Abortion Laws: Why People Abstain From Voting

Abortion laws have been a highly contested issue in the United States for decades, with public opinion fluctuating between support for and opposition to legal abortion. While a majority of Americans currently express support for legal abortion, there are still many barriers that prevent people from seeking abortions, including criminalisation, social stigma, and intersectional discrimination. The Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022 led to a wave of new abortion restrictions and bans being enacted by various states, with tens of millions of voters in ten states set to decide on how their state should regulate abortion. This has sparked a debate on the role of voter turnout and the impact of religious and political affiliations on abortion views, with Democrats hoping that more people who support abortion rights will show up on election day.

Criminalisation of abortion

The criminalisation of abortion has been a highly contested issue globally, with countries differing on their stances. Some countries, like the United States, Sierra Leone, Poland, and Morocco, have laws criminalising abortion, while others allow it under specific circumstances, such as when the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest, or if the pregnant person's life is at risk. The criminalisation of abortion creates barriers for people seeking abortions, particularly those from marginalised communities, who may not have the financial means or access to safe services in another country.

The impact of criminalisation is far-reaching, pushing women and girls towards clandestine, unregulated settings, where unsafe abortions are performed, leading to short- or long-term health complications, and even death. According to the World Health Organization, the rate of unsafe abortions is four times higher in countries with restrictive abortion laws. Additionally, criminalisation undermines fundamental human rights, including the right to life, health, and bodily autonomy. International human rights bodies have called on countries to decriminalise abortion to protect these rights, especially for women and girls.

Despite public support for legal abortion fluctuating over the years, a majority of Americans currently support legal abortion in all or most cases, with 63% in favour. However, this support is not absolute, as many are open to restrictions under certain circumstances. For instance, nearly three-quarters of Americans believe abortion should be legal if the pregnant person's life or health is endangered. The debate surrounding abortion is influenced by various factors, including stigma, religious beliefs, and ethical convictions, making it a complex and divisive issue.

The criminalisation of abortion not only affects those seeking abortions but also impacts healthcare providers. Doctors and medical staff may face ethical dilemmas, choosing between adhering to restrictive laws and providing the best care for their patients. Furthermore, criminalisation creates a "chilling effect", deterring providers from offering abortion services due to the fear of criminal liability. This further limits access to safe abortion procedures and undermines the ability of individuals to make autonomous decisions about their reproductive health.

The criminalisation of abortion has led to human rights abuses, with people being prosecuted, imprisoned, and facing cruel treatment for seeking or providing abortions. It is essential to address these issues and work towards guaranteeing abortion rights and protecting the rights of those defending abortion access.

Social stigma

In addition to community shunning, social stigma can also lead to harassment and intimidation. Clinic staff at abortion providers may face daily protesters and even have their trash dug through by anti-abortion activists looking for patient information. This creates an unsafe and stressful environment for both the staff and patients.

The social stigma surrounding abortion also contributes to the spread of misinformation and the dominance of anti-abortion narratives. Despite most people agreeing that abortion should be legal, many feel they don't know how to speak out and show their support. This allows the loud anti-abortion minority to dominate the narrative and influence policy decisions.

Furthermore, social stigma can lead to the refusal of medical staff to provide abortions based on personal or religious grounds. For example, even after abortion was decriminalized in Northern Ireland, people like Louise still faced obstructed access to services due to living in a remote village and the cost of travelling to another country.

The social stigma associated with abortion has real-world consequences, including unsafe abortions, maternal deaths, disabilities, and mental health struggles. It is a powerful factor that influences people's decisions and behaviours, and it is often intertwined with other factors such as cost, distance to services, and religious attitudes.

Religious beliefs

Many religious conservatives perceive abortion as murder. Anti-abortion advocates believe that legalized abortion is a threat to social, moral, and religious values. The religious influence over a country's population is often a massive determining factor on the legality of abortion.

Christianity

There is no clear consensus on how early Christians felt about abortion, nor is there an explicit prohibition of abortion in the Bible. However, some scholars believe that early Christians considered abortion a sin at all stages, seeing it as at least as grave as sexual immorality. Abortion is not mentioned by name anywhere in the Bible, nor is there a specific commandment against it.

