If every fertilized egg is life, why don't Republicans legislate IVF

[tulipsandroses]

Anti-Abortion Hypocrisy Has Never Been Clearer

Anti-abortion activists and legislators have spent a lot of time, money, and political energy trying to convince Americans that fertilized eggs are human beings. Their belief that “life begins at conception” is supposedly why these lawmakers are passing legislation that bans abortion at six weeks (before most women even know they’re pregnant), and why some are against certain forms of birth control — because they believe that IUDs and the pill prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg.

But when Alabama State Senator Clyde Chambliss, a Republican, was asked recently if his state’s sweeping abortion ban would punish those at IVF clinics who discard embryos or fertilized eggs, he replied, “The egg in the lab doesn’t apply. It’s not in a woman. She’s not pregnant.”
And with that one sentence, the anti-abortion hypocrisy was exposed: The fight to end abortion has never been about when life begins, or protecting “babies”; it’s about controlling women and the anti-abortion movement’s legislative apathy toward IVF proves it.

.
SNIP
And that’s the rub — conservative legislators roll back abortion rights while ignoring the millions of embryos at U.S. clinics that are frozen or destroyed because their agenda is not about “life,” but forced motherhood and a return to traditional gender roles. When Ohio passed its abortion ban, for example, Republican state representative Christina Hagan said, “Motherhood isn’t easy, but it is necessary.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/gen.medium.com/amp/p/c7b621db7ab5

[crickets]

1. Truth.

The hypocrisy is astounding, but it is also powerful; it allows us to make clear that Republicans don’t care about when life begins or saving fertilized eggs. As Chambliss said, exposing more than he realized, conservatives only want to legislate embryos that are “in a woman.” It’s only our bodies and freedom that they’re concerned with.

[appalachiablue]

2. K/R

[Coventina]

3. Oh believe me, they are trying!!!! n/t

[LeftInTX]

7. I know!!

It's very expensive $$$$$$ and if insurance doesn't cover it, forget it. Many plans don't cover it.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

4. They face pressure from fringe "abortion abolitionists" to do just that.

[tulipsandroses]

6. Yes the nuttier ones, BUT they realize that

It wouldn’t be popular with Republican women who got their bundles of joy or grandbabies via IVF. For this reason Alabama made it an exemption. One person said that would be too emotional for women who would normally be on their side in the anti abortion movement. Alabama supporters said the bill wouldn’t have passed if they included IVF

[Buckeyeblue]

5. The anti-choice movement has always been about getting votes, period.

It's the corporate line for Republicans. It allows them to say, those damn democrats want to kill babies. Ignorant religious folk eat this shit up. It becomes their top voting issue even if the economic agenda of the republicans keeps them in poverty. They will gladly be god's martyrs to make sure every baby is born.

It's the dumbest thing in the world, really. And yet here we are.

[LeftInTX]

8. It's controlled because many states don't require insurance to pay for it

And it's very expensive. I considered it in 1989 and it was $20,000 minimum. Insurance would not cover it.

Most Repukes are smart enough not say what that stupid state senator said...most would hem and haw and say, "We're bringing joy into the families" and completely avoid answering the question. But places where it is not covered by insurance, assures that only the very wealthy can afford IVF.

https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/insurance-coverage-for-infertility-laws.aspx