Opinion: Why Pro-life Incrementalism Is Dead, by Ryan Everson

One of the heated intra-conservative debates of late is over the benefits of different pro-life political strategies. Should the pro-life movement push for more moderate bills such as 14-week bans, or should it adopt Alabama’s approach and ban nearly everything? Should it adopt an incrementalist approach, or an absolutist approach?

There is a large consensus that despite being Republican appointees, Justices Kavanaugh and Roberts cannot be trusted to overturn Roe. Consequently, there is a risk for the 5-4 conservative Supreme Court majority to turn into a defeat of 4-5 or even 3-6 on abortion policy. However, the likelihood of such defeat depends upon which law is before the court. Roberts and Kavanaugh may be willing to uphold a 14-week Dilation and Evacuation abortion ban, but they are less likely to uphold Alabama’s all-out ban.

I have long found myself on the incrementalist side of this debate. Alabama is gunning for the endzone, so to speak, and I applaud the state for its bravery. However, the endzone is still far away. I believe such an ambitious move is unlikely to work out and I fear more ambitious pro-life legislation is not yet popular enough for a 5-4 conservative(ish) Supreme Court to uphold. This being so, I have believed passing moderate abortion restrictions one at a time to be the more prudent strategy….Read the entire article:  crisismagazine.com/2019/why-pro-life-incrementalism-is-dead