A new education law should be a model for the nation.
A new education law should be a model for the nation.
P ro-life advocates haven’t had much good news in recent years, as pro-abortion-rights measures have repeatedly passed, even in usually Republican states. They should take heart, however, from a new Iowa law that could help start to turn public opinion in a pro-life direction.
That law requires schools to show students in grades five to twelve a video or ultrasound that depicts each stage of fetal development. Teenagers will learn about when the heart and brain develop, for example, and exactly how the unborn child goes from a fertilized egg to the crying human being that enters the world upon birth.
This strikes directly at the heart of pro-abortion-rights reasoning. For decades, those who favor abortion on demand have emphasized the centrality of a woman’s right to do what she wants with her own body. That has a strong moral appeal, as anyone who believes in the right to individual liberty can grasp.
The problem has always been that abortion destroys another human being’s body, that of the unborn child’s. No one’s right to liberty gives them an excuse to unjustifiably deprive another person of their right to liberty — or to life itself.
Americans have long recognized this. Polls always show that opposition to abortion rights increases the longer a pregnancy lasts. Supermajorities of Americans oppose abortion after the time when a child can live outside the womb, for example.
The challenge for pro-lifers, then, is to convince a majority of Americans that the unborn child is sufficiently developed at an early enough stage in a pregnancy that it, too, deserves legal protection. Do that, and Americans will stop approving laws that permit abortion in the first trimester and start agreeing to ban the procedure at a much earlier stage of pregnancy.
It’s clear that arguing from pure logic is insufficient. Pro-lifers have long relied on an argument that relies on the recognition that the fertilized egg possesses distinct human genes from conception. That is undeniably true — and it is also undeniably true that even many who acknowledge this fact in theory still support legal abortion.
Fetal development laws like Iowa’s put pictures with words. If this is done right, students will see the human heart, brain, and lungs present even in the very early stages of fetal development. That can only help persuade the heart of what the head already knows — and thereby increase the resolve that even a fetus or embryo is a real human being deserving of our sympathy and legal protection.
These materials need to be well crafted to have an impact. They cannot argue against abortion or even mention it. They cannot use language that pro-lifers might use among themselves to describe what is being shown. That might rankle, but avoiding politically loaded terms also makes it harder for pro-abortion-rights advocates to push back against what is being shown.
We know that human beings are moved to action when they sympathize with someone or something. Environmentalists have known that for years, which is why they often feature animals like baby seals or whales in their pleas.
The same principle has long been used by charities soliciting contributions. Who doesn’t want to support a children’s hospital when one sees pictures of young, bald cancer patients?
Showing accurate, factual videos should also be accompanied with the sort of health advice regularly given to pregnant mothers. The popular pregnancy website What to Expect provides specific dietary advice even for mothers in the third week of pregnancy when the egg has just been fertilized. Including this in the materials will reinforce the reality that what is inside a mother is a separate human being whose future health is influenced by maternal decisions from the earliest stages.
Proponents of abortion rights are already howling in opposition, but it’s hard to argue that young teenagers coming to grips with puberty don’t deserve the facts. They can get much of this on their own at sites such as What to Expect; why not include it in mandatory sex education and human health courses so all can receive the information?
Laws like this may not change opinions about abortion. People have a great capacity to rationalize what is in their interest. But knowing more facts about human development makes it harder to do.
After all, if a woman can make her baby healthier by eating the right foods even before the egg implants in the uterus, it’s undeniable that abortion ends a separate life. It’s likely to be harder for abortion-rights advocates to make their claims when a young person understands that.
Pro-lifers need to find something useful and meaningful to be for rather than simply play defense. Pushing for laws like this nationwide can be that positive potential game changer that reenergizes the flagging movement.