I’ve said before on this blog (and I’m not the first to say it) that the “right” to abortion is not the “right to choose” but the right to a dead baby. That is to say, for all of the pro-choice hand-wringing about “unplugging” and maternal safety, pro-choice advocates are not satisfied if pregnancy is ended but the baby survives the abortion attempt. Their ideal right to abortion is the right to an effective abortion, a lethal one.
Dobbs was a victory for the pro-life movement, ending a nationwide judicial ban on legislation to protect unborn humans. However, while it allowed the states to pass pro-life legislation, that’s all it did—allowed the unborn to be protected. Instead of being at the mercy of nine unelected justices, unborn humans are now at the mercy of voters across the country, including in states like California, New York, and Washington.
It’s not enough to allow human rights to be voted up or down in various states. It is the responsibility of the federal government to protect the human rights of unborn children across the nation.
Estimated reading time: 5 minutes
Right now, the Illinois House and Senate have just passed a bill which would go after pregnancy centers in a way unmatched even by California and Massachusetts. SB 1909 attempts to criminalize, as fraud, attempts by a PRC to convince a woman to choose them over an abortion facility or not to have an abortion.
Estimated reading time: 7 minutes
Now that Roe v. Wade has been overturned, states can once again legislate directly on abortion. Following the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, laws restricting or upholding abortion access triggered in several states. More legislation and legal battles across the country followed soon after.
Partisans on both sides of the abortion debate recognize that legislation can be changed and is not enough to provide a permanent resolution. Accordingly, they turned to state constitutional amendments to establish whether or not there is a right to abortion in each state’s constitution. Establishing a right to abortion in a state constitution does the same thing as the Roe decision—invalidates all laws restricting abortion and prevents future ones from coming into effect. Amendments that reject a constitutional right to abortion are more limited: they essentially tell the state supreme court that it can’t issue a Roe-like decision and find a right to abortion, but they don’t change any existing laws or prevent abortion-friendly laws from being passed.
Estimated reading time: 6 minutes
We were thrilled to watch Emily present the pro-life position on MSNBC last Sunday, and we hope you had the chance to see it live! If you didn’t watch the live broadcast, or you’d like to share the segment with people you know, here’s the link to a 12-minute version of the video.
We want you to know that you make appearances like this possible. MSNBC viewers are almost all hostile to pro-life people and their beliefs, and many don’t even have pro-life friends to break through their pro-choice echo chamber. But thanks to your support, many of those viewers have been exposed to a good pro-life argument for maybe the first time in their lives!
After the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs, we’ve gotten more and more media requests, and ERI has been able to share a compelling, relational case against abortion on MSNBC, BBC, and EWTN, among other platforms. This has been a great and exciting opportunity for us, but it also comes with some new costs and challenges.
For example, MSNBC reached out to us to schedule Emily a few days before the segment was filmed. In order for us to make this happen, we needed to schedule a last-minute flight to New York City, which isn’t an expense we planned for.
The good news is, everyone in the media who has interacted with ERI has expressed admiration for our organization and is excited about our specific pro-life perspective. Our dedication to promoting dialogue while providing thoughtful pro-life arguments has brought ERI onto the national media radar, and multiple outlets have openly expressed a desire to have us back! That means, though, that we expect to have increased travel expenses as we fly our staff to filming locations in response to future media requests.
Will you help bring a clear, winsome pro-life message to new audiences on television and the internet? Your donation directly enables the best pro-life arguments to change new minds, even in places, like MSNBC, where we might least expect it. Click here to support ERI with a one-time or monthly donation.