Blog | Subscribe | Free Trial | Contact Us | Cart | Donate | Planned Giving
Log In | Search
facebook
rss
twitter
  • CURRENT
    • Spring 2023 FULL ISSUE
    • Spring 2023 pdf
    • Symposium: Where Do We Go from Dobbs?
    • NEWSworthy: What’s Happening and What It Means to You
    • Blog
    • INSISTING ON LIFE
    • Pastoral Reflections
    • About Us
    • HLF In The News
  • DINNER
    • GREAT DEFENDER OF LIFE DINNER 2023
    • HOST COMMITTEE Great Defender of Life Dinner 2023
    • Great Defender of Life 2023 Dinner Ticket
    • Great Defender of Life 2023 Young Adult / Student Ticket
    • DINNER JOURNAL ADVERTISING 2023
  • ARCHIVE
    • Archive Spotlight
    • ISSUES IN HTML FORMAT
  • LEGACY
    • Planned Giving: Wills, Trusts, and Gifts of Stock
  • SHOP
    • Cart

NEWSworthy

0 Comment

South Carolina upholds abortion ban while pro-abortion advocates play language games

31 Aug 2023
Madeline Fry Schultz
abortion state laws, Jen Psaki, south Carolina
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

 

We have some good news for South Carolinians: The state’s Supreme Court upheld its abortion ban last week, which means unborn babies cannot be aborted after a heartbeat has been detected, around six weeks. This week, the Supreme Court further cemented its decision, saying it refuses to reconsider the case.

For pro-life jurisprudence, and for South Carolina babies in the womb, this is a positive development. Unfortunately, you wouldn’t know that from the headlines.

The Associated Press’ wildly biased headline on the news reads, “South Carolina’s new all-male highest court reverses course on abortion, upholding strict 6-week ban.” The article focuses largely on the perspectives of Planned Parenthood and Chief Justice Don Beatty, who dissented from the court’s 4–1 decision. “But Beatty wrote that at six weeks, the fetus doesn’t exist yet—it’s still an embryo—and the heart doesn’t develop until later in a pregnancy,” the article says. “The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says it’s inaccurate to call such ‘cardiac activity’ a heartbeat.”

The obfuscation over a simple “heartbeat” and the rhetorical dance between “embryo” and “fetus” is nothing new. It’s important to note, however, that to argue against a 12-, 15-, or even 20-week ban, when few would deny a heartbeat, pro-abortion activists would likely find another argument to fit their narrative.

Shuffling on late-term abortion language

After Florida Governor Ron DeSantis told the story of a woman who survived a late-term abortion during the first Republican presidential debate, saying that Democrats support “abortion all the way up until birth,” former Biden press secretary Jen Psaki tweeted, “No one supports abortion up until birth.” She also said on MSBNC, “No one is rooting for late term abortions.”

Yet most Democratic politicians cannot name an abortion restriction they would support, as the party has become more radically pro-abortion.

It’s important to pay attention to the language surrounding the South Carolina abortion law, and the issue of abortion nationally. When states ban abortion in the early weeks, abortion advocates will argue against fetal personhood, stripping away the humanity and inherent dignity of preborn babies.

When it comes to abortions in the last trimesters, abortion advocates will say that it’s not happening or that it happens so rarely that it doesn’t matter. The Washington Post fact-check of the Republican debate, not bothering to respond to the argument that Democratic politicians largely support abortion up till birth, argued that “just 1.3 percent [of abortions take place] at 21 weeks or longer.” Using the Guttmacher Institute’s estimation of 930,160 total U.S. abortions in 2020, 1.3 percent of late-term abortions would suggest there are 12,092 babies aborted after 21 weeks annually.

South Carolina is in the right for defending the preborn—no matter what language pro-abortion advocates may use to convince voters otherwise.

69 people have visited this page. 1 have visited this page today.
About the Author
Madeline Fry Schultz

Madeline Fry Schultz is a writer in Washington, D.C.

Social Share

  • google-share

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Comments will not be posted until approved by a moderator in an effort to prevent spam and off-topic responses.

*
*

captcha *

Get the Human Life Review

subscribe to HLR

Recent Posts

Pro-Life Principles and Politicians

18 Sep 2023

South Dakota's Pro-Abortion Amendment: An Analysis

15 Sep 2023

Vice President Kamala Harris Launching Pro-Abortion Tour on College Campuses

08 Sep 2023

CURRENT ISSUE

Alexandra DeSanctis Anne Conlon Anne Hendershott B G Carter Brian Caulfield Christopher White Clarke D. Forsythe Colleen O’Hara Connie Marshner David Mills David Poecking David Quinn Diane Moriarty Dr. Donald DeMarco Edward Mechmann Edward Short Ellen Wilson Fielding Fr. Gerald E. Murray George McKenna Hadley Arkes Helen Alvaré Jane Sarah Jason Morgan Joe Bissonnette John Grondelski Kristan Hawkins Laura Echevarria Madeline Fry Schultz Maria McFadden Maffucci Mary Meehan Mary Rose Somarriba Nat Hentoff Nicholas Frankovich Patrick J. Flood Peter Pavia Rev. George G. Brooks Rev. Paul T. Stallsworth Stephen Vincent Tara Jernigan Ursula Hennessey Victor Lee Austin Vincenzina Santoro W. Ross Blackburn Wesley J. Smith William Murchison

Pages

  • Issues
  • Human Life Foundation Blog
  • About Us
  • Free Trial Issue
  • Contact Us
  • Shop
  • Planned Giving
  • GREAT DEFENDER OF LIFE DINNER

Follow Us On Twitter

Tweets by @HumanLifeReview

Find Us On Facebook

Human Life Review/Foundation

Search our Website

Contact Information

The Human Life Foundation, Inc.
The Human Life Review
271 Madison Avenue, Room 1005
New York, New York 10016
(212) 685-5210

Copyright (c) The Human Life Foundation.