Debunking “Fake Health Clinic” Claims

“Fake health clinics.”  That’s what the left has termed private mission-driven nonprofits that promote messages contrary to their agenda.  And typical of these types of disagreements, the left deems such organizations discriminatory and attempts to close them by government intervention simply because the left finds the message uncomfortable.

Such a misleading moniker is an attempt to paint a wide brush over nonprofits who offer an immense array of services – from free pregnancy tests and ultrasounds, to health clinics that perform well woman exams.  Although their services may differ, these providers do have one thing in common – a founding on Pro-Life philosophy, a deeply held belief that abortion kills an innocent child, harms the expecting mother, and that there are better other alternatives to assist women and families in a most vulnerable time.

A recent TribTalk op-ed by college journalism student Ofelia Alonso essentially calls for the government to shutter the doors of these nonprofit organizations who are providing services – free of charge – to Texas women.

Maybe we all need to return to what we should have learned in our basic American government courses.

Those who oppose the Pro-Life movement are not simply stating their personal opposition to pregnancy resource centers (a perfectly protected activity here in America), but now there is a call for the government – through the country’s highest court – to determine their viewpoint is correct.  Empowering the government to decide which viewpoint is acceptable to allow a group of people to come together – like a pregnancy resource center – is the very reason we have the First Amendment.

California passed a law mandating pregnancy resource centers promote abortion in their facilities.  Because the very reason these facilities exist is to provide alternatives to abortion, the California government is forcing the facilities to engage in speech against their sincerely held beliefs.  That law is now in front of the Supreme Court of the United States, styled NIFLA v. Becerra.

No one is forced to take advantage of the services offered by pregnancy resource centers.  If the Court sides with California, such a ruling would open the floodgates so that governments may even try to intervene in the day to day community-enriching work of faith-based ministries – like your church– and require those organizations to proclaim and advertise messages they fundamentally oppose.

An absurd result, indeed.

And one our Constitution expressly forbids.