Texas Flag

Columnist Eileen Tyrrell explains how the recent abortion legislation in Texas harms women and children. 

Last week, the Supreme Court refused to block Texas Senate Bill 8, or S.B. 8 — a draconian “heartbeat law” (which is itself a medically inaccurate moniker) that sidesteps the Constitution in favor of vigilante justice

And at midnight on Sept. 1, it became illegal to seek an abortion in the state of Texas after six weeks of pregnancy, even in cases of rape or incest. Those who choose to seek abortions, and anyone who aids them along the way, can be prosecuted by any random citizen on the street for up to $10,000, plus legal fees. 

I don’t need to work hard to summon the anger I feel over this new law. I actually don’t need to work at all. It is always curdling just beneath the surface of my skin.  

S.B.8 is unconscionably cruel. But it is also arrogant. It lets lawmakers assume the mantle of decision-making for women in place of doctors, other medical professionals and women themselves. Lawmakers who have likely never been in a high-risk obstetrics ward, who have never had to decide between getting an abortion or possibly dying and abandoning their already-alive child, have hubristically decided that they know best.  

Outside of the fantasyland that these lawmakers live in is a place called reality, where professionals who do, in fact, know best — high-risk obstetricians, such as Chavi Eve Karkowsky — are unequivocally clear that abortions are frequently life-or-death cases. 

“I need to be able to discuss, recommend and perform abortions somewhat regularly,” Karkowsky wrote for the Atlantic. “This is not because I want to kill babies or end desired pregnancies. It is because, in many cases, I am walking patients and their families through a nightmare.” 

I would not wish a nightmare pregnancy — a fetus developing without a brain, pregnancy due to rape, water breaking at 19 weeks — on anyone, including the authors of S.B.8. But not one part of me believes a person could go through such an experience and continue on, in good conscience, to author that law. (Although I have to admit that good conscience decision-making doesn’t really seem to matter to “pro-life” Republicans anyway, since so many of them go on to seek abortions in their own private lives. I could write a Dr. Seuss book out of the hypocrisy — Do what I say, not what I do! Abortions for me, no abortions for you!)

Just for the fun of it, let’s pretend that the Texas Senate actually does care about protecting life. The concept of being “pro-life” has been bandied about a lot lately, but I think it requires some interrogation to get to the heart of what that actually means. What is a life?

Perhaps an unborn child, depending on your religious and spiritual beliefs.

Certainly a child who has already been born.

You would think, then, that Texas would have the highest standards of care for infants and children. Surely they would recognize not just the rights of the unborn, but also that other Catholic precept towards life — the right of every human being to a dignified natural death.  

Well, (to the surprise of no one!) you would be wrong.  

Setting aside the staggering hypocrisy of claiming to be pro-life while forbidding mask mandates in the midst of a deadly pandemic, there is plenty of other evidence that human life is not actually all that sacred in Texas. Not after birth, anyway. Within the last two years, the state has been ranked 22nd for infant mortality rates; 40th and 39th for its number of poor and extremely poor children, respectively; and has been given a stunning 49th place for the health of its children, measured across key performance metrics including low birth-weight babies, children without health insurance and the child and teen death rate. 

Texas IS the best at one thing, though — the state has been #1 at executing prisoners on death row since 1976, with a whopping 572 executions in the last forty years. 

So you’ll excuse me if I can’t find it in myself to be understanding or polite to the pro-life movement anymore. I am all out of grace. What is happening in Texas right now reflects an ugly tenet of the cause and blots out the few people who genuinely do care about protecting all life — the people who can admit that being actually pro-life means supporting a child from conception until natural death, with tax dollars and social welfare programs and definitely not the death penalty.  

We’ve seen that Texas is decidedly not a pro-life state. The quality of life for infants and children there speaks for itself. So, what is S.B.8, then? It’s a way to control women.

