Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court sent liberals and the media into full panic mode for fear that Kavanaugh would help overturn Roe v. Wade. The debate swelled to a roar, then simmered to mostly yammering, but mild outbursts continue to linger.
Immediately, Vox wanted to know what would happen to the law; weeks later, a plan to fight Kavanaugh’s confirmation process appeared in the publication. An op-ed in The Hill argued women deserve to see into every nook and cranny of Kavanaugh’s life in order to know whether or not he will help overturn Roe. The fact that Kavanaugh and Roe are still in the news shows how important the ruling is to progressives.
Yet, whether Roe must be overturned is not the debate we should be having in America. We should be talking about the reality of abortion, which makes Roe seem like a law on the books rather than the tragedy that it is. We should be talking about what abortion does to the personhood of the unborn baby, and the mother carrying the child, rather than simply how women would cope with the grievous reality should their safety net of choice be removed.
The debate about Roe has always centered around the woman carrying the child and never the baby. The 1973 decision denied that an unborn baby has personhood. The ruling has inspired an entire movement of women concerned with their own rights, while denying others theirs. In a recent piece in The Atlantic, the author, who had two abortions (and also bore three children), wrote:
If we only discuss whether or not Roe was good law (it wasn’t) or what the chances of overturning it are (slim, actually), everybody feels intellectually stimulated but morally bankrupt.
Abortion is actually not as pro-woman as one might think, and that — not to mention what it does to a woman and her baby — is the debate that should be happening.
What is abortion? What does it accomplish? How is it accomplished? How does it feel? To the woman? To the baby? Does the baby feel pain? Does the mom feel pain — emotionally and physically? When is a baby a human? Society should ask these questions and really, sincerely, answer them.
If one doesn’t know the answers to these questions but cites the potential for abortions to once again return to back alleys, that’s both disingenuous and highly manipulative. Abortion is not law so much as it is an abhorrent act that is protected — and protected somewhat outrageously, even according to many neutral legal scholars. That’s why abortion is still such a contentious issue, not because it’s legal but because of what it does to two people (arguably more) despite being legal.
Like many conservatives, I applaud Kavanaugh’s nomination (I was assuredly a part of the “But Gorsuch” crowd), but overturning Roe is not entirely why, nor should it be for any conservative. The abortion debate will not end with Kavanaugh, just like it didn’t end in 1973. The only way it ends is through information and persuasion. As Justice Antonin Scalia said in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, “The States may, if they wish, permit abortion on demand, but the Constitution does not require them to do so. The permissibility of abortion, and the limitations upon it, are to be resolved like most important questions in our democracy: by citizens trying to persuade one another and then voting.”
Nicole Russell (@russell_nm) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. She is a journalist who previously worked in Republican politics in Minnesota.
