In the abortion debate, Florida Republicans tell rape and incest victims ‘tough luck’ | Editorial

There was a time when men who were anti-abortion didn’t bother to hide their lack of empathy for women who end up pregnant as the result of rape or incest.

One man, a Missouri Republican lawmaker, once talked about “consensual rape.” Another alluded to “legitimate rape” and said women had the biological ability to prevent a pregnancy when they were sexually assaulted.

The guys have wised up and shut up. In Florida, female lawmakers are sponsoring a proposed 15-week abortion ban — and have the nerve to frame a bill advancing in Tallahassee as pro women and sexual-assault survivors.

Please.

In their latest display of rhetorical gymnastics, a Florida Senate committee on Wednesday rejected an amendment to provide an exemption in Senate Bill 146 for pregnancies that result from rape, incest and human trafficking. Democratic Sen. Lauren Book, a survivor of sexual abuse, proposed the amendment. She said it was needed to prevent further trauma for women and girls.

It’s a bad look for a lawmaker to tell pregnant victims of such horrific crimes “tough luck,” so sponsor Sen. Kelli Stargel, R-Lakeland, tried to frame Book’s amendment as anti-victim and pro-criminal. She said it would leave room for perpetrators to force an abortion to cover up their crime. Providing survivors a bit of relief after a horrific experience doesn’t even appear to be a consideration.

“I think this amendment does nothing to solve the problems that we all agree are awful — rape, human trafficking, incest — and I will partner with you to fight these crimes and I will partner with you to take the people who are doing that to these children to the furthest extent of the law,” Stargel said, the Associated Press reported.

Her fellow Republicans went along with this farce, knowing fully well that anti-abortion activists, from the beginning, pressured lawmakers to leave exemptions for rape and incest out of abortion legislation. Stargel then said victims would still be able to get an abortion in the first 15 weeks of pregnancy — how nice of her! — which would be calculated from the first day of a woman’s last menstrual period. That’s too bad for women and girls with irregular periods and who can go months without menstruating.

Republicans who voted to advance the bill Wednesday ignored testimony from a doctor about an 11-year-old girl impregnated by a family member and who wasn’t able to see a doctor until the 23rd week of pregnancy. It doesn’t take much common sense to conclude that sexual-assault survivors, especially children and teens, often are too afraid to seek help, much less to tell someone that a relative is abusing them and they’re pregnant.

Perhaps it was easy for lawmakers to dismiss that testimony because that doctor works for Planned Parenthood, the GOP’s favorite punching bag on the issue of abortion. Regardless, lawmakers must answer this question: What sense of morality justifies forcing an 11-year-old to give birth to a child by her father, brother, uncle or other blood relative?

We thought their anti-abortion stance was about protecting children.

The bill at least allows abortions to protect the life of the mother or if at least two doctors certify they found a “fatal fetal abnormality.” Hard to believe these Republicans thought asking a woman to die or give birth to a stillborn went a little too far.

Fortunately, 94% of the 74,756 abortions performed in Florida last year were done in the first 12 weeks. Only 17 happened later in the pregnancy because of rape and incest, according to data from the Agency for Health Care Administration.

One can argue that very few people will be affected by lawmakers’ refusal to provide exemptions for those victims. But why not make an exception if only a few abortions would happen anyway?

Is it about principle? Religion?

No, this is simply cruelty masquerading as morality.

This story was originally published February 3, 2022 at 6:16 PM.