The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

Why anti-abortion groups’ policy positions are nonsensical

Back in the early 2000s, I was a student at Ohio State University and was involved with an evangelical Christian group called Campus Crusade for Christ. We would have Bible studies separated by gender, such that every Tuesday about 30 guys would pile into a living room and read the Bible, break it down, and talk about how it applied to our lives.

So of course, being a group of all guys, one night we decided to talk about abortion. We had many different opinions on the subject. There were a few liberal guys like me, mostly moderates who opposed abortion but thought there should be exceptions, and very conservative guys who were against everything from abortion to in vitro fertilization to surrogacy.

One of them then invoked a nefarious figure in the abortion debate, Eric Rudolph, the Olympic Park bomber and abortion clinic bomber. Telling the group that he “couldn’t condone what he did, but could see why he would do it,” the group member elicited a very strong rebuke from the rest of us. He then said, “I just think some people are so opposed to abortion, that they are willing to do anything to stop it.”

I wish I could have said then what I am about to tell you now, but I just slunk back onto the couch and stayed quiet. But over the years, I have seen the so-called pro-lifers take positions on women’s reproductive rights that didn’t seem to make any sense at all. And in the 2024 election cycle, I think we can stay this is no longer a pro-life movement but an anti-choice one. Don’t believe me? Let’s look at the Republican position on the matter.

In the last few weeks, Donald Trump and his running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, have given wildly inconsistent takes on the Republican position on abortion. Trump, who in the lead up to securing the nomination, called overturning Roe v. Wade and allowing states to ban abortion “a beautiful thing” is now saying he does not support Florida’s ban on abortions for pregnancies beyond six weeks. Trump also took to Truth Social to claim that his administration would be “great for women and their reproductive rights.” Trump even made a major policy announcement by claiming he would make the government or insurance companies pay for IVF treatment.

It is painfully obvious that Trump is seeing the surge in voter registration among women and is trying hard to court women who support abortion rights and he and his running mate are trying everything to win their votes. Vance even proclaimed that Trump would veto a nationwide abortion ban.

In fact, since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the number of abortions in the U.S. has actually increased.

So, my question to the pro-life crowd is this: If some of you are willing to do “anything” to prevent abortions, why aren’t you doing that? Well, because it was never about being pro-life, was it? 

It is a common-sense argument that birth control prevents pregnancies, because if you aren’t pregnant, you don’t need an abortion. Yet, time and time again, pro-lifers have fought to prevent access to birth control. Contraceptives, when used correctly, will dramatically reduce the chance of pregnancy, but they are often opposed by anti-abortion groups.

It is widely accepted that comprehensive sex education to teenagers reduces teenage pregnancies.

Paid maternity leave, health care coverage for the child, a social safety net to alleviate financial hardships for the mother are all ideas anti-abortion groups fail to unify behind.

The fact that people think someone like Rudolph was willing to “do anything” to prevent abortions is laughable, because he could have supported birth control, contraceptive access, sex education, maternity leave, comprehensive health care and done a better job of actually preventing abortions from happening. All of that would have actually made a difference, instead of committing domestic terrorism.

And for the less extreme opponents of abortions rights, the same logic applies to you, too.

If you really wanted to reduce abortions in this country, maybe you should support abortion rights. It seems as if Donald Trump and JD Vance, in their political opportunism, have already decided to do that.

Jos Joseph is a master’s candidate at the Harvard Extension School at Harvard University. He is a Marine veteran who served in Iraq and lives in Anaheim, Calif.

Tags Birth control Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Donald Trump Donald Trump Eric Rudolph IVF coverage JD Vance JD Vance Republican Party Roe v. Wade

Copyright 2024 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed..

 

Main Area Top ↴

Testing Homepage Widget

More Opinion News

See All

 

Main Area Middle ↴
Main Area Bottom ↴

Most Popular

Load more

Video

See all Video