My VIPs for this week are the husbands, boyfriends, and male ex-partners who are “‘an unlikely new ally’ in the pro-life movement’s fight against abortion providers, as described by the Wall Street Journal. Sarah Holliday wrote about this new ally in her article published at The Daily Signal. She reminded her readers that conservatives have long recognized the “involvement of men in the pro-life cause” who “have consistently advocated for the protection of unborn life.
The
Journal’s claim stems from a report highlighting a series of lawsuits filed by
men in response to abortions obtained by their partners or ex-partners. These
legal actions, primarily emerging from Texas, are part of a broader effort to
challenge the accessibility of the abortion pill and its mail-order
distribution system. According to the Journal, “The cases principally flow from
Texas, which allows a parent to sue for the wrongful death of an unborn child.
Many of the suits have been spearheaded by Jonathan F. Mitchell.”
Mitchell,
the former Texas solicitor general, is a key figure in this legal movement. He
crafted SB 8, a Texas law that “allows private litigants to bring civil
lawsuits to enforce a prohibition on performing or aiding abortions after six
weeks of pregnancy,” as the Journal noted. These recent lawsuits reflect the
personal impact felt by men whose partners chose abortion, asserting that such
decisions affect mothers as well as fathers….
As
the Journal reported, “Many of the cases are still in the early stages, so
courts haven’t yet tested the plaintiffs’ legal or factual claims.”
Nevertheless, these efforts signal a growing recognition of fathers’ voices in
the pro-life movement. Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life of
America, emphasized this shift, stating, “We’re starting to have fathers who
feel that they can speak out and speak up for their rights and for the rights
of the child.”
Texas
has emerged as a leader in pro-life legislation, enacting laws to protect
mothers, fathers, and unborn children. A notable example is the Women’s &
Child Protection Act (HB 7), which recently passed the Texas House State
Affairs Committee for the second time with an 8-4 vote. Inspired by advocacy
from Students for Life Action (SFLA’s legislative arm), HB 7 “allows anyone who
manufactures or provides access to Chemical Abortion Pills to be sued for up to
$100,000 in damages,” according to the organization. This law targets the
growing trend of mail-order abortion pills, which bypass traditional medical
oversight….
As
Family Research Council’s Mary Szoch shared with The Washington Stand, the
notion that the Journal put forward, that men are a new ally to the pro-life
movement, is a misguided one. “For years,” she said, “pro-abortionists have
argued that because men cannot carry a baby, they have no right to speak out in
defense of the unborn. This is simply untrue. Every human being has a mother
and a father.” Szoch further emphasized that “it is a father’s job to protect
and defend his children,” highlighting the inherent role men play in advocating
for their families.
She
went deeper, noting that men actually have far more influence in the decision
many women make to have an abortion or not than they may realize. Szoch pointed
to a study from the Charlotte Lozier Institute, which “shows that 70% of women
who had an abortion felt coerced into the decision. If men were always willing
to tell the mother of their child, ‘I’ll be here every step of the way – we’ll
do this together, and I will protect and provide for our child,’ more women
would confidently choose life.”
She
argued that “the abortion industry knows this,” which is why “they want to make
it seem as if men should not have a voice.” Szoch concluded with a hopeful
note: “Praise God for the fathers who are standing up for their child even
after his or her death. My hope is that it encourages more men to stand up for
their child while there is still a chance for that child to live.”
No comments:
Post a Comment