The abortion litmus test

abortion litmus testPresidents control a powerful bully pulpit. They can’t make law, but they can promote and sign pro-life or pro-abortion legislation. In some respects, though, the attorney generals of the 50 states carry just as much clout.

An example: California voters passed Proposition 8 a number of years ago which defined marriage as being between one man and one woman. Then-attorney general of California, Kamala Harris, said she did not like the law and refused to enforce it.

This is especially relevant in light of an announcement earlier this week from the Democratic Attorneys General Association. Their group will only financially support candidates for statewide attorney general races who publicly support human abortion and renounce any limitations on the act.

Abortion politics get worse

If possible, abortion politics have taken an even more sinister turn in this election cycle. If you’re a Catholic candidate for attorney general, or any office for that matter, you are no longer welcome in the Democratic Party unless you, in essence, publicly renounce your Church’s teachings on the sanctity of human life.

The abortion litmus test was on full display at Wednesday night’s Democratic debate. MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow asked:

“If Roe gets overturned and abortion access disappears in some states, would you intervene as president to try to bring that access back?”

Amy Klobuchar responded predictably, if incoherently: “we should codify Roe v. Wade into law.” Many of her fellow presidential candidates concur, even though the office of the president cannot codify laws.

In fact, as we’ve written before, Roe v Wade specifically acknowledges States’ authority to regulate abortion:

[The state] “has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman’s health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a “compelling” point at various stages of the woman’s approach to term.”

Do these candidates not know this, or don’t they care?

Democratic governor signs pro-life law

Interestingly, a pro-life Democratic governor in Louisiana, John Bel Edwards, just signed a ‘heartbeat’ law into law. Ms. Maddow asked Elizabeth Warren:

“Just this weekend, Louisiana reelected a Democratic governor, John Bel Edwards. He has signed one of the country’s toughest laws restricting abortion. Is there room in the Democratic party for someone like him, someone who can win in a deep-red state but who does not support abortion rights?”

Warren didn’t respond directly, despite Maddow asking her the question twice. Said Warren:

“I believe that abortion rights are human rights. And protecting the right of a woman to be able to make decisions about her own body is fundamentally what we do and what we stand for as a Democratic party.”

In essence, she says ‘no,’ that pro-life Democrats are not welcome within the Democratic political party.

Ironically, pro-lifers would agree that abortion rights involve human rights, because unique human beings are the victims of each single abortion. Their human rights are violated when they are killed in the womb. Democratic attorney generals and candidates don’t see it that way. Even more, they increasingly embrace an abortion litmus test.