Supreme Court to hear case about compelled speech
Choice: the world is a rallying cry for the abortion industry, which holds personal autonomy as a supreme value in our culture. Even in their minds, however, some choices are more equal than others.
In two weeks the next major abortion case will come before the U.S. Supreme Court: NIFLA v. Becerra. On March 20, the High Court will hear oral arguments about whether or not the state of California can force prolife pregnancy centers to advertise for free taxpayer-funded abortions.
California’s 2015 Reproductive FACT Act law was specifically written to target prolife pregnancy centers; other medical and non-medical facilities that offer similar or related services are not required to give free advertising to abortion clinics.
The case should be an open and shut decision based on the First Amendment, but when it comes to abortion, throw out the law, the U.S. Constitution, and reality itself. The decision will hinge on the personal biases of the judges involved, in this case likely Justice Anthony Kennedy.
California is not alone. On Saturday the Washington State House approved a bill forcing any health insurance plan in the state that covers maternity care to also cover elective abortions.
Oregon took similar action in 2017, requiring insurance plans to provide free abortions.
While many politicians hold themselves out as “pro-choice” or “personally opposed to abortion,” they are in reality pro-abortion. When they have the reins of power, they move to force people to participate in abortions.
The abortion industry wants:
- taxpayers to cover every abortion for free. They believe every person must help enable every abortion to take place.
- every hospital, doctor, nurse, health insurance company, and everyone else connected to the health industry to either participate with abortions or help promote them. They believe no person of any belief ever has the right to conscientiously object.
- to shutter every prolife pregnancy center. They don’t want any person helping a woman through a crisis pregnancy unless they are willing to help her have an abortion, even as they accuse prolife people of refusing to help them.
- to stop any protection for women facing abortion coercion. The abortion industry knows a significant number of women coming to them for abortions are not doing so by free will. They believe abortion coercion is not a problem and they refuse to do anything about it.
- taxpayers to fund programs overseas that pressure prolife countries to change their laws, and to fund coercive population control programs in horribly repressive countries. They believe China’s one-child policy was a good thing, because too many human beings is a bad thing.
This should be no surprise. Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger, praised the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Buck v. Bell upholding forced sterilization programs. Today Planned Parenthood is forced to limply disavow Sanger’s support for forced sterilization. They claim they care about liberty and the conscience of individuals.
The reality, however, is that the abortion industry and their supporters will not rest until there’s not a single person left in the public square expressing the view that every human being has moral worth. They shrug their shoulders at the horrors of population control programs in places like China.
It’s the prolife movement that truly values personal autonomy. We firmly believe in it, because it’s part of our basic, unalienable human dignity. We know, however, that your autonomy ends when it directly impacts the life of another human being, because they have the same personal autonomy you have.
Personal autonomy is the reason abortion is wrong—a human being’s life is taken from them simply because their existence is an inconvenience. If we can declare entire classes of innocent human beings unpersons, what’s the point of personal autonomy after all?