Why I Don’t Vote Only on the Issue of Abortion

Let me begin by saying that my desire is for every baby conceived to be born healthy.

Growing up and throughout the first half of my twenties, I believed that anti-abortion legislation was the best and only significant way to do accomplish this. I also believed it was my duty as a Christian to advocate for those lives above all others. In the last six or so years, I have changed my mind on both counts. 

First, let’s talk about the effectiveness of anti-abortion legislation.

I want to thank everyone who responded to last week’s post, including those who corrected some of my errors. Your comments encouraged me to research further for this week’s post. One of the things I have learned is that the year before Roe V. Wade was passed, there were over 600,000 legal abortions in the US (not accounting for those performed by unlicensed doctors or attempted by the women themselves). The Supreme Court has had a majority of Republican justices for 49 of the past 50 years, including when Roe was decided, yet Roe has not been overturned during this time. Even if Roe was overturned, it’s estimated that it would only reduce abortions by 14% or so, and there’s no guarantee that even a full bench of Republican justices would ever choose to do this. Now, 14% of abortions is still a lot of lives. But at 14% efficacy, Roe V. Wade is not the lynchpin piece of legislation that both Republicans and Democrats portray it to be, and I also portrayed it to be last week.

Data tells us that fewer abortions are occurring now than at any point since 1973. A combination of factors are responsible, including comprehensive sex education, affordable contraceptives, widespread affordable healthcare, affordable childcare, paid maternity leave, reduced cost of adoptions, and other economic policies. These factors help reduce the number of abortions because women either don’t have an unplanned pregnancy (due to eduction and affordable contraception) or they feel financially and socially supported enough to care for the child they unexpectedly conceived (affordable healthcare and childcare, paid maternity leave). All of these factors help to significantly reduce the number of abortions, no “what ifs” of Supreme Court seats required. Yet most of these factors are not part of conservative platforms, which means a big piece of the puzzle to promoting life is left out of their anti-abortion strategies.

If you’d like to see how such factors reduced the number of abortions in 2 states, watch this clip from Skye Jethani:

Beginning at 7:37

Next, let’s talk about our responsibility to unborn lives.

A few years ago, my aunt and I were talking about the 2016 election over lunch. When I told her who I had voted for, she said “What about abortion?” I told her an abbreviated version of the above, and that I believed the Democratic party does more to reduce the number of abortions through their holistic approach than anti-abortion legislation from the Republican party. She shook her head and said, “I can’t do that. I just feel like God’s going to hold me accountable for all those unborn babies.”

I asked her to clarify: “You personally?” She said yes, then she said, “I believe God is going to hold me accountable for all those little babies who don’t have a voice.”

After a moment, I asked her, “What about the other children who don’t have a voice?” When she didn’t answer me, I said, “What about the children on a schoolbus in Yemen who were killed by a missile purchased from the US? Are you responsible for their deaths?”

She shook her head, bewildered. “I haven’t heard about that,” she said.

“Whether or not you’ve heard of it, your voting choices led to their deaths at least as directly as to the abortion of a fetus,” I said. “What about the children being kept in cages, separated from their parents, and not provided clean diapers or regular food or vaccinations? Some of them have died, and others are so traumatized that they don’t recognize their parents when they’re returned to them—are you responsible for that? They don’t have a voice, and neither do their parents because they’re in cages too.”

“Cages?” she asked, looking at me again.

“Yes,” I answered. “Cages. It’s been all over the news.” When she didn’t react, I said, “There was a little girl who was shot in the head by police officers while she was asleep on the couch in her living room. And Sandy Hook was full of children who were murdered in their classrooms. Do you believe God is going to hold you personally accountable for their deaths?”

After a minute, my aunt, a little lost sounding, said, “I haven’t thought about that.” She considered a few seconds longer, then repeated, “I’ve never thought about that.”

Maybe you haven’t either. 