Opinion Policies

Editorials are longer opinion pieces that are written by a group of community members recruited across campus who address relevant issues on a local, national and international level. Editorials are research-based. The purpose of the Editorial Board is to promote discussion concerning relevant issues in the community while advising on possible solutions. Topics are chosen via relevancy and interests of the members, which are then discussed by the Editorial Board in order to reach a general consensus concerning the topic or issue.

Feedback policy

If you have a grievance concerning the content or argument of the Editorial Board, please contact either Opinion Editor Peyton Hamel (peyton.hamel@iowastatedaily.com) or the Editorial Board as a whole (editorialboard@iowastatedaily.com). Those wanting to respond to editorials can also submit a letter to the editor through the Iowa State Daily website or by emailing the letter to Opinion Editor Peyton Hamel (peyton.hamel@iowastatedaily.com) or Editor-in-Chief Sage Smith (sage.smith@iowastatedaily.com).

Column Policy

Columns are hyper-specific to opinion and are written by only columnists employed by the Iowa State Daily. Columnists are unique because they have a specific writing day and only publish on those writing days. Each column undergoes a thorough editing process ensuring the integrity of the writer, and their claim is maintained while remaining research-based and respectful. Columns may be submitted from community members. These are labelled as “Guest Columns.” These contain similar research-based content and need to be at least 400 words in length. The following requirements should be met: first and last name, email and relation or position to Iowa State. Emails must be tied to the submitted guest column or it will not be accepted or published. Pseudonyms are prohibited and the writer will be banned from submissions.

Read our full Opinion Policies here. Updated on 10/7/2020

(2) comments

Facts and Logic

Ah yes, how 'draconian' it is to prevent people from killing a baby, tearing it limb from limb, and sucking it out of the womb. How dare lawmakers put into place a law protecting innocent, unborn children!

Firstly, the argument that lawmakers shouldn't get to make this decision is simply ludicrous. Lawmakers are humans. Unborn children are humans. We all are humans. And thus, we all (should) have a stake in humans not getting murdered.

Those 'nightmare pregnancy' situations you speak of? They involve more than just the woman carrying the child. They involve the child as well. Murdering a baby just because they aren't physically perfect or the situation surrounding conception was not consensual is NOT the answer. It is vastly ironic to me that you so ardently oppose the death penalty for hardened criminals but are shocked at attempts to prevent the murder of innocent, unborn children.

As for the claim this bill is just a way to control women, well, that's patently crazy. It's not a law telling you how to live. It's not a law telling you who to love. It's not a law telling you where you can work, what you can say, or how you can dress. All it is is a law that stops you from murdering a baby. And if that is too controlling for you, then I'm not sure what else to tell you. Maybe you should ask yourself why murdering an innocent, living baby is the key to your 'success' and 'happiness'.

David Jackson

With all the hysterical outrage and self-righteous backlash against this ban, I haven’t seen one comment, one coherent argument that the Texas law is scientifically incorrect and there isn’t a child being killed if they can detect a heartbeat. Not one!

This piece linked to an article that tried, but as usual with emotional propaganda, fails miserably. From the article: “Doctors acknowledge that while the term “heartbeat” is not medically precise in early pregnancy, it is commonly used with patients to describe electrical or cardiac activity.”

… electrical or cardiac activity….gee like from a heart….whose you ask? The mothers? No. The doctor’s? No. Do women grow spare hearts from time to time? No. It’s almost like they’re detecting “cardiag activity” from someone else or something!? Oh yeah, because they are!

It’s almost as if they can’t argue that this is really about a woman’s choices about her own body and want to ignore the fact at that stage of development you’re killing a child. NOT simply getting rid of a “ball of cells” that’s part of the woman’s body like clipping your fingernails.

There’s also nothing in this law that legalizes rape or doesn’t hold men financially accountable for their children, yet the feminazi’s are out in full force screeching about male oppression.

Remember that when these people go onto opinion sections and social media and pretended to be morally superior. They know they are killing children, and they don’t care, because they’d rather be considered good people by the mob of “pro-choice” supporters they’ve been brainwashed to believe are the good guys their whole life, or for some because personal responsibility is so frightening to them they’d murder their own children to avoid it.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.