NRL News

Debunking the recycled myth that the election of pro-abortion Democrat Presidents saves unborn lives

by | Sep 17, 2020

By Jacki Ragan

Every presidential election year, Democrats pull out all the stops to “explain” how pro-lifers can, in good conscience, vote for pro-abortion Democrats. This year is different only in the extent to which this false narrative is being spread, largely through the use of social media.

You have likely seen at least several memes or graphics on Facebook purporting to show how the abortion rate fell sharply during the years a Democrat held the White House. There are long, drawn out posts to accompany them with the suggestion that the author is coming to this monumentally important decision with much angst and wringing of the hands.

So I turned to some experts today to see how they would respond. Their answers were so thoughtful I have quoted them all below.

National Right to Life’s Director of Education, Dr. Randall K O’Bannon points out, “There have been drops, sometimes big ones under both Democratic and Republican presidents. However, the obvious question is why? We know what Presidents Ronald Reagan, George Bush, George W. Bush, and Donald Trump have done in helping decrease the number of abortions. Is there anything that Bill Clinton and Barack Obama did to help push the abortion numbers lower? Hardly. The laws and budgets they passed, the policies they promoted, the people they appointed did nothing to discourage abortions and everything to promote those that perform them.”

Dr. O’Bannon continues. “Many things have clearly contributed to the drop. Changes in technology (like ultrasound and fetal heartbeat stethoscopes) and public knowledge of fetology (thanks to the popularity of ultrasound and fetal photos books and films like Lennart Nilsson’s) that have taken place since 1973 helped to cool the meteoric rise in the number of abortions that occurred right after Roe, starting the trend downward. The arrival on the scene of pregnancy care centers and their rapid growth (there are now more than 2,500 in the U.S. alone) and increasing medicalization has made alternatives to abortion practical realities for thousands upon thousands of women and their babies.”

Another expert that I spoke with, Rose Mimms, Executive Director of Arkansas Right to Life, said, “This is an old argument and defense for someone who wants to vote Democrat but finds it ‘uncomfortable’ because of the Democrats’ devotion to legal abortion. Remember they want tax funded abortion at any time for any reason. That equals more abortion. We work harder when there is a Democrat in the White House — we have to — and there may have been times where we held the House or Senate and were able to keep the killing down. Our state pro-life laws combined with scientific advancement and educational efforts contribute to the reduction. And, tragically, because of Roe v. Wade, there are tens of millions fewer women to give birth.”

And from National Right to Life’s Federal Legislative Director, Jennifer Popik, J.D., “During the years Democrats controlled the White House–particularly Obama/Biden–the lessening abortion rate was not related to Democrat control at the federal level. During the Obama/ Biden administration, we experienced large gains in the number of Republican legislatures and governorships with the result that a huge number of pro-life laws were passed at the state level during those years. During the Clinton Administration, Gallup polling showed that the debate over banning the partial-birth abortion procedure had the effect of driving sentiment in favor of life.”

I asked Dr. O’Bannon to sum it up. “Of course, none of these laws or policies could have had much of an impact if they had been struck down by the courts, and this is why presidential elections matter. While early Supreme Court nominations by Democrats and Republicans alike were a mixed bag before (and just after) Roe was decided, that all changed beginning in 1993. Appointments by Democrats Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have been reliably pro-abortion and have voted against every pro-life protection or policy. If it wasn’t for the election of Republican presidents and Republican Supreme Court appointments, partial-birth abortion would still be legal and pregnancy care centers could be forced to refer women to abortion clinics.”

Dr. O’Bannon concluded, “Joe Biden has promised to appoint judges who support Roe to the courts and says he would like for the federal government to fund abortions again. As long as there are still pro-life laws on the books and pro-lifers are out there offering women life preserving alternatives to abortion, we may be able to keep the numbers going down, even in a Biden administration.

“However, if a ‘President Biden’ nominates jurists to the High Court who share his philosophy, you know they would overturn our legislation, remove all restraints on abortion pills so that women can order them online, and force us to start paying for abortions again, funneling hundreds of millions more to abortion empires like Planned Parenthood. The consequences would be that the decline in abortions we welcomed and worked so hard for from a high of 1.6 million abortions to under 900, 000 would start heading in the other direction. Many more babies would die.”

The bottom line? A vote for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris is a vote to not only allow abortion on demand to continue, but also to use your tax dollars to pay for it and to see the number skyrocket. They have frankly stated they would allow abortion till birth, paid for with your tax dollars, with no limits or conditions.

We have allowed the killing of more than 62,000,000 innocent, unborn babies since Roe v. Wade was decided.

We have a strong pro-life president in the White House right now. We need to give him four more years to help finish the job.

Categories: Politics