Recently, I wrote a post on legislation introduced in Utah which could criminalize certain types of miscarriages. The bill has now passed the Utah legislature and been signed into law by the state’s governor.

There was, however, one rather significant change before the bill was finalized; namely, the word “reckless” was removed, meaning that most of the hypotheticals I posed in my previous post are no longer issues. The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Carl Wimmer, stated in an interview that the term was removed to ensure that the bill was signed into law.

I’d recommend reading the entire interview, because it’s fascinating. The interviewer seems to be pro-choice and, as a result, asks some pretty interesting questions. Some of the highlights include Wimmer’s plans to get “reckless” back in the bill, his desire to overturn Roe v. Wade, and his desire to get this bill passed in more states.

In my opinion, the highlight of the interview occurs when Rep. Wimmer is asked this:

“You say you care about life, so what programs will you put in place to make sure all of those children have a decent life?”

This is a fair question, and one that you don’t normally see asked of anti-choicers. But it’s a valid issue… if you ban abortion, many unwanted pregnancies will occur… and what happens to those children? Rep. Wimmer’s answer:

“I’m not sure the government needs to be doing that. There are plenty of volunteer organizations that help.”

To me, this is indicative of the true aims of the anti-choice movement. If it was really about helping children, Wimmer should have a laundry list of ideas of how to help them. But he doesn’t. He has no clue, and it doesn’t seem to concern him at all. No… what this is really about is deciding for women what they should do with their bodies, consequences and lives be damned. There’s nothing “pro-life” about Rep. Wimmer. And if he gets his way, there are going to be many individuals who suffer because of his policies.

Comments are closed.