During their convention in Chicago last month, Democrats united around the theme of freedom, and on no issue was freedom more clearly defined in progressive terms than the issue of abortion. The Democrats practiced what they preached. Planned Parenthood set up shop with a mobile abortion and vasectomy clinic just down the street.
A special segment featured two Kentuckians on the main stage: Hadley Duvall and Gov. Andy Beshear. Duvall introduced Beshear, and Beshear called Duvall “one of the bravest people [he’s] ever met.” At another time, a Texas couple—Josh and Amanda Zurawski—claimed that they were denied an abortion when it was medically necessary because of the state’s abortion ban.
The Governor’s rhetoric was discordant, however. For example, consider the subhead of the Kentucky Lantern story about his address: “The governor highlights reproductive freedom and overcoming division in politics while backing Harris for president.”
This has been a theme of Beshear’s governorship: eschew the culture war, embrace what unifies. This line of reasoning is problematic, however, especially when it is applied to abortion.
Democrats are misrepresenting the issue at hand. Stories like the Zurawskis are sad, but they don’t represent the medical facts. The Supreme Court of Texas made the issue quite clear in its ruling on their case: every state with an abortion ban, including Texas, does not prevent the care of the mother if the unborn child dies. Why do the healthcare establishment and the Democratic Party claim otherwise? Their pro-abortion convictions have led to misrepresentations.
Further, what happened to Hadley Duvall was tragic. But the lesson is not that having an abortion and the subsequent promotion of it are acts of courageous self-sacrifice. Courage intercedes for the vulnerable. It does not advocate for the right to end another person’s life.
Democrats say that abortion is a deeply personal experience. We agree, because there are two people involved: the mother and her unborn child. The child in the womb is tiny, but nonetheless a person like you and me as we were once in the same stage. Just societies have a legal interest in protecting all human life, born and unborn.
We believe that both Republicans and Democrats desire a healthy society. However, a healthy society is only possible when there is profound respect for human life. Unfortunately, our culture’s commitment to radical autonomy displaces any claims the unborn might have. On its face, deliberately ending a pregnancy may appear to be freedom, but is “freeing” a living human into oblivion truly freedom? Certainly not for the unborn who’d never make such a choice.
Rhetoric that trumpets “reproductive freedom” above the claims of another’s life rings hollow. It’s insidious. It’s divisive to the core. In a word, it’s deadly. How we treat “the least of these” will translate to how we treat all people. How we regard the origin of life and the limits of what the born can do to the unborn will translate to how we regard our political life together.
Beshear was right to assert that we should love our neighbors, even if they have different political positions. Caring well for others transcends political affiliation, but truly loving our fellow neighbors requires affirming the fundamental principles of human nature. Life has a starting point and acknowledging personhood and extending dignity to these lives is one way to love our tiny neighbors.
This moves us towards a culture of moral obligation, which elevates the dignity of all human life. And such obligation calls us to renew our commitments to the most vulnerable members of the human community, our families, and the God who created both.