Following Donald Trump’s selection of JD Vance as his Vice Presidential running mate, the issue of abortion once again dominates the Democratic attacks against the Republican party’s presidential ticket.
Vance has already articulated a compelling counterargument to the radical pro-choice dogma that infects the Democratic party by highlighting how pro-choice values often come at the expense of children. He has framed the issue as one centered around children and, at the RNC convention, has confirmed culture should change to accommodate children rather than viewing them as “inconveniences.”
With the Republican party taking a states’ rights approach to abortion regulation, Vance should fight the abortion battle by demanding Harris explain why abortion is a human right rather than an exception to the general rule against intentionally killing human beings.
Democrats Exclude Children as Worthy of Compassion
Democrats have a long history of controlling which individuals and groups qualify for cultural compassion. And, when the rights of women collide with children, the leftist tendency is to abort both children’s existence and perspectives.
This is accomplished through the strategic use of trauma. Vice President Kamala Harris employed this tactic on the two-year anniversary of the Dobbs ruling. Harris deployed a woman’s emotionally gripping story of childhood sexual abuse to advance the idea that a woman has a “right” to abortion.
Despite the fact that all categories of rape and incest - much less cases only involving minors - account for 1.5% of total abortions, Harris received little to no pushback when bringing this victim on cable shows.
No one made mention of the pesky reality that, in a battle of trauma victims, pro-choice advocates do not necessarily have the upper hand. Conveniently, Harris and the media ignore the equally emotionally compelling stories of women who have chosen life after rape and the children who live with the hideous “rape baby” label readily affixed to them by zealous reproductive “rights” advocates.
Normalization of abortion in culture further complicates pro-choice messaging. The common myth that late-term abortions are only performed in cases of medical emergencies is increasingly difficult to argue. In 2019, Teen Vogue and Think Progress both highlighted sympathetic stories of third-trimester abortions. Additionally, Guttmacher Institute data shows that young women, in particular, have late-term abortions, many of which are performed for purely elective reasons, including difficulty making a decision, financial, and other social concerns.
The fact young women - nurtured in a culture that promotes pro-life advocacy as a form of hate - are more likely to seek late-term abortions should surprise no one. In fact, placing any limits on abortion is increasingly difficult for pro-choice advocates.
This was illustrated earlier this year when a pro-choice medical student, speaking against a proposed 14-week abortion ban, testified that a woman should be able to abort up to “full term.” It is also seen in a commentary that moves away from framing abortion as a necessary evil in favor of promoting the procedure as a positive good.
This all opens the door to Vance’s critique of the cruelty that pro-choice culture produces.
Vance Should Call Out Leftist Anti-Natal Rhetoric
For half a century, left-wing viewpoints justifying abortion have dominated culture. Restoring respect for life and elevating the position of children in society is a marathon, not a sprint.
Attacking the Democratic claim that compassion undergirds pro-choice policies is critical because it exposes the cognitive dissonance at the heart of leftwing abortion extremism. It is also consistent with the public’s beliefs. A majority of Americans support abortion, but support is not absolute and drops significantly in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy.
Vance should ask difficult and direct abortion-related questions of Harris, a politician who is known for becoming the first vice presidential candidate to include abortion tours as part of her advocacy.
What messages does her pro-choice advocacy send to children about their worth in society?
It is easy to understand how children, especially those unwanted or abused, are encouraged to internalize shame after hearing abortion rights advocates speak of preborn human life as if it were expendable, inconvenient, and worthless.
Additionally, even wanted children have been inundated for decades with cultural messages telling them that they are unequal to their mothers. No amount of focus on extreme cases of rape or medical emergencies changes this reality. The left argues abortion is a human right, not a procedure that should be legal in rare cases.
Children routinely hear how their lives cause difficulty and pain to women. They destroy careers and stand in the way of their mother’s access to autonomy and ambition. Even the process of bringing wanted children into the world is increasingly demonized by some as a disease.
Over time, the dehumanization of children has become more gruesome. After five decades of cultural conditioning, pro-choice advocates on college campuses feel no shame engaging in overt and vitriolic hatred against preborn human beings. In the past year, they have eaten model fetuses and shouted chants such as “I eat fetuses” and “Yeetus the fetus” in support of “human rights.”
While Democrats may argue this represents a fringe element of pro-choice advocacy, such an argument is weak. Imagine a similar language being deployed against any other group of human beings. It would be unthinkable.
Respect for human life will not be rebuilt in a day. But Vance can make inroads by refusing to cave to the tsunami of pressure coming his way.
Instead, he should calmly and competently challenge Harris, a woman who has never birthed nor nurtured a child, to explain why children are unworthy of compassion.
Leslie Corbly, author of Silent Suffering: Poems of Pain and Purpose, is an author, poet, and attorney. Her debut poetry collection, Silent Suffering, critiques the predicates of progressive/postmodern beliefs by exploring the suffering of those who fall on the margins of the present era’s culturally dominant moral philosophies.