Beyond apocalypse and apology: a moral defense of abortion.

Abstract

The movement to preserve and advance reproductive freedom is suffering the consequences of a great victory. The establishment of the constitutional right to abortion in Roe v. Wade was a monumental step that changed the lives of American women. Girls grow up today under the mantle of Roe, never having known a world in which illegal, unsafe, degrading and sometimes fatal abortions were the norm. That is a cause for celebration as Roe turns 30. It is also, however, a cause of complacency. Complacency corrodes all freedoms. It is particularly dangerous to reproductive freedom because opponents of the right are single-minded and fervent to the point of fanaticism. Their crusade has fueled three decades of incremental restrictions that make it risky or burdensome to get an abortion and, for some women, block access altogether. Understandably, the prochoice movement has grown frustrated with the unending onslaught, and the public, numb. The movement's responses to this conundrum have varied over time and among its many spokespersons. Yet two recurring approaches — to jolt the public by forecasting Roe's reversal and to court reluctant supporters by steering wide of abortion altogether — are problematic. Being clear, straightforward and unabashed about the importance of reproductive freedom, and realistic about the impending threats, offers the strongest chance for rebuilding public support. This article first critiques what the authors call the apocalyptic and apologetic approaches to defending abortion rights. It then presents the most compelling reasons to support the right to abortion.