The Reporter (Lansdale, PA)

Honor women by celebratin­g life

-

Sometimes, the stars align, and things happen the way they’re supposed to. Like starting Women’s History Month with a wonderful gift to women, or at least the unborn kind.

On the eve of the 31-day period that celebrates the beauty, the intelligen­ce, the talent, the majesty and all of the other traits shared by the sisterhood, the Senate by a 48-46 margin rejected attempts to codify Roe v. Wade and provide women with a federal right to abortion.

The coyly named Women’s Health Protection Act would have invalidate­d each and every state law that provided limitation­s on a mother’s right to terminate her pregnancy. It was a knee-jerk reaction to the prospect that Roe would be overruled at the Supreme Court, thereby allowing the 50 states to construct their own abortion landscapes.

And that scared the sort of person who thinks women’s history includes a right to abortion in the Constituti­on, and that women’s autonomy requires a right to become unpregnant, and that women’s dignity requires a right to ignore the dignity of nascent human life.

They rushed to create a federal shield that would protect these poor pregnant women from the horrific assaults being lobbed against them from legislativ­e missiles by states.

To be fair, women who think that the power to give life is much less empowering than the power to end it do have a legitimate reason to be nervous. While it’s far from certain that this court will overturn Roe, , many pro-lifers are cautiously optimistic that Roe will finally be erased from the jurisprude­ntial horizon. But our cautious optimism translates to apoplexy for the other side, and they started to promote laws which would have been struck down the minute someone challenged them in a court of law. There were no exceptions for religious opposition. The legislatio­n provided for abortion up to the moment of birth, which is something that even under Roe could have been prohibited. The principle of states rights was ignored.

Every single Republican voted to oppose the Women’s Health Protection Act. Even lawmakers who call themselves pro-choice could not stomach the draconian measures included in the Act, which would have essentiall­y carved “abortion on demand” into the bedrock foundation of our society.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski was blunt about the bill’s assault on conscience: “I have long supported a woman’s right to choose, but my position is not without limits, and this partisan Women’s Health Protection Act simply goes too far. It would broadly supersede state laws and infringe on Americans’ religious freedoms. The fact that my choice is between this bill, or nothing at all, shows how insincere Majority Leader Schumer is about protecting women’s rights. Failing to conduct any outreach and reducing this important issue to nothing more than a designedto-fail show vote is a disservice to women across America.”

Murkowski makes a great point about Schumer, who is representa­tive of many Democrats on this issue. While there are a number of Republican­s who support abortion rights, and while a majority of Americans in both parties generally poll in opposition to complete abortion bans, the Democrats have engaged in a scorchedea­rth policy where anything less than abortion up to the moment of birth is unacceptab­le. And in some cases, birth isn’t even the necessary cutoff.

That’s a horrible commentary on where we’re at during Women’s History Month. Any celebratio­n of women must celebrate their ability to give life, to nurture it, to shelter and mentor it, to teach it lessons in virtue and compassion, to protect it, to perpetuate it. And far too many women, and men, forget that.

You don’t have to agree with me about abortion. But legislatio­n that ignores a Catholic doctor’s right to refrain from taking life, and that looks upon the states as neutered servants of some federal overlord, is repellent. Beyond that, it’s dangerous. And I’m very thankful 48 principled senators knew it.

A friend once told me that the key is in changing hearts and minds, in helping women to understand that abortion solves no problems and creates a world of hurt. He said legislatio­n was ineffectiv­e. I responded that I have no interest in changing the hearts and minds of people who believe destroying unborn life is a right. That’s why working the courts and legislatur­es is key to making next year’s Women’s History Month, the one where we can finally celebrate the glory of unborn women, a reality.

 ?? ?? Christine Flowers Columnist
Christine Flowers Columnist

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States