Another great article Emily. The Republicans must figure out a unified message on this. I am pro-life, however realize others don’t feel the same. Conservatives will never win again if the Dems can threaten that we will “ban” abortion. If you saw how Desantis handled it (he does allow up to 15 weeks, which is PLENTY of time) in his debate with Crist, he said regarding unborn children “I think we should give everyone a shot at life”. It’s all about messaging and how you use words to change minds. Realistically, anyone can get a pill that works up to 12 weeks anyway, so any thought of tight restrictions is pointless.
This issue should be considered akin to the slavery issue that the Founding Fathers considered. They knew they had no hopes of a Union if the didn’t push this issue into the future—not because they were incapable or unwilling to debate it, but because the CULTURE needed to change before the legislation would work. The abortion topic is similar. Culture would need to determine that protecting a baby’s murder takes priority over “reproductive rights.” Until that time, it is in Republican’s best interest to compromise and wait for the day that culture catches up. My compromise: 1. Up to 10 weeks, 2. Mandatory counseling (including stuff you suggested) that the male partner attends and pays for 3. Mother and partner (if applicable) must sign a form acknowledging that she is, indeed, choosing to kill a baby. To your point, we can humanize the baby while allowing this to happen.
And to make a quick decision in the heat of the moment to be irresponsible because they can just get an abortion if they get pregnant. I acknowledge this is not everyone, and couldn't even begin to estimate the percentage, but any needle movement towards no abortion is progress. In my opinion.
I think it was Naomi Wolf who said something along the lines of what Emily's saying here: Even if we say that abortion should be legal under certain conditions (which states' laws already say, to one extent or another), a pro-choice advocate should still be able to recognize that the act of abortion is sad.
Abortion is not a societal "good." It will never go away, and has existed from the beginning of time. But some far-left folks on this issue are downright celebratory about it.
I am with you (and Emily) that her suggestions move us TOWARD life, and would go a long way the conversation forward.
I agree. It has been really disturbing to me, the number of celebrities who have forced upon me, the knowledge that they had an abortion, or multiple abortions, or so many they aren't really sure how many they had. It should be available to women, within reasonable bounds, but should never be something to be celebrated or exalted, or presented as a badge of honor.
The fact that abortions went up under Trump, tells me women were getting pregnant and choosing abortion just in order to demonstrate their rebellion against someone they hated.
This is the more level-headed way of looking at the issue of abortion . . . and there are other issues, like transgender medical treatment of minors and transgender activist-designed school curriculum, etc., that has drawn a lot of left-leaning individuals into supporting Republican politicians proposing bans and parents' rights coalitions, which would benefit from this same sort of pragmatism.
Getting to grips with the limits of what public policy can do in addressing cultural controversies and the failings of our medical and science institutions is something more voters need to do - in other words, grow up and don't expect government to solve all your society's moral problems. But there's a depressing-to-witness certainty held by too many supposed grown-ups, that what is "right" can be achieved through simple "might," (in the form of another ban or government program or temporary political victory).
Re-humanize! Amen. One of my biggest issues with the entire abortion debate is the cognitive dissonance so many pro-choicers subscribe to so that they can hold tight to their beliefs. Taking religion out of the equation, Science tells us it is a human being. Period.
Abortion is certainly not nothing, but it belongs at its place near the bottom of the list of most American's policy priorities. Unfortunately, yesterday's election shows that most of America is quite content with the way things have gone over the past six years--and especially the past two.
By appearing to have largely preserved the status quo of political power, America spoke up yesterday and said, "Go ahead and bankrupt us, destroy the USD, lead us ever closer to nuclear war without any debate, open the borders and let five million illegal immigrants burden the country, let a million violent criminals thrive, teach our very young children all about the primacy of sex, gender, and racial identity, let elections be run worse than in third world countries, and let personal liberties wither and die. I agree wholeheartedly with your pro-natal ideas. Sorry, I just do not see why we're expending any intellectual bandwidth on this. We have much more important challenges in front of us.
Well put. Reminds me of something P.J O'Rourke once wrote (paraphrasing): A deeply religious person would oppose both abortion and the death penalty. A callus pragmatist would support both. It takes years of therapy to arrive at the liberal point of view, where it is okay to kill unborn babies but not convicted murderers.
