In the wake of Roe's 50th anniversary, four believing experts discuss the merits and challenges of the Make Birth Free proposal.
Last week marked 50 years since the monumental Roe v. Wade case legalized abortion in our country—and seven months since it was overturned.
Amid the articles discussing implications for the pro-life movement, one argument in Compact Magazine sparked a ripple of related headlines. In it, Catherine Glenn Foster with Americans United for Life and Kristen Day with Democrats for Life of America proposed that to address the financial motives for abortion, giving birth should be made free in the United States.
This proposal isn’t new—Elizabeth Bruenig penned an op-ed with the same title for The Atlantic last year—but the Make Birth Free movement seems to be gaining greater traction in recent days, as people of faith and folks on both sides of the political aisle are lining up to share their thoughts on the subject.
One response for the Institute for Family Studies explains that “making it easier to have a child doesn’t require making birth free”—arguing instead that existing resources should be made easier to access. Another piece for the National Review lists other objections and ultimately argues that the same ends could be achieved through private rather than governmental support.
But what are some other views on the matter? Four pro-life Christian thinkers with a background in politics and family advocacy weigh in on the merits and challenges of the Make Birth Free proposal.
Daniel Bennet, politics professor at John Brown University:
The end of Roe v. Wade was a necessary result for the American pro-life movement, but it was far from sufficient in its fight against abortion. Pro-life Americans—including many Christians—now find themselves in new territory, no longer fighting …