There has always been a logical oddity at the heart of anti-abortion politics. Once a fertilized egg is granted the status of a fully-formed human being, it becomes possible to “murder” the egg. And when there is a murder, it’s usually a pretty clear-cut exercise to identify the murderer, along with any co-conspirators. If you shoot and kill someone, you’re a murderer, but if you hire out the killing you’re equally guilty. And if you know a murder is about to take place and fail to report it, that comes with legal consequences, too.

Yet, anti-choicers have traditionally shied away from advocating criminal penalties for would-be mothers or acquiescing would-be fathers who choose abortion. Instead, they’ve focused only on holding the provider of the abortion accountable for murder. That doesn’t follow naturally from any fair or traditional assessment of responsibility, but it was considered the only politically palatable position to take.

This isn’t the only example of this phenomenon. It’s seems sensible, I guess, to make a rape and incest exception to any prohibition against abortion, but it’s really a political concession that doesn’t follow from granting full personhood to a fertilized egg or embryo. If you discovered that a 50-year old man was the product of rape or incest, would you then have an “exception” that allowed you to end their life with impunity? Why, then, would you apply a different standard to the unborn?

To be sure, some folks have opted to be logically consistent by opposing any exemptions for rape or incest and supporting murder charges for the mothers. When this has been tried by politicians, it often has not been well-received.

Down in Louisiana, however, they’re ready to really lean-in to logical consistency.

The Supreme Court’s potential decision to overturn Roe v. Wade would result the immediate gutting of reproductive rights across conservative America, but some states are already taking action. The Louisiana state House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday advanced a bill that would make abortion a homicide, opening the door for mothers who terminate a pregnancy in the state to be charged with murder…

…House Bill 813, also known as the “Abolition of Abortion in Louisiana Act of 2022,” would not only makes abortion a homicide, it would make it a homicide “from the moment of fertilization.” The fertilized cluster of cells, the bill states, would be afforded all the protections of a human being.

Now, from time-to-time, I’ve seen bills like this introduced but they generally die a quiet death even in very conservative legislatures. This one, however, was just passed out of the Louisiana House’s committee on appropriations by a 7-2 majority.

The bill could eventually land on Democratic Gov. John Bel Edwards’ desk. I doubt he would sign it despite his strongly anti-choice political stance, but a Republican governor might.

The problem here is it’s just not supportable to treat a fertilized egg the same as a person. The egg is in a symbiotic relationship with the mother, and the mother has rights, too. When you treat mother and egg as completely distinct, you immediately drift into positions that are both logically fallacious and politically toxic.

In the field of logic there’s a distinction between valid and sound arguments. A valid argument is one in which the conclusion must be true assuming that all the premises are true. A sound argument is one where all the premises are, in fact, true.

The Louisiana appropriations committee is using a valid argument.

Premise One: Killing a person is murder
Premise Two: A fertilized egg is a person
Conclusion: Killing a fertilized egg is murder

But if the second premise is not true, then this is not a sound argument. In practical terms, even a premise that is contentious rather than obviously false can present immense difficulties. Consider this argument:

Premise One: All planets must be destroyed
Premise Two: Pluto is a planet
Conclusion: Pluto must be destroyed

Well, Pluto used to be classified as a planet, but that’s now a matter of debate. It might fairly be said that there isn’t any absolute answer to the question, and that it’s basically settled by whoever has the power to settle it. I think the safest course is to grant there are enough distinctions between a human being and a fertilized egg to not treat them exactly the same. That’s why this bill is not using a sound argument.

But people intuitively sense this even without the benefit of sound logic. That’s why it’s an extreme position that is politically toxic. In the past, that’s been enough to deter conservative legislatures.

I can’t say where we’re headed as a country or whether in some places women who get abortions will soon be charged with murder and women who lose pregnancies will be investigated for murder. I can say, however, that this will not be popular. For now, at least, even the existence of this Louisiana bill is a political problem for the Republican Party that can be hung around their necks during this election cycle.