The University Town Where I Reside Just Declared Itself a ‘Sanctuary City for the Unborn’

I never imagined I would be discussing this in 2021, but last week, I found myself voting against a local measure that would designate the university town I call home as a “Sanctuary City for the Unborn.” If passed, this ordinance would classify abortion at any stage of pregnancy as murder. To date, 22 cities in Texas and two in Nebraska have pursued similar designations. The largest city to adopt this designation previously was Big Spring, Texas, which has a population of just over 28,000.

Lubbock, known for Texas Tech University and its rich musical history, is almost ten times the size of Big Spring, boasting a population of 258,862. This means we’re now the largest city in the United States to enact a “Sanctuary City for the Unborn” law. The central question arising from this movement is whether those who supported the ordinance are genuinely pro-life or merely pro-birth.

As you drive around Lubbock, you’ll notice numerous signs urging residents to “Vote for Life.” These messages are displayed prominently at homes, on street corners, in businesses, and at local churches. With a significant proportion of the population being churchgoers, it feels like there’s a place of worship on every corner, all advocating for the ordinance that would strip women of their right to make choices about their own bodies.

What Does It Mean to Be Pro-Life?

What does it truly mean to vote yes and claim to be “pro-life”? Does it involve ensuring that a woman who unexpectedly becomes pregnant receives adequate medical care? What happens when the health of the mother is at stake? Is it justified to prioritize the life of the fetus over the mother’s well-being? What about the psychological impact on survivors of sexual assault, who may face lifelong trauma?

Once the child is born, what does a yes vote signify? How will we address the already strained social services that are in desperate need of foster homes, especially after the onset of COVID-19? What support will be available for families unable to provide for their children without government assistance? In Lubbock County, where child abuse rates are alarmingly high, how are we ensuring the safety and well-being of children born into potentially harmful situations?

These questions weigh heavily on my mind as I reflect on the “Vote for Life” signs scattered throughout our town. A friend who supports the ordinance shared her own concerns, suggesting that being truly pro-life means taking action beyond just voting—like fostering, donating, or volunteering. While I fundamentally disagree with her stance, I appreciate her call for those who voted yes to demonstrate their commitment to being genuinely pro-life rather than merely pro-birth, often driven by religious expectations.

Protecting Life Beyond Birth

Tonight, I received a mailer from the “Vote for Life” movement that states, “This is not political—we simply want to protect life. It’s about standing up for defenseless babies and their mothers.” Yet, as a woman and a mother, I believe that protecting life encompasses far more than just the act of giving birth. It involves ensuring access to quality healthcare for both mothers and babies leading up to and following birth. It includes providing the necessary resources to support children throughout their upbringing, ensuring they have adequate nourishment, clothing, housing, and education.

It’s about addressing the needs of parents and newborns in a country that lacks mandated paid maternity or paternity leave. We must prioritize the mental health of mothers and ensure that survivors of sexual assault have autonomy over their own bodies.

I can’t help but recall a scene from “The Handmaid’s Tale,” where a character pleads with her husband to sign a prescription for birth control, highlighting how society often makes decisions for women instead of allowing them to make their own choices. Healthcare providers shouldn’t have to fear legal repercussions for offering essential care that could save a woman’s life.

Rather than investing time and resources into promoting pro-birth initiatives, we should focus on educating, supporting, and helping women who may not be ready for a child. If they choose to bring a child into the world, we need to prioritize initiatives that support both the mother and child throughout their lives.

No one else should dictate what’s best for me, my life, and my body. Women deserve choices that empower them to decide what is right for themselves. Healthcare professionals should have the freedom to make decisions in the best interest of their patients without the fear of legal challenges. Each woman’s situation is unique; it is both unrealistic and dangerous to assume that one approach fits all.

Advocating for True Support

As a mother who welcomed a healthy baby into a loving marriage, I recognize my privilege and feel compelled to advocate for what is right. Many women lack the support and resources that I have. They may find themselves in unhealthy situations or face pregnancies resulting from assault.

By supporting the right to choose, I believe I am advocating for life. This includes educating our youth about sex and contraception, providing affordable medical care and birth control options for women, and allowing women to make informed decisions regarding their bodies. I urge everyone who believes that voting for a Sanctuary City ordinance equates to supporting life to deeply consider the implications. If it merely involves checking a box on a ballot, are you truly pro-life or just pro-birth? What does it mean to support life for both the baby and the mother?

I voted against the ordinance, which ultimately passed by a significant margin. However, I am uncertain if its supporters fully grasp the implications. Unless we establish the necessary resources and structures to support mothers and children—beyond just childbirth—then a yes vote cannot genuinely be seen as supporting life. If a mother experiences mental distress due to being compelled to carry a pregnancy, that does not equate to supporting life. Making decisions for others without understanding their individual circumstances is not a path toward true support.

Instead of focusing on stricter abortion laws, we need to address the core issues surrounding what it means to advocate for life.