In 1970, Norma L. McCorvey (“Jane Roe”) filed a lawsuit against Henry Wade, a Dallas district attorney, claiming that a law criminalizing most abortions violated her constitutional rights. Wade then appealed to the Supreme Court, and on Jan. 22, 1972, the Court ruled that Roe’s rights were violated under the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments, arguing that the “zone of privacy” was “broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”
This was over 45 years ago. Back then, abortion in almost all cases was illegal and seen as immoral, and Roe v. Wade dismissed many of the legal restrictions surrounding it. The Supreme Court’s decision was highly controversial when released and still remains one of the most highly debated Court decisions today.
Ever since then, pro-lifers have been marching every year to the capitol to protest this decision around the anniversary of Roe v. Wade. In fact, just last weekend 100,000 to 300,000 attended the March for Life in DC—and received astonishingly little news coverage.
The news should be an unbiased, accurate reporting of noteworthy events and information for the public. Sadly, in recent years it has not been so, enough for me to agree with our president that the media produces more “fake news” than it should.
The 2019 Women’s March in DC received roughly 15 times more news coverage than the March for Life on broadcast television, according to the Media Research Center, yet barely 10,000 attended it. Some networks such as ABC, CBS and NBC went so far as to completely ignore the March for Life in their morning shows. Moreover, in the few instances the media did report on the March for Life, many reported it to be just a few thousand “anti-abortion protestors” who attended, framing most of the attendees as Catholic high schoolers who were only there as an excuse to get out of class.
The media has painted the pro-life movement as full of religious bigots when it couldn’t be farther from the truth.
This year, the theme for the March for Life was “Unique from Day One: Pro-Life is Pro-Science.” Both young and old alike marched with the understanding that from the moment of conception (day one) the life of a new, individual human organism begins, with its own set of human DNA different from its parents. To say that this is not a human life is to reject basic biology. By about week four of its development, the heart begins to beat. By week seven, one could already ask a doctor the sex of the baby. All of this happens in just the first trimester of the pregnancy, the baby not even a “fetus” yet— just an embryo.
The pro-life movement is not just a protest against Roe v. Wade. If you go to one of the marches, you will see many who advocate for pregnancy resources, especially for women who have little to no money. One popular pregnancy resource is the Women’s Haven, which offers initial pregnancy services like testing and education on abortion and fetal development; infant supplies like maternity and baby clothing; community referrals for GED and higher learning, sonograms, prenatal care, housing and childcare; and counseling for young women, new mothers and fathers, all for free.
Roe v. Wade claimed that women’s constitutional rights included the right to have an abortion—such a decisive ruling that ignores ethics and biology.
“Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” The order of these is not coincidental. To be able to have the pursuit of happiness, we must have liberty, and to have liberty we must have life. To say that a woman’s “choice” or liberty to choose supersedes her child’s right to life is not only unconstitutional but also immoral.