Bethel McGrew: Abortion advocates blur the lines

MYRNA BROWN, HOST: Today is Wednesday, June 5th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Myrna Brown.

MARY REICHARD, HOST: And I’m Mary Reichard. Up next, WORLD Opinions commentator Bethel McGrew on an abortion law in Texas.

BETHEL MCGREW: Texas-based radio host Ryan Hamilton has gone viral with the dramatic story of his wife’s recent miscarriage. The story has ignited fierce debate over the definition of abortion, Texas state law, and pro-life legislation in general. Hamilton has claimed that one doctor refused to give her a second dose of the medicine she needed because he didn’t want her to “go home and have an abortion.” He also blames state law for the fact that nobody offered her a D & C or dilation and curettage procedure to remove the child’s body in-hospital. He ends his story by railing, “If you think your ‘Pray To End Ab*rtion’ sign in your yard is ‘Christian,’ I suggest you revisit the teachings of Jesus and try again.”

This tragic tale has become a rallying point for pro-choicers. On social media platform X, New Testament professor Laura Robinson made the cynical assertion that “this is exactly how these laws are supposed to work.” In other words, she accused pro-lifers of plotting and scheming all along to create trauma for miscarrying couples like the Hamiltons.

That’s a nice pro-choice fantasy, but it simply isn’t true. In fact, Texas law clearly allows doctors to proceed as needed for the removal of a corpse when a woman miscarries. Even if one of the Hamiltons’ doctors did commit malpractice, this has nothing to do with “staunch pro-lifers” or pro-life law.

Hamilton is also mistaken if he thinks that a D & C is the only safe approach to a miscarriage, and pro-lifers are taking it away. One pro-life consultant at the nonprofit Live Action responded that it’s always been standard safe practice to send miscarrying mothers home. But with the spread of anti-life propaganda, parents may increasingly become scared and confused. This debate highlights the need for strong definitional clarity. Pro-choicers are obfuscating with intent to smear the pro-life side by insistently using the word “abortion” for the removal of a dead body.

In the case of Texas mother Kate Cox, we see that pro-choicers will also muddy the waters around pregnancies that allegedly “threaten” the mother’s life or health. As a C-section mom, Cox risked uterine rupture by continuing to carry her child, who was diagnosed with Trisomy 18. But that risk wasn’t unique to this particular pregnancy, and she would presumably have taken it with a healthy child. Of course, that didn’t make good copy for the pro-abortion press, which played up the story as yet another case of horribly bigoted pro-lifers torturing a vulnerable mom.

We will need to respond compassionately but firmly to parents like Cox as well as the Hamiltons. We can say several true things all at the same time: Yes, we grieve every lost child, and yes, we believe individual doctors should be held accountable for genuine malpractice. But no, we won’t accept made-up definitions of “what we’re voting for.” And no, we won’t stop advocating for pro-life legislation which has nothing to do with harming women and everything to do with saving babies.

I’m Bethel McGrew.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.