Can conservatives hold true beliefs about abortion? The front page of Monday’s New York TimesThis outlet again reduced pro-life belief to cynical politics. Reporter Kate Zernike wrote “Is a Fetus a Person? An Anti-Abortion Strategy Says Yes.”
“Strategy” is a fascinating word choice, remindful of a May 2004 TimesReport by Laurie Goodstein, religion journalist. This story reduced the solemn sacrament denial to pro-choice Catholic lawmakers to a cynical and political maneuver: “The tactic to deny that the sacrament was has been encouraged for years by groups such as the American Life League (Legatus), and the National Right to Life Committee,” said Deal Hudson. Crisis is a conservative Catholic magazine.
Zernike demonstrated her prolife credentials by promoting a story about prolife activists trying to give personhood to the fetus. She dismissed out of hand that the fetus may feel pain but forwards bizarre extrapolations from pro-choice people of what such rules might involve, with zero criticism.
Despite the fact that nearly half of the US states have had to enact abortion bans since Roe v Wade was overturned by the Supreme Court in June, Anti-abortion activists want a more permanent and absolute goal: legislation that grants fetuses equal legal rights and protections to all other people.
So-called fetal personhood laws would make abortion murder, ruling out all or most of the exceptions for abortion allowed in states that already ban it….
Zernike made some of the most outrageous predictions from the professional pro-choice movement. Fetal personhood could make aspirin taking like murder.
They could criminalize certain health-care procedures, and restrict the rights of pregnant women in making their health-care decisions.
….
Mississippi Medical groups opposed the fetal persons amendment. They warned it would criminalize contraceptive devices and IUDs.In vitro fertilization involves freezing embryos that are fertilized and then implanting several to ensure that all pregnancies hold. Disposing of unused fertilized eggs, or selectively eliminating implanted eggs, as many aspiring parents do, could result in murder charges….
She allowed GA State Sen. Jen Jordan to warn “that taking legal medications that some doctors advise against using in pregnancy — aspirin and some antidepressants — or even failing to secure adequate prenatal care could open pregnant women to prosecution.”
Zernike, after allowing her pro-choice sources to extrapolate wildly, strictly monitored what pro-lifers could claim about fetal discomfort (links provided for context).
The Georgia law declares that the “unborn” are entitled to 14th Amendment protection. It also codifies assertions that the scientific literature does not support: for instance, that a fetus has a heartbeat at six weeks of pregnancy and can feel pain at 20 weeks. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists disputes both.
Zernike probed Arizona’s fetal personhood law, currently on hold:
….the state’s law on child abuse applies to anyone who causes physical injury to a child “whether intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently.” According to the groups, declaring a foetus a baby could result in women being charged with abuse for undergoing medical procedures that may harm fertilized eggs. This includes cancer screening and substance abuse treatment.
Zernike was able to conclude in a notable way:
“Seemingly far-fetched possibilities too easily become reality,” the National Advocates for Pregnant Women declared in a report on fetal personhood last week.
Indeed.