Chattanooga Times Free Press

THE NEW REPUBLICAN PARTY ISN’T READY FOR THE POST-ROE WORLD

-

Ohio is not a swing state, not any longer. Donald Trump won it by 8 points, twice. It has a Republican governor, and while its senators are split between the parties, its U.S. House delegation is made up of 10 Republican­s and five Democrats. And yet Ohio just passed an abortion-rights referendum by a margin of more than 13 points.

There’s no way to spin this result. There’s no way to spin every other pro-choice result in every other red-state referendum. The pro-life movement is in a state of electoral collapse, and I think I know one reason.

In the eight years since the so-called New Right emerged on the scene and Trump began to dominate the Republican landscape, the Republican Party has become less libertaria­n but more libertine, and libertinis­m is ultimately incompatib­le with a holistic pro-life worldview.

I’m not arguing that the pro-choice position is inherently libertine. There are many millions of Americans — including pro-choice Republican­s — who arrive at their position through genuine philosophi­cal disagreeme­nt with the idea that an unborn child possesses the same inherent worth as anyone else. But I’ve seen Republican libertinis­m with my own eyes. I know that it distorts the culture of the Republican Party and red America.

The difference between libertaria­nism and libertinis­m can be summed up as the difference between rights and desires. A libertaria­n is concerned with her own liberty but also knows that this liberty ends where yours begins. The entire philosophy of libertaria­nism depends on a healthy recognitio­n of human dignity. A healthy libertaria­nism can still be individual­istic, but it’s also deeply concerned with both personal virtue and the rights of others. Not all libertaria­ns are pro-life, but a pro-life libertaria­n will recognize the humanity and dignity of both mother and child.

A libertine, by contrast, is dominated by his desires. The object of his life is to do what he wants, and the object of politics is to give him what he wants. A libertaria­n is concerned with all forms of state coercion. A libertine rejects any attempt to coerce him personally, but he’s happy to coerce others if it gives him what he wants.

Donald Trump is the consummate libertine. He rejects restraints on his appetites and accountabi­lity for his actions. The guiding principle of his worldview is summed up with a simple declaratio­n: I do what I want.

Trump’s movement dismisses the value of personal character. It mocks personal restraint. And it’s happy to inflict its will on others if it achieves what it wants. Libertaria­nism says that your rights are more important than my desires. Libertinis­m says my desires are more important than your rights, and this means that libertines are terrible ambassador­s for any cause that requires self-sacrifice.

I don’t think the pro-life movement has fully reckoned with the political and cultural fallout from the libertine right-wing response to the COVID pandemic. Here was a movement that was loudly telling women that they had to carry unwanted pregnancie­s to term, with all the physical transforma­tions, risks and financial uncertaint­ies that come with pregnancy and childbirth, at the same time that millions of its members were also loudly refusing the minor inconvenie­nces of masking and the low risks of vaccinatio­n — even if the best science available at the time told us that both masking and vaccinatio­n could help protect others from getting the disease.

Even worse, many of the same people demanded that the state limit the liberty of others so that they could live how they wanted.

This do-what-you-want ethos cost a staggering number of American lives. A 2022 study found that there were an estimated 318,981 vaccine-preventabl­e deaths from January 2021 to April 2022. Vaccine hesitancy was so concentrat­ed in Republican America that political affiliatio­n was more relevant than race and ethnicity as an indicator of willingnes­s to take the vaccine.

It’s not just that libertinis­m robs Republican­s of moral authority; it’s that libertinis­m robs Republican­s of moral principle. The Ohio ballot measure could fail so decisively only if Republican­s voted against it. The same analysis applies to ballot referendum losses in pro-Trump states such as Kansas, Montana and Kentucky.

In each state, all the pro-life movement needed was consistent Republican support, and it would have sailed to victory. All the Democrats in the state could have voted to protect abortion rights, and they would have lost if Republican­s held firm. But they did not.

“Do as I say and not as I do” is among the worst moral arguments imaginable. A holistic pro-life society requires true self-sacrifice. It asks women to value the life growing inside of them even in the face of fear and poverty. It asks the community to rally beside these women to keep them and their children safe and to provide them with opportunit­ies to flourish. It requires both individual­s and communitie­s to sublimate their own desires to protect the lives and opportunit­ies of others.

As the Republican Party grows more libertine, the pro-life movement is going to keep losing. It’s also going to lose in the Republican Party itself, a party that is increasing­ly dedicated to outright defiance.

The challenge for pro-life America isn’t simply to raise more money or use better talking points. As Republican losses in Virginia demonstrat­e, advocating even a relatively mild abortion ban — a 15-week law, not a so-called heartbeat sixweek bill — is fraught. The challenge is much more profound. Pro-life America has to reconnect with personal virtue. It has to model self-sacrifice. It has to show, not just tell, America what it would look like to value life from conception to natural death.

At present, however, the Republican Party is dominated by its id. It indulges its desires. And so long as its id is in control, the pro-life movement will fail. There is no selfish path to a culture of life.

 ?? ?? David French
David French

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States