Growing up, I was taught in my church that abortion is so heinous that is supersedes all other issues, which means that there was only one Christlike way to vote: for conservative candidates (Republicans) who support anti-abortion legislation. Also while I was growing up, I asked God to break my heart for what breaks God’s heart. In the years since I asked that of God, I have learned that yes, abortion breaks God’s heart, but much more breaks God’s heart than abortion alone. Many more people suffer and die than unborn children. So why would I vote as if those are the only lives God cares about? 

I’m not saying that we Christians as a whole or individually are not responsible for those unborn children who might be aborted in a clinic that remains open because of how we vote. I’m saying there are many other effective avenues for keeping a child from being aborted—more effective than what overturning Roe V. Wade (as uncertain as that possibility is) would maybe accomplish. I’m also saying that we are responsible for many other children’s deaths and traumas, too. I voted for Obama in 2012, and so I am responsible for the families harmed by the forced separation policy he enacted among immigrants. The cages and neglect, however, are new.

We as the Christian community in the United States are responsible for the children who will never be born because their mothers were forcibly sterilized while detained. We’re responsible for the children whose records were erased and their parents can no longer be found. We responsible for the children poisoned by the water in their taps. We’re responsible for the children in NYC who have lost a parent to COVID-19 (there are now more of them than there were who lost a parent on 9/11). We’re responsible for the children who have died in mass shootings. We’re responsible for children who face wildfires and rising oceans and food scarcity. 

Let’s recap. A single issue vote is intended to help elect a Republican president who may have the opportunity to appoint Supreme Court Justices, who might have a case come up which challenges Roe, and who may eventually be part of a majority that chooses to go against SCOTUS’s previous ruling to overturn Roe. As controversial as the law is, it has been federal law for 50 years. That’s a lot of “ifs” required to justify a vote based on the single issue of anti-abortion legislation. Meanwhile, a lot more can be done immediately to reduce the number of abortions through widespread access to healthcare, comprehensive sex education, and community support for crisis pregnancy centers and domestic violence shelters. Additionally, many more lives are at stake than the unborn who might be aborted. A lot more people are voiceless than just those children.

If you, like my aunt, have never considered how far your responsibility to love your neighbor as yourself reaches—how many lives you bear responsibility for—I hope you will before Nov. 3.

Is your choice the best and wisest choice to promote life, mercy, and justice, and to act out your love for God and for others? If you believe the answer is yes, go with God and vote in that way. But please, don’t cast your vote based on only one issue, on only one set of lives possibly being affected out of all those who are at risk.

What Amy Coney Barrett Would Mean for the Supreme Court

Amy Coney Barrett claims to be a Constitutional Originalist, which she explained as meaning she believes the Constitution should be legally interpreted in the way that the writers of the Constitution originally intended. 

For the sake of time, let’s acknowledge but not explore the fact that language and its usage changes over time, and Barrett is not a linguist or historian who focuses on late 18th century legal or political documents or language evolution. Let’s also not get into the fact that the writers of the Constitution designed it for the country they were building, not the country they could never imagine which exists now, over 250 years later. And, of course, we don’t have time to get into how many of these contributors owned slaves, even their own Black children. 

Let’s also not dwell on the well-documented hypocrisy of Republican lawmakers pushing Barrett’s nomination hearing through mere weeks before the election, despite refusing one for Merrick Garland over 200 days before the 2016 election. Or the dangers of holding these hearings when multiple committee members have recently tested positive for COVID-19 and there is little ventilation and no COVID tests on the premises.

Now then.

Barrett’s Originalist stance means that anyone who isn’t a white male who owns land should not be allowed to vote. Indeed, most of the Bill of Rights don’t apply to anyone outside of this group. It also means that Barrett believes that she herself, as a woman, should not have the right to vote. One would assume that, believing she shouldn’t have that right, she does not exercise it. Also, in 1789 women could not be judges. Therefore Barrett is living in violation of her Originalist beliefs by serving as a federal judge now. She certainly would be in violation of these by becoming a Supreme Court justice. And yet she has not refused the nomination.

