Radical Left tries to sneak abortion support into pro-pregnancy bill

Photo by John Looy from Unsplash

An important bill protecting pregnant women was proposed last year.

And, as always, the radical Left interfered.

Pro-choice legislators attempted to alter the bill to benefit women who want abortions, too.

In a stunning twist, a pro-life bill meant to support pregnant women in the workplace has taken an unexpected turn, raising concerns among many Americans.

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), passed in December 2022, aimed to provide reasonable accommodations for pregnant women, ensuring their safety and enabling them to work comfortably.

However, a federal agency’s interpretation has added an alarming dimension to the legislation, compelling employers to provide accommodations for abortion.

The PWFA garnered bipartisan support in Congress and from various advocacy groups due to its potential to remove barriers, allowing women to choose life over abortion.

By providing necessary accommodations, especially for lower-income women, the legislation promised financial stability, empowering them to embrace the journey of motherhood.

While the bill’s initial intent was clear, the ambiguity in its language became apparent during its implementation.

The PWFA required employers to provide “reasonable accommodations” related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.

Yet, the terms “reasonable accommodation” and “related medical condition” lacked specific definitions, leading to confusion.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was granted the authority to interpret and implement the bill’s provisions.

However, their interpretation departed significantly from the original intent of Congress.

The EEOC broadened the definition of “reasonable accommodation” to include additional paid leave, and shockingly, included abortion as a “related medical condition.”

This unexpected inclusion compelled employers to provide medical leave for women seeking abortions, directly contradicting the pro-life ethos of the PWFA.

Both the primary Democratic sponsor, Sen. Casey (PA), and the primary Republican sponsor, Sen. Cassidy (LA), vehemently opposed the EEOC’s actions.

They emphasized that the bill was never intended to support abortion-related accommodations.

Sen. Cassidy criticized the EEOC for attempting to inject a political abortion agenda, asserting that the decision was illegal and deeply concerning.

In response, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) took a stand, emphasizing the sanctity of every human life as created in the image of God.

They submitted public comments, challenging the EEOC’s attempt to insert abortion into a legislation designed to affirm life.

The ERLC highlighted the longstanding pro-life stance of Southern Baptists, underscoring the value and dignity of every human being according to Scripture.

The ERLC’s response reflects their commitment to advocating for the sanctity of life.

They have called upon fellow Southern Baptists to join them in prayer, urging the sponsors of the PWFA to exhibit leadership and resist the deceptive approach of the EEOC.

By safeguarding the responsibility of Congress to legislate fairly and honestly, both preborn children and employers’ consciences can be protected.

This unexpected turn in the implementation of the PWFA serves as a rallying cry for pro-life Americans.

Their resolve to protect the sanctity of life remains unshaken, urging lawmakers to uphold the original intent of the PWFA and ensure that accommodations are truly life-affirming, reflecting the values of faith, compassion, and respect for every unborn child.

Pro-Life Press will keep you up-to-date on any developments to this ongoing story.