�Թϲ�����

Cathy McMorris Rodgers serves as chair of the House Republican Conference, which puts her in charge of the congressional GOP’s messaging. McMorris Rodgers (Wash.) is also the proud mother of a 10-year-old who has Down syndrome, which makes it unsurprising that she directed an unhappy message my way after a column about state legislation to prohibit abortions for fetuses with Down syndrome. “I struggled to put into words how offensive it is,” McMorris Rodgers tweeted about the column, in which I wrote that I would have terminated a pregnancy had prenatal testing shown Down syndrome. (Ruth Marcus, 3/16)

When moral philosophers and others take up an issue that is at the center of public debate, we tend to frame it as a matter of individual ethics. Is it morally permissible to eat meat? To offer money for sex? To have an abortion? Yet, such questions often fail to focus on the issues that are important and relevant for public policy and, as a result, can derail productive public debate. (Laurie Shrage, 3/19)

Governments routinely behave badly, but sometimes their mean-spiritedness comes to the Supreme Court’s attention. On Tuesday, it will hear oral arguments concerning the constitutionality of measures that California’s government has taken to compel pro-life entities to speak against their own mission. (George Will, 3/17)

There is more than one way to speak morally about reproductive rights. I certainly respect those who believe abortion is wrong. As a rabbi, however, I do not respect how Ohio leaders pretend that the only moral position is one which subverts women's reproductive freedom. The latest proposal, Ohio Senate Bill 145, seeks to ban the most common medical procedure of abortion. Like many restrictive policies, it forces Ohio women into a situation to accept inferior, ill-advised options from their physicians. (Robert A. Nosanchuk, 3/18)

My job is to take care of women. As an obstetrician-gynecologist working in Botswana, I see women through the highs and lows of their reproductive lives. Until last year, I personally had only experienced the highs. In 2015, I gave birth to a perfect baby at the right time in my life given my values and goals. A few years later, when I was ready, I got pregnant with my second child. Last August, I went for my 20-week ultrasound, expecting to find out if number two was a boy or a girl. Instead, I looked to the monitor and found a fetus struggling to survive in my womb. I’m used to being on the other side of that ultrasound probe, so I knew what was next. I would have said the same thing: “The baby can’t survive. And you can get very sick.” (Rebecca Luckett, 3/19)

I witnessed a sleight-of-hand at the Kentucky Capitol on March 8. Under the pretense of concern for the “human rights” and “ethical and humane treatment” of fetuses with Down syndrome, Republican lawmakers headed down the path of determining that some reasons for seeking a legal abortion are legitimate, while other reasons are not. In brief, House Bill 455 would prohibit an abortion if there is any test result, prenatal diagnosis or other reason to believe the fetus has Down syndrome. As the parent of an adult with developmental disabilities, and as a long-time advocate for people with developmental disabilities, I am offended at this pretense. Either these lawmakers are ignorant of the complexity and challenges of parenting a child with special needs, or they are willfully deceptive. Why else would they propose this bill, at the same time that these same legislators are supporting cuts to so many of the public benefits that people with Down syndrome and other disabilities rely on for their survival? (Joan Kofodimos, 3/14)