law. The third glaring fact that the pro-choice crowd is ignoring is that the pro-life movement is and has been historically lead by women. Susan B. Anthony, Lila Rose, and subject of the recent film Unplanned, Abby Johnson, just to name a few. The pro-choice crowd perpetuates this lie that the pro-life (anti-abortion as they say) movement is lead by men who only wish to assert control over women through the law, Handmaid's Tale style. This simply isn't the case. Through celebrities, media, and propaganda, they convince the left-leaning masses that the issue of abortion is men vs. women over the control of women's bodies. This can only be described as an outright lie.
"Abortion is only 3% of what Planned Parenthood does". The Washington Post, which leans liberal, gave this statement "three Pinocchios" for its falsehood. Planned Parenthood exists and thrives because of abortion. While the other services Planned Parenthood provides are certainly valuable, they still don't measure up to all the abortion money that Planned Parenthood brings in. And even if it is just three percent, it doesn't justify anything. Abortion is still an egregious violation of human rights. Unfortunately, the Republican-dominated Congress before 2018 didn't do anything to attempt to defund Planned Parenthood, like they said they would, but the recent laws by the states are righting that wrong.
I recently ran the camera for an impromptu interview with Planned Parenthood representatives at a sexual health fair on a university campus. In Planned Parenthood's defense (something you'll rarely hear me say), the interview was impromptu, so expecting eloquent, thought-out answers would be unreasonable, but my friend who was interviewing them could not get a response for even a simple question. Their hesitance and unwillingness to speak with us was almost comical. They love to brag about their services and abortions they provide, but they didn't want to answer a simple, related question. They even attempted to have us removed by police (this didn't work. We were well within our legal rights.). I'll link to that interview and news package here.
"Abortion is healthcare/a human right" and "my body, my choice" are other common sentiments the pro-choice (should I call them anti-life since they like to use the term "anti abortion"?) crowd likes to use. The simple truth is that abortion could not be farther from being healthcare or a human right. Science tends to support that life begins at conception. And even if we can't say that for sure, we still know empirically that 9 months after conception, a human being will be born, which means that at some point this human became human, so, even if we can't say that life begins at conception for sure, allowing abortion at any point means that we could possibly be murdering a human being. The only difference is location. The only way to justify abortion is if science can somehow pinpoint a non-conception point where life begins. Be it birth, 6 months, whatever. If life conclusively and scientifically begins at birth, then go ahead and abort away, your body, your choice. But science does not lean this way. Science leans more to life beginning at conception, which means that it's not your body, therefore it's not your choice. Again, the only difference between the baby inside a woman and a baby outside is location. The United States was declared independent on the grounds of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". It's about time we stop ignoring that life is part of that.
There is, however, one argument some pro-choicers are speaking out that I tend to agree with. This is the argument that "pro-life" must mean caring for the child that wasn't permitted to be aborted through the rest of their life. I agree. While they do seem to believe that the pro-life crowd does not care all and completely ignores the non-aborted children, which isn't the case at all (Christians, who are generally pro-life, adopt at a much higher rate than any other religious group), they do make a point. We as pro-lifers need to support the pursuit of happiness. Children should not be ripped from their parents and put in massive cages like cattle. Preventative birth control must be encouraged. Sex education should not simply be a message of abstinence, as we need to come to terms with the fact that today's teens are going to largely ignore that message in favor of a reckless hookup culture (where do you think these abortions are coming from?). Children in school should not have to live with a daily fear of being shot up. And, in direct correlation with banning abortions, we must deregulate adoption. The process of adopting is insanely long and expensive. We can't practically expect abortion to be entirely replaced by adoption if it's insanely difficult to adopt. If we don't deregulate adoption, orphanages and the foster care system would quickly overflow and cause major problems. We also must do all we can to make sure that giving birth in a hospital costs the same or less than an abortion. Right now, this is not the case, as abortions can range up to $950, while hospital birth can range up to $4500. We can't expect all women to pick giving birth over abortion if hospital birth is over 4 times as expensive. This could be done by diverting federal Planned Parenthood funds to instead pay for giving birth at hospitals (though if the last Republican Congress was too cowardly to defund Planned Parenthood, then I doubt any future one would be willing to do it).
Banning abortion, while a major victory, is not enough. We as pro-lifers must push for not only life, but the other values we declared independence on. If "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness", then we need to act like it. We must support not just Life, but Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
Opponents of these laws will throw a variation of arguments out against the laws that all tend to fall apart when actually looked at. The pro-choice crowd's main arguments tend to be that "men should not make laws about women's bodies", "abortion is healthcare/a human right", "abortion is only 3% of what Planned Parenthood does", and, of course, "my body, my choice". When examined with science, facts, and common sense, all of these arguments fall apart.