It strikes me that the situation we find ourselves in concerning abortion is very much like the one we found ourselves a hundred years ago concerning alcohol. Prohibition was a disaster, and so is the attempt to ban abortion. Our goal cannot be accomplished by outlawing abortion, any more than temperance was established by outlawing liquor.
We need to change the terms of the debate from “at what point will we make it illegal to have an abortion?” To “how can we minimize the need for abortion?”
So we have to stop engaging the issue by trying to establish a generally acceptable point when an abortion is permissible. We should flat out refuse to discuss that, and instead turn the question aside with by saying “I’d rather discuss how can we find ways to make abortion unnecessary.”
Reproductive choice and eugenics are inextricably bound. Sex-selective abortion is common and widely practiced, as is abortion of those with Downs and other genetic abnormalities.
Plus, IVF clinics routinely screen embryos, discard the defective ones and implant the largest embryos of the preferred sex. Additionally, sperm and eggs are sold and bought like any other commodity. They run ads in college newspapers and on billboards.
Supporting "reproductive choice" is intrinsically eugenic and socially/psychologically destructive. These practices aren't prospective. They've been occurring for several decades and are growing in popularity as people delay marriage and procreation.
Those who based their D vote on restrictions on abortion have again shown themselves to be histrionic and out of touch with reality. Abortions are still widely available. We live among many mentally ill people. They can't be reasoned with.
One aspect not covered in your article, but needs to be thought about, if we are talking about practicalities, is how lucrative the abortion industry is to the handful of doctors that do it. Strong financial interests of a minority generally always win against weak preferences of the majority.
One thing the left does very well is demonize and target the industry. Perhaps the right can learn some lessons from that, learn from the enemy re tactics.
I cringe every time I hear a republican politician take the hardline against. It clearly alienates a large % of voters instantly. A rational policy like you suggest is clearly better - yet they can't seem to see that. Why do they feel that pandering to the hard right, who do not need pandering in return for their vote, is the road they must take? A rational policy may piss some of those folks off, but they'll get over it when they win.
From where I was sitting during the election, what we had was a bunch of Democrats completely lying about 'abortion bans', the GOP wasn't actually taking those hardline stances. (I'm sure there were exceptions)
Biden's own Twitter stated the GOP wanted a 'national ban' when the hypothetical federal bill was actually a cutoff of 15 weeks -- roughly the same as Europe.
I feel like people were much more motivated by this 'misinformation' than actual Republican stances on the issue.
Edit: I went to find the Biden tweet, complete with misleading captioning over the video, but it's gone. I guess it served its purpose. In scrolling through the feed, I did notice how many "THE GOP IS COMING FOR YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY" posts there were. More lying.
Edit edit: Found it! It was on Biden's 'personal' account
I thought graham should have pitched it for what it was a compromise on providing access. Instead it got the dems riled up as a “ban”, and pro-life pissed as too lenient.
I horrified some strict Catholic friends when I told them Republicans need to stop drawing the line in the sand on this very issue, because they will always lose. If asked what they believe, they should answer, it is legal. And leave the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology to make recommendations for reasonable and safe guidelines for regulation.
A lot of angst has been wasted on "threats to the mother's life." An ectopic pregnancy is a life threatening emergency and no abortion laws prevent the treatment thereof.
I was not allowed to get tubal ligation under age 30 since I did not already have 2 children.
The women's rights groups were nowhere on this issue. In fact, they had a vested interest in NOT pursuing pregnancy prevention in women: women getting abortions was their money and votes bread and butter.
I so appreciate your voice on this. I am a woman and new mother who is yearning for a pro family pro child message. I am an outlier like you as well. I am pro choice but have learned to listen more to pro life voices and understand their view. I have shifted my overall view after listening to them. I support these ideas and am thankful for you articulating them.
Another great article Emily. The Republicans must figure out a unified message on this. I am pro-life, however realize others don’t feel the same. Conservatives will never win again if the Dems can threaten that we will “ban” abortion. If you saw how Desantis handled it (he does allow up to 15 weeks, which is PLENTY of time) in his debate with Crist, he said regarding unborn children “I think we should give everyone a shot at life”. It’s all about messaging and how you use words to change minds. Realistically, anyone can get a pill that works up to 12 weeks anyway, so any thought of tight restrictions is pointless.
