Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Sacrosanct ideal. Liberty. Fundamental issue of justice.
That’s just a sampling of the words and phrases 2020 Democratic hopefuls used Tuesday night to describe the destruction of 60 million unborn American lives since Roe v. Wade struck down state-level protections in 1973.
As usual, those children and their mothers—many of whom suffer life-long regret—were notably absent from the conversation, cast aside for a mix of tried-and-true talking points and increasingly bizarre policy proposals.
Senator Kamala Harris served as a solid test case. By now, Harris’s pro-abortion bona fides are unimpeachable. While running for Senate, Harris — then California’s Attorney General — defended a state law that would have forced pro-life pregnancy centers to advertise taxpayer-funded abortions. In a case argued by Alliance Defending Freedom, the Supreme Court struck down that law in 2018.
In addition, Harris apparently coordinated with Planned Parenthood to punish undercover investigator David Daleiden for exposing the abortion giant’s complicity in the illegal trafficking of body parts harvested from aborted babies. This put her in prime position to respond to the first question about abortion.
Asked what she would do to strike back at states that protect unborn life — like Ohio, where a court recently blocked a law shielding children diagnosed with Down syndrome from being targeted for abortion — Harris said she would establish an extrajudicial “pre-clearance” process within the executive branch, bypassing the courts altogether and subjecting state laws to the approval of her administration.
Harris went on to assert that no law can tell a man or a woman what to do with their own body — an absurd notion since that’s precisely what laws forbidding everything from jaywalking to assault and murder do — before rounding out her response by maintaining that since “women have been given the responsibility to perpetuate the human species,” abortion is, therefore, a foundational right.
Senator Cory Booker pitched an idea similar to Harris’ “pre-clearance” plan, though with a bit more of an Orwellian flair. With Booker in the Oval Office, the effort to circle the wagons around Roe would fall to his “Office of Reproductive Freedom and Reproductive Rights.” That office, Booker explained, would also be charged with stripping away freedom by forcing US taxpayers to fund abortions “so that we are leading the Planet Earth in defending the global assault we see on women right now.”
It wasn’t until the question fell to Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard that any of the candidates so much as hinted that they would agree to any law protecting life in the womb. Gabbard recommended limiting abortion to the first two trimesters of pregnancy, urging a return to the old party line of “safe, legal, and rare.”
But even in doing so, Gabbard sided with many of her opponents on the need to, as they put it, “codify” Roe — a ruling that makes America one of only four countries, along with Canada, North Korea, and China, to allow abortion on-demand up to the very moment of birth.
Roe is far more extreme than most people realize. As shocked as most Americans were this January when New York passed its so-called “Reproductive Health Act” — which decriminalizes abortion until birth — or when they learn that Congress refuses to protect newly born babies who survive abortion attempts, they should realize that all of this fits with what Roe already allows. Together with its companion case, Doe v. Bolton, Roe puts women and unborn children in the crosshairs of abortion for all nine months of pregnancy.
Even legal scholars like Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg who support abortion agree that Roe was poorly decided. Decided by seven men, Roe was a purely political decision with no basis in the Constitution, American law, or even the factual record of the case itself.
While foreclosing on the chance for the American people to decide the issue themselves in their own states, Roe betrayed women by establishing a de facto response to an unexpected pregnancy. Rather than turning to families, communities, and nonprofit organizations like pregnancy centers — which save lives every day — generations of women have been preyed upon by an industry that feeds on the fact that many women resort to abortion because they feel it is their only choice.
A call by any government official or candidate to “codify” Roe underscores the fact that it is not settled law. It’s a bad decision that needs to be overturned. Sixty million American lives have been lost since Roe. This devastating loss of innocent life results from refusing to recognize the dignity and worth of every human person.
Our laws should protect all innocent human lives — mothers and unborn children alike. If that’s not a “sacrosanct ideal,” or a “foundational issue of justice,” perhaps we need to reconsider what is. And fast.Published in