It’s baffling that Barrett wants to uphold the strictest possible interpretation of the Constitution despite all the ways doing so would destroy her career.

Although, her behavior during the nomination hearing over the past three days does suggest to me that she must not want the position particularly badly. She certainly doesn’t seem to be taking it seriously. 

Let’s remember, Barrett has been nominated by the president, but it is up the Congress to decide if she is fit to serve in that position. It is the job of the Congressional Judiciary Committee to learn how she would perform in that role and if she is qualified to take it. It’s a job interview.

So why is Barrett repeatedly refusing to answer the committee members’ questions? And why does she say it would “not be appropriate” to speculate on the hypothetical legal situations they propose? Every first year law student must speculate in exactly this manner to demonstrate their knowledge and proficiency in applying the law to real-life situations. By refusing to speculate, Barrett is refusing to demonstrate proficiency. Law students cannot practice law or be invited to return for a second year of law school without doing so. She must be aware of this universal requirement of law students, as she herself has been a law professor at Notre Dame, which didn’t accept female students until 1972.

Barrett has been nominated to help interpret laws in the highest court in the country. She’s supposed to be doing so now as a federal judge, a position she was appointed to a scant 3 years ago, and not without complaints of misconduct from her colleagues. These hypotheticals are entirely reasonable and it’s wild that she’s just…refusing to answer. Repeatedly. If I refused to answer questions during a job interview, I wouldn’t expect to get that job. So I wonder why Barrett has bothered to show up at all. 

Someone said to me recently that they don’t actually care if Justice Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Dr. Ford, so long as he votes on the Supreme Court in the conservative manner they want, primarily about abortion. Kavanaugh’s doing so, in their mind, will justify their voting for Trump in 2016 because of abortion, though they were deeply upset to vote that way at the time.

I have neither the time nor the energy to get into why breaking a law by assaulting another person should disqualify someone for the upholding of and interpretation of this country’s laws. Nor do I have space in this blog to discuss why doubling down on a damaging decision just to make yourself feel better is a terrible stance.

But let’s say that’s your stance too—if not about Kavanaugh then about Barrett. So long as she votes in the way you desire, against abortion for example, you don’t care if she refuses to answer questions during the hearing or claims beliefs that she clearly doesn’t live by.

What would a repeal of Roe V. Wade actually do?

As Ruth Bader Ginsberg wrote, wealthy women will always have a choice regarding abortion. They can pay for the plane tickets required to get them to a state of country where abortion is legal. Poor women, marginalized women will not have that choice. And that isn’t fair.

But let’s say you don’t care that it isn’t fair. You feel completely confident that you would never, under any circumstances seek an abortion for yourself or your spouse. However, you cannot guarantee that no one you love will not suffer a miscarriage. 

One in four pregnancies end in miscarriage. That’s the reality. 

Imagine yourself, or your spouse or daughter or best friend, has just suffered a miscarriage. Perhaps this has really happened to you or a loved one before.

You have just endured a miscarriage. Perhaps you have had to go to the hospital for treatment because of it. But if both you and your family don’t perform grief enough, you could be accused of actually having had an abortion. And as that would be illegal with Roe V. Wade repealed, you could be arrested for it. Even if you aren’t convicted, you would be stripped from your family at a physically and emotionally devastating time and locked behind bars. Your family would be forced to scrape together enough cash for you to post bail. You would probably lose your job if your family couldn’t post bail within a day or two. And whether you are forced to stay in jail or not, it isn’t as though you will receive great physical or any mental health care during that time, the medical effects of which could last years.

If you think, “Oh that wouldn’t happen. No one would do that,” it’s happened already. 

It’s the ongoing reality for women in El Salvador

Brian Kemp’s 2019 “heartbeat bill” here in Georgia could put a woman in jail for up to 30 years for having a miscarriage.

And you know about Marshae Jones, don’t you? She was shot in the stomach, lost her unborn baby, and was charged with manslaughter. Her bond was $50,000. Most of us don’t have $50,000 laying around.

