“I believe Roe v. Wade should be repealed. I believe federal law should declare that life begins at conception. And I believe states should regulate the enforcement of this law, as they do other laws against violence.” – Dr Ron Paul
Last week SAB broke the news that Representative Rick Becker, who is seeking the GOP nomination for governor, has announced his support for the legislation that North Dakota enacted in 2013 prohibiting abortions when an about-to-be-born child is so thoroughly developed that their heartbeat can be detected. This legislation passed with overwhelming majorities and bipartisan support in both chambers of the state legislature before being signed into law by Governor Dalrymple. It is currently being defended (much to the chagrin of the Forum editorial board) at the Supreme Court by Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem, the presumed front-runner for the GOP nomination for governor.
Becker’s interview and his statement below help to clarify his position on the most fundamental civil rights issue of our era.
Some members of the pro life movement will be skeptical of Becker due to his troubling voting record during the 2013 legislative session. Having met with Becker I will say that I believe his recent statements are genuine and that his confusing voting record is a result of not having thought all the way through the issue before being forced to take a position in his first legislative session.
Beyond the 2016 gubernatorial race in North Dakota, however, Becker’s statements point to a broader development in the libertarian movement as it becomes more and more clear that there is no political future in denying equal protection under the law to human beings in utero
[mks_pullquote align=”right” width=”300″ size=”24″ bg_color=”#ffffff” txt_color=”#000000″]By sucking up to the left on “social” issues these libertarians are occasionally able to win a kind word from a late-night host or a TV news anchor but ultimately the inconsistency of their position makes them completely untenable as serious political candidates.[/mks_pullquote]
From Murray Rothbard in the 80s to Gary Johnson in 2012 a few libertarians have attempted to construct a political platform that rails against the thousands of deaths caused by foreign military entanglements but ignores the deaths of millions of children in the name of “choice.” In this ideology the danger of allowing the government to pick winners and losers in the business world is recognized but the danger of allowing the government to pick which human beings will receive equal protection under the law is completely missed.
By sucking up to the left on “social” issues these libertarians are occasionally able to win a kind word from a late-night host or a TV news anchor but ultimately the inconsistency of their position makes them completely untenable as serious political candidates. As Ron Paul put it recently “Libertarians who support abortion should ask themselves how they can expect a government that does not respect the unborn’s right to life to respect their property rights. Therefore, all those who wish to create a society of liberty, peace, and prosperity should join me in advocating for a consistent ethic of life and liberty that respects the rights of all persons, born and unborn.”
Rand Paul, the leader of the libertarians in the US Senate, is no less committed than his father to equal protection under the law for about-to-be-born children. Justin Amash, the leader of the libertarians in the US House, has stated “I’m pro-life, and I think all abortion should be illegal.” This is the future of the libertarian movement and, in fact, of the entire nation.
Leftists are putting as much effort into stretching the story of the insane murderer at a Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood as they put into burying the facts about Planned Parenthood’s now abandoned organ “donation” program. Ultimately, however, this is a losing battle for the left. There’s no future in clinging to 19th century embryology and pretending that we do not know that the victims of abortion are every bit as human as any newborn. And neither willful ignorance of embryology, nor bodily autonomy, nor the Supreme Court rambling about “penumbras, formed by emanations” can give someone a right to kill their child.