The Abortion Wars Have Become a Fight Over Science
Forty-six years after Roe, the two camps increasingly disagree on basic facts about abortion — and who has the authority to determine them.
By Mary Ziegler
Jan. 22, 2019
It was perhaps, at first glance, an unusual feature of the 2019 March for Life that it downplayed what many have come to think of as the central claim of the anti-abortion movement: that the unborn have a constitutional right to life.
Instead, march organizers focused on proclaiming that science was on their side. They circulated material on “when human life begins,” whether abortions are ever medically necessary and when fetal life becomes viable. They praised legal restrictions based on what science supposedly says about fetal pain.
Anti-Choice March for Life Attempts Pivot to Science
By Ella Cerón
Jan 18, 2019
Anti-choice activists convened in Washington, D.C., today at the annual March for Life protest that condemns access to abortion services. This year, the March took on a new theme: Their movement, as they’re now describing it, is “pro-science.”
Specifically, the organization is arguing that scientific research shows that life begins at conception – though their methodology is highly suspect. The Washington Post reports that the organizers used two “scientific papers” to bolster their claim that zygotes are living beings; one was written by an anti-abortion group, and the other came from the American College of Pediatricians, a socially conservative advocacy group that the Southern Poverty Law Center describes as “a fringe anti-LGBT hate group that masquerades as the premier U.S. association of pediatricians.”
Six Facts About Abortion to Counter March for Life’s Junk Science
Jan 16, 2019
This year's March for Life claims that “being pro-life is not in opposition to science," though many of its positions fly in the face of evidence.
The 46th annual March for Life in Washington, D.C., has adopted “Unique from Day One” as its theme, an apparent declaration of the extreme anti-choice position that life begins at conception. The event not only asserts this view as a moral position but also claims that “being pro-life is not in opposition to science.”
This co-opting of science is in line with a strategy and infrastructure that the anti-choice movement has been building for some time.