Marshae Jones didn’t shoot herself in the stomach, but she was charged as if she did. And if manslaughter is the charge with Roe v. Wade in place, what if it’s repealed?

What if a woman who doesn’t know she’s pregnant has a glass of wine, then suffers a miscarriage? Even if someone could find a doctor who’d testify that that glass of wine resulted in the miscarriage, should that accident result in prosecution? What if a woman doesn’t go to the doctor as soon as she learns she might be pregnant, and later has a miscarriage? She could be charged with reckless endangerment or manslaughter for not seeking prenatal care as soon as someone on a bench or behind a badge thinks she should. 

No one of childbearing years would be safe in a repeal of Roe V. Wade. But that’s what’s at stake with Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination. She may refuse to speculate on hypotheticals, but it is entirely reasonable, even necessary for you and I to do so.

There is another possibility for why Barrett may be refusing to answer questions or go one record regarding how she would rule in certain instances. She doesn’t think she has to. She may have been assured that so long as she doesn’t go on record against Roe V. Wade or the Affordable Care Act (which yes, people still want repealed even during a pandemic), she will still be confirmed. If this is the case, these hearings are shams, a going through of the motions before the GOP pushes through whoever the president has nominated. If that’s the case, the game is rigged. That’s court packing. That’s a challenge to the prestige and power of the Supreme Court and ultimately a threat to our democracy because of the ways in which SCOTUS is designed to check and balance the power of the other two branches of government.

Maybe the game is rigged. Maybe she’ll be confirmed no matter what. But we can’t let her nomination move forward in silence. Hers or ours.

My Wedding Anniversary and the Election

I’m looking at two big anniversaries. The first is my 2nd wedding anniversary, which is today. I’m considering how much our lives have changed in these two years, how the world has changed, and how much better Tyler and I know each other and love each other now than we did on our wedding day. 

Tonight, we plan to order takeout. Something nice like steak. And I’ll join my friend Claire’s Zoom book launch (for Lightbringer) for an hour, and then I’ll sit with Tyler and watch Atlanta play the Dodgers to try to reach the World Series. It isn’t the trip to Europe we’d hoped for, or a trip to the coast to see my family. It isn’t anything we could have anticipated two years ago on the beautiful day we hosted a big party and got married. And, thankfully, nothing happening today can take away that beautiful day.

The second is the election. I consider it an anniversary because four years ago, I was deeply anxious, waiting and wondering. And those of you who know me or have done a deep dive into my blog know that the results of the election sparked two months of the most intense and prolonged depression I’ve ever experienced. And at the end of that, when I started having some good days again after the new year, I reconnected with Tyler, and we started dating, and it was soon clear to each of us that we were going to get married. We dated for a little over a year before becoming engaged. We were engaged from March-October of 2018. And it’s been such a blessing and also so weird that I’ve experienced such immense personal joy alongside such immense pain in our country, such frustration and anxiety, both as a result of the president’s incompetence and in the GOP’s decision to roll over to all his whims, as well as to double down on behavior that would have been unthinkable prior to this administration.

I’ve learned so much in these years, particularly through conversations with friends and by listening to people share their stories and perspectives, especially on Twitter. 

NaNo is approaching, but for the first time since 2015, I’m not interested in participating. I’d like to keep up my streak, sure, and I have several in-progress drafts of books on my hard drive, and I’d like to finish one of them. But I feel no urgency to do so. 

Maybe it’s the pandemic. I lay awake a few nights ago, telling God how helpless I feel that so many are dying or dead or forever compromised in their health but I’m expected to attend baby dedications and weddings and go traveling. “You can wear a mask if you want,” they say. But I saw what the pastor posted about masks—lies so egregious that Facebook took the post down. I know most people won’t be wearing them because of the culture among those people. I know how unsafe that makes me, even if I’m wearing a mask.