This issue should be considered akin to the slavery issue that the Founding Fathers considered. They knew they had no hopes of a Union if the didn’t push this issue into the future—not because they were incapable or unwilling to debate it, but because the CULTURE needed to change before the legislation would work. The abortion topic is similar. Culture would need to determine that protecting a baby’s murder takes priority over “reproductive rights.” Until that time, it is in Republican’s best interest to compromise and wait for the day that culture catches up. My compromise: 1. Up to 10 weeks, 2. Mandatory counseling (including stuff you suggested) that the male partner attends and pays for 3. Mother and partner (if applicable) must sign a form acknowledging that she is, indeed, choosing to kill a baby. To your point, we can humanize the baby while allowing this to happen.
I also think we should stop saying "reproductive rights" when we really mean "right to engage in sexual intercourse."
Agreed. “Reproductive Rights” is another brilliant marketing spin from the Left.
I'm not sure what you mean.
I think abortion is a pro-male option. The availability of abortion as a fallback gives men full access to women's bodies.
Let me put it this way:
What are "reproductive rights," exactly?
(I agree with your point, by the way.)
And to make a quick decision in the heat of the moment to be irresponsible because they can just get an abortion if they get pregnant. I acknowledge this is not everyone, and couldn't even begin to estimate the percentage, but any needle movement towards no abortion is progress. In my opinion.
I think it was Naomi Wolf who said something along the lines of what Emily's saying here: Even if we say that abortion should be legal under certain conditions (which states' laws already say, to one extent or another), a pro-choice advocate should still be able to recognize that the act of abortion is sad.
Abortion is not a societal "good." It will never go away, and has existed from the beginning of time. But some far-left folks on this issue are downright celebratory about it.
I am with you (and Emily) that her suggestions move us TOWARD life, and would go a long way the conversation forward.
I agree. It has been really disturbing to me, the number of celebrities who have forced upon me, the knowledge that they had an abortion, or multiple abortions, or so many they aren't really sure how many they had. It should be available to women, within reasonable bounds, but should never be something to be celebrated or exalted, or presented as a badge of honor.
The fact that abortions went up under Trump, tells me women were getting pregnant and choosing abortion just in order to demonstrate their rebellion against someone they hated.
Really interesting comparison/point.
This is the more level-headed way of looking at the issue of abortion . . . and there are other issues, like transgender medical treatment of minors and transgender activist-designed school curriculum, etc., that has drawn a lot of left-leaning individuals into supporting Republican politicians proposing bans and parents' rights coalitions, which would benefit from this same sort of pragmatism.
Getting to grips with the limits of what public policy can do in addressing cultural controversies and the failings of our medical and science institutions is something more voters need to do - in other words, grow up and don't expect government to solve all your society's moral problems. But there's a depressing-to-witness certainty held by too many supposed grown-ups, that what is "right" can be achieved through simple "might," (in the form of another ban or government program or temporary political victory).
I’m 100% pro life but this piece is what we need. Reasonable approaches. Reduction in abortion. Less government.
Re-humanize! Amen. One of my biggest issues with the entire abortion debate is the cognitive dissonance so many pro-choicers subscribe to so that they can hold tight to their beliefs. Taking religion out of the equation, Science tells us it is a human being. Period.
Abortion is certainly not nothing, but it belongs at its place near the bottom of the list of most American's policy priorities. Unfortunately, yesterday's election shows that most of America is quite content with the way things have gone over the past six years--and especially the past two.
By appearing to have largely preserved the status quo of political power, America spoke up yesterday and said, "Go ahead and bankrupt us, destroy the USD, lead us ever closer to nuclear war without any debate, open the borders and let five million illegal immigrants burden the country, let a million violent criminals thrive, teach our very young children all about the primacy of sex, gender, and racial identity, let elections be run worse than in third world countries, and let personal liberties wither and die. I agree wholeheartedly with your pro-natal ideas. Sorry, I just do not see why we're expending any intellectual bandwidth on this. We have much more important challenges in front of us.
Yes, agree with all you say .. Safe, Legal, Rare, Early. Thoughtfully ... of all things where there could possibly be a middle ground ...
https://tobyrogers.substack.com/p/how-the-scotus-abortion-decision - I think you'd appreciate this article ..
Glad I found you ... although substack overwhelmed already ...
Abortion is about convenience these days, no matter how hard you try to sugar-coat the truth.
I concur with your proposed action steps.
Additionally, I submit this summary...
