Fiscal v. social conservatism: An unexpected fight for abortion rights

Comment | Tweet | Share | | | Email | More |
It was just another afternoon in the Oklahoma House until the subject of personhood came up. Then things got interesting, and in a way that most would not expect. Photo: Associated Press

FLORIDA, May 2, 2012 — This could possibly be the first time that I have heard anything remotely positive about reproductive rights come out of the Sooner State.

Last Wednesday, a very interesting scuttle broke out on the floor of the Oklahoma House of Representatives. Rep. Mike Reynolds, a stalwart opponent of abortion rights, attempted to introduce a bill which would have defined human life as beginning at the very moment of conception.

Also referred to as a personhood act, this would effectively criminalize all pregnancy terminations as well as in vitro fertilization procedures and certain types of birth control. In what is sometimes referred to as the buckle of the Bible Belt, such a piece of legislation might be expected to pass with considerable ease.

Not so, and much to my surprise.

The Republican House leadership refused to hear the bill, which had been previously passed by the Senate and approved by the former chamber’s committee on public health. In refusing to hear what is formally titled Senate Bill 1433, both Speaker Pro Tempore Jeff Hickman and Majority Leader Dale DeWitt timed it out of session.

Considering that this parliamentary maneuver took place the day after officials representing religious groups, such as the Southern Baptist Convention, and powerful special interests, like the National Right to Life, held a press conference vocalizing strong support for S.B. 1433, the actions of those House leaders can only be described as bold, if not daring.

“The Republican leadership in Oklahoma is testing the resolve of the state’s pro-life movement,” Keith Mason, the President of Personhood USA proclaimed. “The question at hand is who will fight harder—politicians settling for inaction or the people advocating for the lives of the preborn?” If a report from the Tulsa Beacon, a theoconservative newsweekly, is to be believed, then the state Chamber of Commerce is in fact holding the cards here. Apparently, it “instructed the GOP leadership to (evade S.B. 1433) because (it) didn’t want any negative national publicity.” 

A bright idea, to say the least.
As a registered Republican, I am glad to see that easily manipulated social issues are taking a backseat to higher priorities; even if this has to be done via order of the business community. I would imagine that legislators would reflexively want to focus on the concerns most pressing to their constituents, such as runaway government spending and public safety measures.
In the long run, it is small building blocks such as this one that will ultimately build a path toward direly needed moderation on hot button topics. The path in question might be long and winding, but events like the one in Oklahoma last week prove that it is, at the very least, a work in progress.
Despite falling far short of optimal, this sounds good enough for me. 

This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

More from The Conscience of a Realist
 
blog comments powered by Disqus
Joseph Cotto

Joseph F. Cotto is a social journalist and student of history from central Florida. He writes about everything from political trends to men's fashion, but finds nothing to be more interesting than a good interview. In the past, he was a contributor to Blogcritics Magazine, among other publications. He is currently at work on a book about American society. 

Contact Joseph Cotto

Error

Please enable pop-ups to use this feature, don't worry you can always turn them off later.

Who We Are

This is the Communities section at WashingtonTimes.com. Individual contributors are responsible for their content, which is not edited by The Washington Times. The opinions of Communities writers do not necessarily reflect the views of, nor are they endorsed by, The Washington Times. Contact Us with questions or comments.

Get The Most Up-To-Date News From The Washington Times Communities.

* required
Question of the Day

Which White House scandal most concerns you?

View results

Featured
Photo Galleries
Popular Threads
Powered by Disqus