In a stunning turn of events, another politician has changed their stance on an issue. Now serving his 6th term in the U.S. House of Representatives, Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, has switched his platform on abortion from pro-life to pro-choice after “speaking with women.”
How he managed to go 14 years as an elected official without 'speaking with women' has yet to be reported. Ryan, a lifelong Catholic, has been pro-life up to this point based on the Catholic church doctrine stating that a human being’s life begins at the moment of conception, making abortion unacceptable. Not once did the Congressman mention the unborn during his op-ed explaining the platform transition. This is astonishing considering his previous position on the issue. The intentional distance in his language is indubitable — the unborn are now “pregnancies.”
Apart from abandoning those he promised to protect, the most reprehensible disclosure of Ryan’s op-ed was his blatant sexism. He claimed to switch sides after speaking with women, putting us in a box as if we all support the same causes. According to a study performed by Carol Maxwell, 60 percent of pro-life activists in the U.S. are women. So contrary to Congressman Ryan’s labeling, the majority of people actively working to end abortion are women. The pro-choice movement is not representative of all women, nor will the formulated statistics of politicians make it so.
A common theme in Ryan’s piece, and a common narrative of the pro-choice movement, is that the government has no place in a woman’s decision to have an abortion. This is deeply hypocritical (to be blunt, it's nonsense) considering the government actively works to stop abortions. Let that sink in. The government is actively involved in a woman’s decision to have an abortion. They have made contraception readily available for the very purpose of avoiding abortion. Apparently this form of government involvement doesn’t outrage the Congressman.
Another point from Ryan’s op-ed was that if individuals want to reduce the number of abortions, they should work to provide broader access to contraceptives. This is difficult to comprehend considering that contraception is free, and available to everyone in the U.S. Due to a provision in the Affordable Care Act, even minors can acquire contraceptives without parental consent.
According to the Guttmacher Institute, 54 percent of women who have abortions were practicing contraception the month they conceived. Considering that contraception is very accessible and the majority of women having abortions are already on it, the argument that more contraceptives will reduce the number abortions is weak. After 56 million legal abortions and counting, choosing another form of action to end abortions is hardly unreasonable.
In all three of the women’s stories that Ryan cited, the unplanned pregnancy was not the problem. For the woman who became pregnant by her violent spouse, the problem is her violent spouse, not the unborn child. For the woman who lost her job and cannot afford another child, the problem is financial hardship, not the unborn child. For the vulnerable teenager afraid to be thrown out of her house, the problem is her unsupportive family, not the unborn child.
Additionally, not one of these women’s hardships will be resolved by abortion. Even if they partake in the procedure, there will still be an abusive husband, a mother out of work and a teenager stuck in an unloving, unsupportive environment.
The term “pro-choice” can seem to be a misnomer, because abortion is the only choice made readily available to women facing unintended pregnancies. It is easier to locate a spine on Capitol Hill than it is for women to find supportive and realistic alternatives to abortion. They will be referred to an adoption agency, and that is all. Furthermore, the Catholic Congressman’s opinion piece never mentioned what the Church will do for women facing unintended pregnancies. When women are afforded emotional and financial support, the adoption choice becomes more feasible, and it’s high time the government provides broader access to that option.
I know you’ve got your eye on that seat in the Senate, and that you need funding from the Democratic Party, but the abortion issue is more important than your political goals, Congressman Ryan.
Reach the columnist at Joan.Lebeau@asu.edu or follow @joanlebeau94 on Twitter
Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.
Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.
