The very idea of murder by mail sounds like something out of Agatha Christie. But it was, in fact, the American Food and Drug Administration which allowed, under the auspices of COVID, abortifacient pills to be dispensed, not even by a doctor (in violation of the Hippocratic Oath), but via post. A federal district court ruling, issued early in April, has overruled the FDA and suspended the authorization of this fatal drug entirely. Unfortunately, two higher courts, including the Supreme Court, stayed the decision directing the FDA to reconsider its politically motivated approval of the deadly abortion drug. There is more legal wrangling to come. But no matter what decision may come down from the United States’ highest court, it is clear that more wrangling about this drug—its legal status, its dangers, and the relaxed rules which have allowed it to proliferate—are in the offing. Abortion advocates in the U.S. are reeling, and they will hotly contest what could be, on the heels of last year’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, another stinging defeat.
Of course, the media’s framing of this decision is preposterous; the push to end what is plainly a scandalous example of medical malpractice should enjoy broad support across the political spectrum. But at a time when fentanyl is claiming the lives of thousands and chemical castration in the name of “gender affirmation” is foisted upon vulnerable, troubled adolescents, it is little wonder that the odious practice of chemical infanticide is readily defended. Indeed, one frequent line of attack is that pro-lifers now “want to ban even abortion pills.” But such willful ignorance of both the relevant facts and the underlying principle should be expected in the desperate defense of such a barbaric practice. If individual states have outlawed abortion, closing a loophole that allows babies to die because the implements of their murder arrived in the mail makes perfect sense.
The lies, misrepresentations, and feigned moral outrage which the recent decision has occasioned is regrettable; regrettable, too, is the painful paradox of so-called advocates for women’s rights argue for the distribution of dangerous infanticidal drugs under the preposterous pretense that pregnancy is a disease. But these sad spectacles will only increase as the “post-Roe” landscape of the pro-life movement emerges. New fronts are being opened—and new victories are being achieved—every day. Slowly but surely, the heart of a great nation is being turned away from the odious evil of abortion. American pro-lifers must now put in the work required to make a culture of life being born in their country flourish and thrive.
