Celebrating Election Day results
Why I support abortion rights and reject so-called 'moderate' compromises
This post originally appeared on my blog on June 1, 2023, in a reply to the Run-Up podcast, and has since been updated. Today I was thrilled to wake up to news that Americans across the country voted in favor of abortion rights.
Marjorie Dannenfelser is president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America and was a guest on The Run-Up podcast today. At the end of her interview with host Astead Herndon, she said that democrats do not have a response to her organization’s proposed 15-week ban on abortion: “They don’t want you to know, because it’s wildly unpopular.”
I think the implication here is that democrats’ supposed silence on the limit is indicative of their support for abortion rights “up to birth.” This is a line anti-choicers use often. Trump (who fell out of favor with SBA) said a few years ago that pro-choicers wrap newborn babies in blankets and then kill them. I hope it’s obvious that this is untrue.
I don’t know if I agree with Dannenfelser’s accusation that democrats don’t have a clear limit. I agree it sounds bad to say, “I support no limit abortion” on a debate stage because it will be quickly misconstrued. But I will be clear: I support no limits on abortion access.
Do I think that it would be very sad and morally wrong to terminate a healthy, viable pregnancy at eight months? Yes. However, 1) this is so unlikely to happen that it is an absurd suggestion; and 2) it’s none of my business if a person chooses to end a pregnancy for any reason.
The majority of later abortions happen because something goes terribly wrong in a wanted pregnancy. Forcing women to continue pregnancies after, say, the so-called “moderate” suggestion of 15 weeks, when they know the baby will not survive is devastatingly cruel to both the baby and the parents. I cannot imagine the emotional and psychological toll it would take on a person to carry a pregnancy to term that they know is not viable. It also puts the pregnant person’s life in danger.
The other reason I support no limit abortion is that the more we restrict abortion access across the country, the more later abortions occur. People who want and need abortion care are facing longer wait times and greater travel requirements. Abortions that would have taken place at 6 or 10 weeks are occurring later not because the woman wants to wait, but because there is not enough access to care. Placing limits on abortion access delays abortions from taking place early on.
On top of all that, doctors hesitate to perform necessary abortions to protect the health of the mother, because legislation is unclear. Doctors in training don’t want to practice in states where they don’t have permission to do their job completely, and so anti-choice states are becoming less safe places to be pregnant and/or give birth. Our maternal mortality rate is already bad enough, and we are making it worse.
So, to sum up, if you want abortions to be legal up to 15 weeks, it makes more sense to support no limit abortions because it expands and expedites access, allowing abortions to take place sooner. A 15-week ban is merely theoretical. That’s because abortions are increasingly more difficult to access before 15 weeks, meaning they wouldn’t occur in time and the “right” is moot. Exceptions for rape, incest and the health of the mother, which are complicated and left up for debate because we are often not taken at our word, are also theoretical. But I’m sure Dannenfelser already knows that. And now so do you.
I suppose it is possible that if there were a federal 15-week ban, confusion about how to apply the law across different states would dissipate. However, I have zero faith that a federal limit would do anything to stop state legislatures from trying to apply their own further limitations. Discussions about deadlines and exceptions sow confusion and doubt, forcing health practitioners to deny care and clinics to close.