The governor of Oklahoma is likely to sign the House-passed Senate Bill 612, also known as the “Oklahoma abortion ban.” Governor Kevin Stitt has vowed to “sign all anti-abortion bills that come to his desk.”
This bill makes performing an abortion in the state a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison. It has become one of the most severe abortion bans since Roe v. Wade, with the only exception being in cases where the mother’s life is endangered.
This year, between January and April, 82 bans in 30 states were introduced into their state legislatures. As of March 17, Ohio’s House Bill 598 was introduced to face hearings and public testimony, and it currently awaits House committee assignment. This bill holds the same provisions as Oklahoma’s.
States like Colorado, New York and Massachusetts have no restrictions on abortions and even allow minors to get one without any parental consent. The “Roe Bill,” recently passed in New York and introduced to Massachusetts, advocates removing all “late-stage” restrictions and eliminating requirements to maintain the health and safety of a baby born during an abortion procedure.
Radical legislation is often reactionary. States that have proposed or passed anti-abortion legislation have been met defiantly by extreme opposition with their own proposed legislation. This has created a cycle of radicalism that ends with a total abortion ban and complete removal of any abortion restrictions in their respective states. The product of this cycle is immoral extremism of laws that are irrational and harmful to the individuals they impact.
There have been acts of violence on both sides of the debate: murders of abortion providers and assaults of pro-life protesters are heinous acts that are perpetrated by radical activists. As radicalism sets people more staunchly in their opinions, the abortion debate has intensified.
State legislature and Supreme Court decisions have begun to reflect and navigate these extreme beliefs. With people who are both pro-life and pro-choice petitioning for changes in the laws, the fight is “all or nothing.” These proposed laws are impulsive. People fighting on both sides have become so entrenched in their beliefs that they have become recklessly radicalized.
However, what these activists and legislators refuse to acknowledge is many Americans take a more rational approach to the abortion debate. Some pro-lifers believe that minors, cases of incest or rape and medical/health issues are valid reasons why abortion should be allowed. Similarly, some pro-choicers believe that late-term pregnancies, heartbeat detection and other possible reasons are valid possibilities in which abortion should not be allowed.
In a recent NBC News poll, 31% of people believe that abortion should always be legal with no exception, while 8% of people believe that abortion should be illegal with no exception. That leaves 61% of Americans in the middle who are not represented by proposed radical legislation.
It is the responsibility of Democratically-elected leaders to write and pass legislation that represents the majority opinion of their constituents. These proposed laws – on both the left and the right – do not give proper representation to the opinions of the majority.
Katie Trott is a junior studying creative writing at Ohio University. Please note that the views and opinions of the columnists do not reflect those of The Post. What are your thoughts? Tell Katie by emailing her at kt008918@ohio.edu.
Opinion Columnist
