By Dan Calabrese ——Bio and Archives--June 29, 2018
American Politics, News | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
Let’s say that somehow all five conservative Supreme Court justices manage to outlast the Obama presidency, and that in 2016 we elect a Republican president who appoints the fifth vote to overturn Roe v. Wade. Then everything changes, right? Not really. The only thing that would do is return the issue to the states. Now let’s say for the sake of argument that some states would ban abortions and other would not. (And let’s skip the discussion of the political implications of the battles that would ensue in all 50 states.) And let’s say the pattern of who does what hues exactly to the 2012 electoral map. In that case, you’d have 24 states banning abortion and 26 states keeping it legal. Aha, you say! You just saved babies in 24 states! I say no you didn’t. What do you think will happen in the 24 states that ban abortion? Pro-abortion groups will raise money, organize transportation, conduct public information campaigns and basically do everything within their power to get women who want abortions to a clinic in a state where it’s legal. Granted, many women wouldn’t even need the help. You live in Indiana, you’re pregnant and you want an abortion? You can be at a clinic in Illinois or Michigan in a few hours.
Support Canada Free Press
Don’t think women would make the trip? I think you’re wrong. A woman who has decided to abort a pregnancy has just made what she probably views as one of the most important decisions of her life. You seriously think she’s going to go through childbirth because a half-day trip to another state is too much of a hassle? I know this is a hard truth for pro-lifers to accept, but when you think about it, it’s hard to deny: Overturning Roe v. Wade would prevent very few abortions. Maybe none. I understand its appeal as a political victory, but as a practical matter, that is all it would be. If your goal is to save babies, your goal would not be met.What we would likely have is a series of state-by-state, blood/death matches in which every election hinges on the abortion question. Some states would indeed pass bans on abortion, now empowered by the Supreme Court to do so. Do not think for a second that these laws would face no legal challenges. They would. Left-wing judges would find reasons to strike them down, necessitating new challenges that would go all the way to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, pregnant women would travel to states with liberal abortion laws and terminate their pregnancies. The fight would not be over. The pro-life side would have won a momentary political/legal victory, but almost no abortions would be prevented and the political death match would only ratchet up. I just hope you know what you’re getting excited about, because the end of Roe v. Wade is not the end of the fight, nor is it the end of abortion. The only way to save these babies is to appeal to the hearts of the women carrying them. If they want to abort, they will find a way. We need to pray that they won’t want to.
View Comments
Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain
Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.