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

Saint of the Day for June 7: Blessed Franz Jägerstätter (May 20, 1907 – Aug. 9, 1943)
June 7, 2019
Pope Benedict’s Secretary Praises Mary as ‘Mediatrix of All Graces,’ Christians Must ‘Turn’ to Her, by Maike Hickson
June 7, 2019

By Ryan Everson, Crisis Magazine, June 7, 2019

Ryan EversonOne 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