Some early Christians believed that the embryo did not have a soul from conception, and consequently, opinion was divided as to whether or not early abortion was murder or ethically equivalent to murder. Early church councils punished women for abortions that were combined with other sexual crimes, as well as makers of abortifacient drugs.

The Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodoxy, and most Evangelical Protestants oppose deliberate abortion as immoral while allowing what is sometimes called indirect abortion. That is, an action that does not seek the death of the foetus as an end or a means, but that is followed by death as a side effect. The Catholic Church and many Evangelical Christians believe that life begins at conception and have strong moral prohibitions against abortion, equating it to murder.

Some mainline Protestant denominations such as the Methodist Church, Episcopal Church, United Church of Christ, Presbyterian Church, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, among others, are more permissive of abortion.

Islam

The Quran and Hadith describe God's creation of man in the womb and condemn infanticide. Each of the four Sunni Islam schools of thought—Hanafi, Shafi‘i, Hanbali and Maliki—have their own reservations on if and when abortions are permissible in Islam. The Maliki madhhab holds that the fetus is ensouled at the moment of conception, and thus most Malikis do not permit abortion at any point. On the other hand, some Hanafi scholars believe that abortion before the hundred twenty day period is over is permitted, though some Hanafi scholars teach that an abortion within 120 days is makruh (discouraged). The other Islamic schools of thought agree that abortion is recommended when the mother's life is in danger.

After 120 days, the fetus is believed to be human life, yet it is still permissible to abort it to save the life of the mother. This is because a fetus will die anyway if the mother dies, and the mother is part of a family and has responsibilities.

Judaism

Orthodox Jewish teaching allows abortion if necessary to safeguard the life of the pregnant woman. While the Reform, Reconstructionist, and Conservative movements openly advocate for the right to a safe and accessible abortion, the Orthodox movement is less unified on the issue. Many Orthodox Jews oppose abortion, except when it is necessary to save a woman's life (or, according to some, the woman's health).

The Hebrew Bible has a few references to abortion; Exodus 21:22-25 addresses miscarriage by way of another's actions, which it describes as a non-capital offense punishable through a fine. The Book of Numbers in the Hebrew Bible describes the Ordeal of the bitter water (sotah) to be administered by a priest to a wife whose husband thinks she was unfaithful. Some scholars interpret the text as involving an abortifacient potion or otherwise inducing a miscarriage if the woman is pregnant with another man's child.

Buddhism

There is no single Buddhist view concerning abortion. Some traditional sources, including some Buddhist monastic codes, hold that life begins at conception, and that abortion, which would then involve the deliberate destruction of life, should be rejected. Complicating the issue is the Buddhist belief that "life is a continuum with no discernible starting point". Among Buddhists, there is no official or preferred viewpoint regarding abortion.

The Dalai Lama has said that abortion is "negative", but there are exceptions. He said, "I think abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each circumstance." Inducing or otherwise causing an abortion is regarded as a serious matter in the monastic rules followed by both Theravada and Vajrayana monks; monks and nuns must be expelled for assisting a woman in procuring an abortion.

Hinduism

Most classical Hindu texts strongly condemn abortion, although the Sushruta Samhita recommends it if the fetus is defective. The British Broadcasting Corporation writes, "When considering abortion, the Hindu way is to choose the action that will do least harm to all involved: the mother and father, the foetus and society." The BBC goes on to state that, in practice, abortion is common in India because the religious ban on abortion is sometimes overruled by the cultural preference for sons. This can lead to abortion to prevent the birth of girl babies, which is called 'female foeticide'. Hindu scholars and women's rights advocates have supported bans on sex-selective abortions. Some Hindus support abortion in cases where the mother's life is at imminent risk or when the foetus has a life-threatening developmental anomaly.

Some Hindu theologians and Brahma Kumaris believe personhood begins at three months and develops through to five months of gestation, possibly implying that abortion is permitted up to the third month and that any abortion past the third month is considered the destruction of the soul's current incarnate body.

