While pro-lifers prepare for a post-Roe era by continuing to promote the dignity of each and every life and the range of supports available for pregnant women, pro-abortion zealots and their allies are pushing a different narrative. Here are five sinister ideas being pushed since Roe v. Wade was overturned.

1. Pro-life laws threaten the health of women who suffer miscarriages.

“Blanket restrictions on ‘abortion’ procedures and medications therefore may be understood to deprive women of effective treatment for miscarriages, which occur in about 10 to 30 percent of pregnancies.”  

You might think this quote comes from Planned Parenthood. You would be wrong. It is found in Footnote 12 of the dissenting opinion written by Justice Stephen Breyer, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Big Abortion and their allies in the press — including columnists in The New York Times and The Washington Post — have since picked up with the idea and run with it. 

There’s only one problem: It is not true.

Dobbs “in no way restricted access to abortion, much less vital medical care for women,” explain legal scholar Elizabeth Kirk and Dr. Ingrid Skop, director of medical affairs at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, in SCOTUSblog. They point out that the Mississippi statute, which bans elective abortions after 15 weeks, specifically excludes from the definition of abortion the use of medicines or procedures performed “to terminate an ectopic pregnancy, or to remove a dead unborn human being.” 

Pro-life powerhouse Alexandra DeSanctis, writing for National Review, has looked at how every state pro-life law handles ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage. “Though not every law explicitly names ectopic pregnancy and miscarriage management, each is perfectly clear in its definition of abortion and clear about leaving room for doctors to act in cases of medical emergency,” she notes. 

2. Supreme Court justices in the Dobbs majority deserve to be harassed — even at home.

Since a draft majority opinion in Dobbs was made public last May, noisy bands of pro-abortion advocates have held weekly protests and picketing outside the homes of Supreme Court justices in Maryland and Virginia. I’ve got no problem with protests outside the Supreme Court, but these actions trample on the privacy of the justices and their families, violate local and state laws and have chillingly exposed the justices to physical harm. (A heavily armed man was arrested in June near the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh. He called 911 to confess that he was suicidal and had traveled to Maryland with the intent of harming both himself and Kavanaugh.) Despite pleas from the court’s marshal, the Biden administration failed to intervene in the ongoing harassment of the justices.  

Do Americans really believe this sort of thuggery is acceptable? Not at all. A recent poll conducted by the Judicial Crisis Network found that American voters object to ongoing protests at the homes of Supreme Court justices. The group’s president, Carrie Severino, writes: “Americans overwhelmingly agree: Threats, protests at the homes of Supreme Court justices, vandalism, violence, and other intimidation tactics undermine our democracy.” 

3. Pro-life pregnancy centers should be forcibly closed.

Pro-abortion politicians, such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., are calling for pro-life pregnancy centers to be shut down across the country. Trying to get rid of Big Abortion’s competition is nothing new. When serving as attorney general for the state of California, current Vice President Kamala Harris and Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra supported a state law that attempted to force pro-life pregnancy centers to promote abortion or be shut down. The Supreme Court, in NIFLA v. Becerra, ruled that this was unconstitutional. 

4. Catholic churches and pro-life pregnancy centers are acceptable targets for vandalism.

Catholic churches are being targeted all over the country by pro-abortion vandals. There have even been attempts to burn them down. Catholic News Agency has been keeping a running tally of instances of vandalism in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision. Federal law prohibits Church arson as well as threats and other efforts to intimidate churchgoers. Despite these legal prohibitions and serious concern among American Catholics, the Biden administration has not initiated any investigations. Pro-life pregnancy centers, many of which are run by faith-inspired organizations, including the Catholic Church, have similarly suffered vandalism at the hands of pro-abortion zealots. When presented with the opportunity to denounce these attacks, House Democrats refused.

5. Unfettered access to abortion is a matter of religious freedom. 

Rabbi Barry Silver, a former civil-rights lawyer and Democratic state representative, is suing the state of Florida over a bill that would ban abortions after 15 weeks, arguing that it infringes on religious liberty. Silver’s complaint alleges that “[i]f a fetus poses a threat to the health or emotional well-being of its mother, at any stage of gestation up until birth, Jewish law requires the mother to abort the pregnancy and protect herself.” 

Does this mean that pregnant Jewish women who live in Florida will be forced to choose between compliance with state law and religious teaching? Not at all. In fact, Florida’s bill allows exceptions when the health of the mother is in peril.

Over the past five years, the Supreme Court has clarified important principles of religious freedom. Perhaps this explains Silver’s clumsy attempt to weaponize religious liberty in the cause of unfettered abortion in his home state. Be prepared to see more legal challenges like Silver’s across the country.