"Men should not make laws about women's bodies" is the common sentiment on Twitter following the passing of new laws, specifically that of Alabama yesterday. The pro-choice crowd is ignoring three glaring facts. The first being that the Alabama law was introduced by a woman, Terri Collins, and signed into law by a woman, Kay Ivey. The second being that Roe was decided by a Supreme Court made up entirely of men, and that if we, for some reason, decided to go by that logic, Roe would be overturned, allowing the states to decide for their own about abortion. Many states already have trigger-laws in place which would ban abortion upon an overturning of Roe. I can't speak for the gender makeup of who voted for the trigger laws, but there are no doubt Republican women who had parts in the trigger laws, just like the Alabama law. The third glaring fact that the pro-choice crowd is ignoring is that the pro-life movement is and has been historically lead by women. Susan B. Anthony, Lila Rose, and subject of the recent film Unplanned, Abby Johnson, just to name a few. The pro-choice crowd perpetuates this lie that the pro-life (anti-abortion as they say) movement is lead by men who only wish to assert control over women through the law, Handmaid's Tale style. This simply isn't the case. Through celebrities, media, and propaganda, they convince the left-leaning masses that the issue of abortion is men vs. women over the control of women's bodies. This can only be described as an outright lie.
"Abortion is only 3% of what Planned Parenthood does". The Washington Post, which leans liberal, gave this statement "three Pinocchios" for its falsehood. Planned Parenthood exists and thrives because of abortion. While the other services Planned Parenthood provides are certainly valuable, they still don't measure up to all the abortion money that Planned Parenthood brings in. And even if it is just three percent, it doesn't justify anything. Abortion is still an egregious violation of human rights. Unfortunately, the Republican-dominated Congress before 2018 didn't do anything to attempt to defund Planned Parenthood, like they said they would, but the recent laws by the states are righting that wrong.
I recently ran the camera for an impromptu interview with Planned Parenthood representatives at a sexual health fair on a university campus. In Planned Parenthood's defense (something you'll rarely hear me say), the interview was impromptu, so expecting eloquent, thought-out answers would be unreasonable, but my friend who was interviewing them could not get a response for even a simple question. Their hesitance and unwillingness to speak with us was almost comical. They love to brag about their services and abortions they provide, but they didn't want to answer a simple, related question. They even attempted to have us removed by police (this didn't work. We were well within our legal rights.). I'll link to that interview and news package here.
"Abortion is healthcare/a human right" and "my body, my choice" are other common sentiments the pro-choice (should I call them anti-life since they like to use the term "anti abortion"?) crowd likes to use. The simple truth is that abortion could not be farther from being healthcare or a human right. Science tends to support that life begins at conception. And even if we can't say that for sure, we still know empirically that 9 months after conception, a human being will be born, which means that at some point this human became human, so, even if we can't say that life begins at conception for sure, allowing abortion at any point means that we could possibly be murdering a human being. The only difference is location. The only way to justify abortion is if science can somehow pinpoint a non-conception point where life begins. Be it birth, 6 months, whatever. If life conclusively and scientifically begins at birth, then go ahead and abort away, your body, your choice. But science does not lean this way. Science leans more to life beginning at conception, which means that it's not your body, therefore it's not your choice. Again, the only difference between the baby inside a woman and a baby outside is location. The United States was declared independent on the grounds of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". It's about time we stop ignoring that life is part of that.
There is, however, one argument some pro-choicers are speaking out that I tend to agree with. This is the argument that "pro-life" must mean caring for the child that wasn't permitted to be aborted through the rest of their life. I agree. While they do seem to believe that the pro-life crowd does not care all and completely ignores the non-aborted children, which isn't the case at all (Christians, who are generally pro-life, adopt at a much higher rate than any other religious group), they do make a point. We as pro-lifers need to support the pursuit of happiness. Children should not be ripped from their parents and put in massive cages like cattle. Preventative birth control must be encouraged. Sex education should not simply be a message of abstinence, as we need to come to terms with the fact that today's teens are going to largely ignore that message in favor of a reckless hookup culture (where do you think these abortions are coming from?). Children in school should not have to live with a daily fear of being shot up. And, in direct correlation with banning abortions, we must deregulate adoption. The process of adopting is insanely long and expensive. We can't practically expect abortion to be entirely replaced by adoption if it's insanely difficult to adopt. If we don't deregulate adoption, orphanages and the foster care system would quickly overflow and cause major problems. We also must do all we can to make sure that giving birth in a hospital costs the same or less than an abortion. Right now, this is not the case, as abortions can range up to $950, while hospital birth can range up to $4500. We can't expect all women to pick giving birth over abortion if hospital birth is over 4 times as expensive. This could be done by diverting federal Planned Parenthood funds to instead pay for giving birth at hospitals (though if the last Republican Congress was too cowardly to defund Planned Parenthood, then I doubt any future one would be willing to do it).
Banning abortion, while a major victory, is not enough. We as pro-lifers must push for not only life, but the other values we declared independence on. If "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness", then we need to act like it. We must support not just Life, but Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
Comments
Post a Comment