Baháʼí Faith

Abortion, merely for the purpose of eliminating an unwanted child, is strongly deprecated in the Baháʼí Faith, although medical reasons may warrant it. Among the possible reasons for terminating a pregnancy are rape, incest, lack of viability of the fetus, and health of the mother. Baháʼís are encouraged to decide based on their own conscience in light of general guidance found in Baháʼí writings and medical advice.

Voter suppression

In the first four months of 2021, Republican lawmakers introduced over 360 bills to restrict voting rights and 536 bills to restrict abortion rights. These efforts are deeply connected, according to Smith College professor Loretta Ross, who states that the right-wing agenda is to "maintain a white majority" and that this requires restricting voting rights and immigrant rights, as well as socially engineering white women to have more babies.

The connection between voter suppression and abortion restrictions was further highlighted by the simultaneous passing of Texas's S.B. 8, a near-total abortion ban, and S.B. 1, an omnibus voter suppression package. Both laws delegate enforcement powers to civilians, creating a form of citizen vigilante. S.B. 8, for example, allows any person to sue an abortion provider or anyone who "aids and abets" someone getting an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, with a minimum reward of $10,000 for a successful lawsuit. S.B. 1, on the other hand, expands the authority of partisan poll watchers and imposes criminal penalties on election workers who try to regulate their conduct, making it easier for voters to be harassed and intimidated.

The anti-abortion movement has a long history of employing voter suppression tactics to maintain political power. After the election of Barack Obama, white supremacists feared a loss of political power and mobilized to restrict voting rights and limit access to abortion and birth control. In 2011, Mississippi proposed two constitutional measures: Initiative 26, declaring a fertilized human egg a legal person, and Initiative 27, requiring photo identification to vote. While the personhood initiative was defeated, the voter ID law passed, demonstrating the link between restricting voting rights and limiting access to abortion.

Anti-abortion groups have also shifted their focus to supporting new restrictions on voting, offering significant grassroots power and money to make it harder for people to vote. For example, the Susan B. Anthony List, a group traditionally focused on restricting abortion access, announced it intends to spend millions in a joint "election transparency initiative" with the American Principles Project. This effort aims to scupper national voting rights legislation and mobilize lawmakers and volunteers in states.

Many of the most fervent backers of abortion bans are also championing anti-voting rights legislation. For instance, in Arizona, Republican legislator Walter Blackman introduced an abortion ban bill that would have charged women and doctors with first-degree murder, while also sponsoring or co-sponsoring four bills that would restrict voting in the state. Similarly, in Texas, Republican state house representative Briscoe Cain authored a six-week abortion ban, as well as a sweeping bill with new voting restrictions that prohibit officials from mailing absentee ballot applications to voters and give poll watchers more power.

By restricting voting rights and suppressing the vote, these groups and lawmakers aim to entrench conservative political ideology and disenfranchise and marginalize those who support abortion rights.

Lack of access to information

The stigmatisation and criminalisation of abortion create an environment of fear and misinformation, making it difficult for people to access accurate and unbiased information about their reproductive rights and options. This lack of information can lead to unsafe abortions, which put individuals' health and lives at risk.

Additionally, the restriction of abortion-related information on social media platforms and other online sources further contributes to the lack of access to vital information. The removal of abortion-related content by tech giants such as Meta and TikTok prevents people from accessing life-saving information and makes it challenging for them to make informed decisions about their reproductive health.

The lack of access to information is also evident in the varying levels of awareness and understanding among the public regarding abortion laws and their rights. Many individuals may not be fully informed about the specific circumstances under which abortion is legal or illegal in their state, which can lead to confusion and hesitation when facing an unwanted pregnancy.

Furthermore, the underrepresentation of women, especially women of colour, in state legislatures and other decision-making positions contributes to the lack of access to information. This disparity in representation can result in policies and laws that do not adequately address the needs and perspectives of women, further exacerbating the information gap and hindering their ability to make informed choices.

To address this issue, it is crucial to ensure that accurate and unbiased information about abortion is readily available to the public. This includes providing comprehensive sex education, increasing awareness of reproductive rights, and improving access to reliable sources of information, especially for marginalised communities.

By empowering individuals with knowledge and resources, we can help them make informed decisions about their bodies and their future, regardless of their gender, race, or socioeconomic status.

Frequently asked questions