A Feminist's Response to NIFLA v. Becerra



This week the Supreme Court will be hearing arguments for NIFLA v. Becerra, a case that is fundamentally about the right to freedom of speech. However, the ruling will have a major effect on the anti-abortion cause. The question that the court is addressing is whether the government can force Americans to express or support ideas they oppose. The law that is being challenged is California’s Reproductive FACT Act which requires pro-life pregnancy centers, typically charitable organizations that exist to assist pregnant people and new parents, to post signage that reads, “California has public programs that provide immediate free or low-cost access to comprehensive family planning services, prenatal care, and abortion, for eligible [people].”(1) They also are required to provide a phone number and a recommendation to contact the office that can provide these services.(1)

Essentially, this law is forcing non-violent health and resource centers to refer clients to a violent procedure that is contrary to the mission of these centers. The state already has the ability to promote their programs and should not compel pro-life medical professionals and volunteers to advertise for state-sponsored lethal violence.

Regardless of where someone may fall on the abortion issue, they should be able to oppose state-mandated speech that is contradictory to a person's deeply held beliefs. However, this law is just another example of politically motivated attacks from abortion supporters that attempt to expose and ultimately shut down what they refer to as “fake clinics.” For years certain so-called pro-choice activists have been doing everything in their power to prevent pro-lifers from helping pregnant people choose life. There is nothing pro-choice about accepting a culture in which one of the most common reasons cited for abortion is economic concerns.(2) If these activists are truly pro-choice, they should support the centers offering direct aid to low-income people experiencing unplanned pregnancy and parenthood so that they have more options outside of abortion.

Yet, groups like NARAL and Reproaction have been working on mobilizing their followers to rally outside the Supreme Court in support of this unjust and unconstitutional law that promotes abortion: the continuation of a cycle of violence and oppression.

These pro-choice groups think they define and stand for feminism; let’s show them how wrong they are! Join Rehumanize International and other pro-life feminists in front of the Supreme Court Tuesday, March 20th to show your support for non-violent pregnancy centers as the court hears arguments for NIFLA v. Becerra!

For more information about our meet-up check out our Facebook event here.

(1) https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB775

(2) https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states

#abortion #feminism

All content copyright Life Matters Journal, Inc. 2012-2019 

unless otherwise noted or in bylines.

Rehumanize International is a registered Doing Business As

name of Life Matters Journal, 2017.

 

Rehumanize International 
744 E. Warrington Ave.
@ Work Hard PGH
Pittsburgh, PA 15210

 

info@lifemattersjournal.org - 740-963-9565

  • Facebook - Black Circle
  • Twitter - Black Circle
  • Instagram - Black Circle
  • snapchat ghostie copy
  • YouTube - Black Circle
  • LinkedIn - Black Circle