Pro-abortion groups did not make their case compelling enough to voters. Now, even more than before, all ire is directed at various abortion bans and the deaths, which abortion advocates ascribe to them.
These deaths are exceptions, and further, excepted from honest scrutiny, but exceptions rule for abortion advocacy groups. If states do not accommodate their goals, warring becomes a little trickier.
Such is the case in Texas, where the state’s Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Review Committee will omit cases from 2022 and 2023. Whether the decision is simple backlog relief or is a provision of breathing room for the state’s abortion ban, pro-abortion coverage is seeing it in one light: The committee was intentional with its decision and wants to conceal damning cases from the first two years of the ban.
In reality, the bans do not have a direct hand in dealing out death. They are designed for just the opposite, of course: The lives of babies are their product. What the media present as “doctors are now afraid that standard procedures are illegal” seems more like a problem of bad or timid doctors — ones who read the law carelessly and do not assess how it affects their practice, ones who lack confidence in their own skills. This characterization is inseparable from what comes prior, namely how the law becomes confused by the vehemence surrounding abortion access. Rallying for it only exacerbates what should be a simple question of life and death. By this point, the issue is entangled with heady questions of bodily autonomy and cost of living.
Neither effect has to do with the bans in themselves. But then again, that may be beside the point. From the perspective of abortion advocates, drawing out the precise causality is much less important than proving their case. Lies blaming abortion pill deaths on pro-life laws have been published as fact. The imperative now is to validate the fears that abortion groups and media outlets have stoked willingly.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Skipped cases from past years, as in the Texas committee, are greatly concerning for pro-abortion groups — not so much out of justice for dead mothers, but because they are needed to bolster the method. Exceptions to the norm, such as abortion procedures gone wrong, determine the rallying cry. A woman’s delayed care becomes everyone’s personal abortion defense. But not so when exceptions to the norm undermine the theme. Tragic in vitro fertilization embryo swaps do not define “reproductive rights” messaging, nor do cases of successful abortion pill reversals.
Choices made by Texas’s Morbidity Review Committee may prove entirely insignificant, or it might end up working against the effort to spread the truth about so-called “abortion ban deaths.” Either way, it diminishes the abortion coalition’s disingenuous focus on exceptions. Sinister hopes to increase the salience of women’s abortion-related deaths will be undercut, and lies will abound — but at least the committee will not give much credence to nonsense.