
CV NEWS FEED // As legal questions over chemical abortion access headed to the Supreme Court on March 27, dozens of pro-abortion and pro-life advocates gathered outside the Court to protest or support the lawsuit.
According to a recent article by pro-life advocate Leanna Baumer from Pregnancy Help News, both the oral arguments heard that day and the actions of pro-abortionists reflect “competing worldviews” on the value of women, pregnancy, and unborn children.
Supreme Court Justices heard oral arguments in Food and Drug Administration (FDA) v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (AHM), which challenged the FDA’s decision to approve the abortion drug mifepristone. The AHM argued that the FDA disregarded health risks by increasing access to the drug on several occasions.
Baumer wrote that in addition to asking about the legal standing of the lawsuit Justices “asked a surprising number of questions pertaining to the nature of procedure at issue when doctors … may be required to provide emergency care for women suffering life-threatening hemorrhage and infection from chemical abortions.”
“[E]ven the most ardent abortion rights defenders on the Bench know the Court and our society have not reckoned fully with the nature of the unborn child and the moral significance of that child’s certain destruction in abortion,” Baumer wrote.
She also added that inside the court, the questions soon turned into “where, when, and how” in regards to accessing mifepristone, rather than questioning the safety of the drug. Outside the court, abortion pill vendors promoted online sales of the drug. A remote-controlled robot from one company appeared ready to immediately dispense mifepristone.
The FDA’s promise to manage safety and health risks by controlling the circumstances surrounding the dispensation of the drug is now gone, according to Baumer.
“The FDA has fostered this pharmaceutical regime of unfettered access to chemical abortion drugs where sales matter more than safety,” she wrote, adding that the mifepristone robot serves as an analogy for how the abortion industry views women’s fertility as machine-like.
“Women deserve education and the truth about dangerous drugs like mifepristone,” Baumer continued. “They deserve access to information and physicians, not manipulation by an industry seeking to profit from another’s personal crisis.”
“Most of all, they deserve truthful conversations about the harm abortion poses to them and their unborn child and a vision and resources for a better future that protects them both,” she concluded.