Maybe it’s looking down the barrel of this election, surrounded by reckless disregard for others’ health interspersed with temper tantrums. I see the definition of court packing: refusing to approve 100 judicial nominations by Obama months ahead of the 2016 election but trying to shove through SCOTUS and federal judicial nominations mere days before this election. And I see the unconstitutional threats being shrugged off. 

Maybe these 4 years are just getting to me. 

I can’t make you recognize the insidious creep of fascism. I can’t make you see the pure evil of this administration. I can’t make you realize that people having to wait 11 hours to vote is voter suppression, and unheard of elsewhere in the world. I can’t make you believe that the planet is dying, that this year of wildfires and hurricanes may be the most stable of the next 100 years.

I can’t make you care about other people as much as you care about yourself, though that is God’s command. I can’t even convince you to act in your own best interest by voting for Biden, who takes suffering seriously, and who apologizes, and who is capable of doing this job, and who isn’t motivated by greed alone.

Writing is so hard right now. And feels useless. And takes brain power I have to put into my work and my advocacy. I don’t want to write 50,000 words this year, not when the world is on fire and there’s only more fire to come. I’d rather crochet some more cute animals and make some decorations for Christmas (I delved deeply into pumpkins during September and I regret nothing). 

Work has calmed down some for now, as have freelance work. The weird friend situation from a few months ago is more up in the air than I had wanted. I deeply appreciate everyone’s support and gentle advice and encouragement when I shared about it. I feel far less confused, and I need strong boundaries to keep it that way. Boundaries that also take energy to maintain. She’s trying to guilt me into expend extraordinary energy into convincing her that she’s wrong. She thinks she’s owed that because we’re friends. Or we were.

Do I want to keep writing books? Do I want to keep writing for this blog? I don’t know. This blog meant so much to me over the years, but I’m not afraid of it ending either. All things end eventually. It’s tempting to burrow and let my creativity renew itself, then let it push out in a new direction, no matter what this election will bring, and no matter what evils will be forced upon us in its aftermath. 

Crocheting something other than a scarf is already a stretch for me, and I’m enjoying it. I need to enjoy something. I need to fight despair so I can fight fascism and injustice and racism and the evils of selfishness. 

After a Few Weeks Off

Some of you may have noticed that I’ve been taking a break from the blog. I didn’t announce this. I didn’t really even plan on it. I decided to take a week off of all social media, which was incredibly good for my brain, only getting on to share that week’s blog post. Then I decided to give myself a week off from the blog while still keeping my doomscrolling in check. And another week passed without my noticing. 

I kept writing down blog ideas on post-it notes, but I felt no urgency to write about them. I was very busy at work, writing freelance after work, and when I was done with all of that I didn’t want to write. With the boiling pot of the news, I didn’t think anyone would notice if I took a few weeks off. I read voraciously for a few weeks, and for the last couple of weeks I have crocheted voraciously. 

I’ve also been reconsidering, as I do periodically, the social media platforms I’m on and why I’m there. I’ve asked myself both what do I get out of that platform and what I’m contributing to it. I haven’t made any major decisions related to them, but I have decided to prioritize my mental health in two specific ways. 

1. Get Outside / Exercise
The weather is finally shy of abysmally hot and the past two weeks, I’ve spent significant time outside more days than not. And I feel good. And I want to be in the habit of those walks with Tyler, and my walks on days when he runs, when the weather grows colder and I don’t want to go out. I also want to be back in the habit of using my rowing machine.

2. Strict Social Media Boundaries 
I was pretty good of not getting on social media or checking for news until after breakfast, but the evenings were when I’d find myself doomscrolling, unable to look away as the constant cycle and the terrible on terrible events and news and theories went on and on. With Tyler’s encouragement, I started putting my phone away at least an hour before bed and kept my hands busy to spend less time on it during the weekends.

The ongoing pandemic, the coming election, and the coming of winter all herald warnings for my mental health. I wrote about it earlier this year, and it’s not as though 2020 has let up since then. 

I hope your brain is as healthy as it can be, and that you have found a few ways to take better care of yourself this year.