Roe v. Wade Is Under Fire

The past two years have been bizarre, and it is doubtful whether H.G. Wells or Ray Bradbury could have written a more terrifying story than what America has been experiencing. The Republicans have used the call for mask mandates to tout infringement of their civil liberties, wrongly decried violation of their HIPAA rights in having to disclose vaccination status, and applauded fellow GOP members for histrionics in lieu of governing as constituents die from COVID. With the exception of their shock and awe campaign across television, the Republicans have upheld the charade of being the party which supports civil liberties and embraces small, limited government. Or, at least, it would seem. Unless, of course, the issue is women’s rights.

In May, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed a bill banning abortions after a fetal heartbeat is detected, as early as six weeks. Known as a heartbeat bill, Texas and 12 other states have passed similar legislation. A majority of the heartbeat bills have not gone into effect because courts have temporarily blocked them or struck them down. Until now.

On September 1st, Texas’ law banning abortion took effect, becoming the most restrictive abortion law in the country. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court spoke out, refusing to block the Texas law. The Supremes stated the abortion providers didn’t make their case “in the face of ‘complex and novel’ procedural questions.” It is important to note that the majority stressed it was not making a constitutionality ruling on the law.

Supporters of the Texas law and other states’ heartbeat bills are playing the long game and hoping for legal challenges to find their way to the Supremes. With the Supremes’ refusal to block the Lone Star State’s anti-abortion law, pro-life advocates are counting this as one step closer toward overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark case granting a woman the right to choose to have an abortion.

The irony of Republicans working overtime to pass and enact laws that deny women the right to choose and have control over their own bodies without excessive government intervention should not be ignored.

Since the beginning of the pandemic, Republican leadership has politicized COVID-19, committed a full-frontal assault on science, and decried mask mandates under the guise of infringement of civil liberties, aka “my body, my choice.”

For a political party whose leaders have refused to impose mask mandates because it is an infringement of civil liberties, support capital punishment, and believe in small limited government, it is difficult to make sense of how or why they would support such a Big Brother-esque type of law.

The problem is, if the Republican party truly stood for small limited government and protecting civil liberties, they should refuse to support any type of legislation that seeks to embolden more government regulation and greater government oversight into the lives of private citizens.

Conversely, the argument Republicans fall back on is the sanctity of life. If the GOP were truly the pro-life party, they wouldn’t support capital punishment. If a political party or individual is going to be pro-life they must be pro-life for an entire life, from womb to tomb. However, that is not the stance of the Republican party.

They prefer to campaign on and pass legislation to protect the lives of the unborn. But what happens when the life they vehemently defended is born and the mother needs government assistance? The Republican party is not willing to expand welfare programs to support the mother and their child. It goes against their ethos of small limited government.

This is the problem with playing partisan politics and legislating someone else’s body. If Republicans don’t support abortion, fine, don’t have one. However, enacting sweeping legislation to remove the choice from the woman to advance an agenda of protecting the sanctity of life isn’t good governance. It’s overreaching and, for the GOP, which detests bureaucracy and big government, they’re self-sabotaging. Unless, of course, it’s not the abortion they’re against but women.