Intellectually honest, tenable positions:
1. Pro-life on abortion, anti-mandate masks/vaccines
2. Pro-choice on abortion, anti-mandate on masks/vaccines
Intellectually dishonest, untenable positions:
1. Pro-choice on abortion, pro-mandate on masks/vaccines
2. Pro-life on abortion, pro-mandate on masks/vaccines
Well put. Reminds me of something P.J O'Rourke once wrote (paraphrasing): A deeply religious person would oppose both abortion and the death penalty. A callus pragmatist would support both. It takes years of therapy to arrive at the liberal point of view, where it is okay to kill unborn babies but not convicted murderers.
It strikes me that the situation we find ourselves in concerning abortion is very much like the one we found ourselves a hundred years ago concerning alcohol. Prohibition was a disaster, and so is the attempt to ban abortion. Our goal cannot be accomplished by outlawing abortion, any more than temperance was established by outlawing liquor.
We need to change the terms of the debate from “at what point will we make it illegal to have an abortion?” To “how can we minimize the need for abortion?”
So we have to stop engaging the issue by trying to establish a generally acceptable point when an abortion is permissible. We should flat out refuse to discuss that, and instead turn the question aside with by saying “I’d rather discuss how can we find ways to make abortion unnecessary.”
Reproductive choice and eugenics are inextricably bound. Sex-selective abortion is common and widely practiced, as is abortion of those with Downs and other genetic abnormalities.
Plus, IVF clinics routinely screen embryos, discard the defective ones and implant the largest embryos of the preferred sex. Additionally, sperm and eggs are sold and bought like any other commodity. They run ads in college newspapers and on billboards.
Supporting "reproductive choice" is intrinsically eugenic and socially/psychologically destructive. These practices aren't prospective. They've been occurring for several decades and are growing in popularity as people delay marriage and procreation.
Those who based their D vote on restrictions on abortion have again shown themselves to be histrionic and out of touch with reality. Abortions are still widely available. We live among many mentally ill people. They can't be reasoned with.
One aspect not covered in your article, but needs to be thought about, if we are talking about practicalities, is how lucrative the abortion industry is to the handful of doctors that do it. Strong financial interests of a minority generally always win against weak preferences of the majority.
One thing the left does very well is demonize and target the industry. Perhaps the right can learn some lessons from that, learn from the enemy re tactics.
Great article,. Very well said.
I cringe every time I hear a republican politician take the hardline against. It clearly alienates a large % of voters instantly. A rational policy like you suggest is clearly better - yet they can't seem to see that. Why do they feel that pandering to the hard right, who do not need pandering in return for their vote, is the road they must take? A rational policy may piss some of those folks off, but they'll get over it when they win.
From where I was sitting during the election, what we had was a bunch of Democrats completely lying about 'abortion bans', the GOP wasn't actually taking those hardline stances. (I'm sure there were exceptions)
Biden's own Twitter stated the GOP wanted a 'national ban' when the hypothetical federal bill was actually a cutoff of 15 weeks -- roughly the same as Europe.
I feel like people were much more motivated by this 'misinformation' than actual Republican stances on the issue.
Edit: I went to find the Biden tweet, complete with misleading captioning over the video, but it's gone. I guess it served its purpose. In scrolling through the feed, I did notice how many "THE GOP IS COMING FOR YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY" posts there were. More lying.
Edit edit: Found it! It was on Biden's 'personal' account
https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1588637354859921409
I thought graham should have pitched it for what it was a compromise on providing access. Instead it got the dems riled up as a “ban”, and pro-life pissed as too lenient.
I horrified some strict Catholic friends when I told them Republicans need to stop drawing the line in the sand on this very issue, because they will always lose. If asked what they believe, they should answer, it is legal. And leave the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology to make recommendations for reasonable and safe guidelines for regulation.
A lot of angst has been wasted on "threats to the mother's life." An ectopic pregnancy is a life threatening emergency and no abortion laws prevent the treatment thereof.
I was not allowed to get tubal ligation under age 30 since I did not already have 2 children.
The women's rights groups were nowhere on this issue. In fact, they had a vested interest in NOT pursuing pregnancy prevention in women: women getting abortions was their money and votes bread and butter.
I so appreciate your voice on this. I am a woman and new mother who is yearning for a pro family pro child message. I am an outlier like you as well. I am pro choice but have learned to listen more to pro life voices and understand their view. I have shifted my overall view after listening to them. I support these ideas and am thankful for you articulating them.