Katherine Beck Johnson is FRC's Research Fellow for Legal and Policy Studies. This article appeared on Townhall.com on May 13, 2020.
The ACLU is suing to block Arkansas’s order requiring any person seeking an elective surgery to test negative for COVID-19 test within 48 hours prior to the procedure. This commonsense rule applies across the board to all elective procedures, but abortion centers do not want to abide by the same health and safety standards as all others in the medical profession.
As states seek out ways to safely help more businesses return to work, testing for coronavirus is a common safety precaution, particularly for situations where social distancing is not possible. But abortionists have insisted that the rules don’t apply to them throughout the pandemic.
Abortion proponents want to make the argument that women should be treated equally in the context of choosing life or choosing abortion. However, this pandemic highlighted the empty promises of the abortion proponents.
As a pregnant woman, I was only scheduled for appointments once a month in my third trimester opposed to the usual every two weeks. I sacrificed additional health checks for my baby and my own health during the pandemic. Yet the abortion industry insisted that women who wanted abortions would not forego any appointment to terminate the life of their child. Pregnant women were not guaranteed the same access to medical care as women who wanted abortions.
And back in April while all elective medical procedures were postponed, the abortion industry continued to act as though a pandemic was not sweeping the globe. Amid widespread stay-at-home orders, abortion centers insisted that they should be classified as “essential” services so they could carry on business as usual. The abortion industry claims to be exempt from any inconvenience to them, even when the lives of others are on the line.
On top of this, the abortion industry insisted on operating, without a care that they would be using PPE (personal protective equipment) that could be saving lives. Some courts, such as the Fifth Circuit, upheld state restrictions on abortion during the pandemic, but still allowed medical abortions (abortion by pill) to proceed in the state. Yet, 2-7% of women who have a medical abortion require a follow up surgery or a larger dosage of misoprostol. Even this at-home abortion method used valuable medical resources.
The abortion industry’s desire for exemptions is nothing new; in fact, the current case before the Supreme Court, June Medical Services vs. Russo, highlights the same mentality. In that case, June Medical, an abortion clinic in Louisiana, sued to be exempt from the requirement that abortion providers must possess hospital admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. This is the same rule that regulates every other outpatient surgical center in the state. Much like the coronavirus testing, this commonsense rule protects the health and safety of patients, but the abortion industry claims they deserve an exemption.
The coronavirus forced the whole world to consider the inherent value of human life. We witnessed—and are still witnessing—society make countless sacrifices for the most vulnerable among us. As it was discovered that the elderly and people with prior medical conditions were at the highest risk of death, people stayed home so as to not overwhelm hospitals and give the vulnerable a fighting chance at life as the disease spread across the globe.
Yet, there was one vulnerable population that has not been protected during the pandemic: the unborn.
The abortion industry refused to sacrifice their profits to save lives, killing more unborn children, wasting PPE that could have been donated to hospitals, and locking up courts with endless litigation challenging any law that dare question their elective practice of taking the lives of unborn children.
It became clear the only sacrifices on the part of the abortion industry were the lives of the unborn. As states begin to reopen we should not forget their behavior.