Abortion supporters have long ignored the central question of the abortion debate by piling on endless euphemisms and red herrings.
For example, the so-called “right to choose” only applies if the fetus were merely a clump of cells, but not if it’s a distinct, living human being. And so-called “reproductive rights” assumes that only one person’s rights are at stake—without ever presenting an actual argument.
Last week, an Alabama judge allowed a case to go forward that could expose these euphemisms and red herrings. Ryan Magers is suing the Alabama Women’s Center for Reproductive Alternatives and a pharmaceutical company that produced the abortion pill that killed his preborn child.
Magers’ girlfriend had the abortion despite his pleas that she give birth. The wrongful death lawsuit is based on a new law in Alabama that recognizes the human rights of the unborn. And his unborn child is listed as a co-defendant.
Abortion supporters say this could threaten abortion rights everywhere. Yes, it could. In fact, let’s hope it does.