fbpx
Articles

What is abortion tourism?

/
April 5, 2022

We’re familiar with the terms “abortion” and “tourism,” but what do you get when you put these two words together? Abortion tourism is travel for the purpose of obtaining an abortion where it’s legal, and it’s not a new phenomenon. Yet, it has continued to evolve as the abortion landscape has changed in the United States. In 1970, prior to Roe v. Wade, New York repealed all laws criminalizing abortion, giving birth to abortion tourism in the United States. Just two years later, and a year before the Roe decision, over 100,000 women traveled to New York City for abortions, half of whom traveled more than 500 miles to come to a city where they could legally abort their children.

Abortion tourism began to slow when Roe was decided in the Supreme Court in 1973. Abortion was legalized in every state, and the need to travel out of state for abortions decreased. But abortion tourism still wasn’t obsolete. Some states had more restrictive abortion laws than others, so women who found themselves in positions where the abortion they wanted was no longer legal traveled out of state to obtain legal abortions.

Abortion tourism today

But a major shift to the abortion tourism industry began last year when the Texas Heartbeat Act, a law prohibiting abortions in Texas as early as six weeks, went into effect on Sept. 1, 2021. With this law came a rise in abortion tourism. From September to December 2021, nearly 1,400 Texans a month went to surrounding states (Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, and Oklahoma) to have abortions, according to research from the Texas Policy Evaluation Project.

In addition to the procedure itself, abortion tourism comes with expenses such as transportation to another state and lodging while there. So the need to travel for an abortion is merely an inconvenience for some, while it eliminates the possibility of having an abortion for others. For women who don’t have a working car, can’t get time off work, or don’t have anyone to watch their kids, traveling out of state for an abortion becomes much more challenging, and sometimes impossible. Companies such as Citigroup are already supporting abortion tourism by offering to cover travel costs for U.S.-based employees seeking an abortion, and Lyft and Uber both announced last year that they would cover any legal fees drivers face for serving as a ride for women to an abortion clinic.

With this rise of abortion tourism, comes an increase of tourism to out-of-state pregnancy resource centers. Women searching for abortion clinics in a neighboring state have stumbled across pregnancy resource centers and traveled hundreds of miles to get there. While this is an incredible opportunity for these PRCs, it also presents challenges for these centers which are designed around the concept of community and walking with women and families to provide them the support they need to choose life.

Abortion tourism in the future

Now, the Roe v. Wade decision is being challenged at the Supreme Court with a Mississippi abortion case called Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. If the Supreme Court rules to overturn Roe, the abortion tourism landscape could shift once again. While the market may increase if the court decision allowed abortion to became illegal in some states, traveling to obtain an abortion would also likely become a greater barrier to abortion for women.

If the Supreme Court overturns Roe, individual states will be free to make their own decisions on abortions. Many states have laws in place that would automatically either protect or prohibit abortion access. Particularly, if abortion becomes illegal in several Southern and Midwestern states, such laws would cause abortion clinics to close in wide swaths, increasing a woman’s average driving distance to the nearest abortion clinic from 35 miles to 280 miles. And the clinics they could access for legal abortions would likely be overwhelmed with patients.

Even if the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs allows states to make abortion illegal, abortions will continue in other states that welcome abortion tourists with open arms. States like New York are preparing for the new wave of abortion tourism that could come if Roe is overturned. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul has promised that New York will welcome women into their abortion clinics who can’t have abortions in their home states — much like they did in the early 1970s. 

As more states rightly establish pro-life laws, which would make abortions more challenging both for women seeking abortions and clinics providing abortions, churches need to prepare to help make abortions unthinkable and unnecessary – both through advocacy and care. Let’s pray that God would advance pro-life laws, soften hearts to choose life, and make our churches a refuge for women with unplanned pregnancies, vulnerable children, and those whose lives have been turned upside down by the abortion industry’s empty promises. 

Marissa Postell

Marissa Postell serves as the managing editor of LifewayResearch.com. As a writer, she hopes to tell compelling narratives to equip the church to live on mission for the kingdom of God. Read More by this Author

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24