top of page
  • Triangle DSA

In New Ad, Mark Robinson Takes Page Out of Anti-Abortion Playbook


Mark Robinson recently released a new ad appearing to take a more moderate stance on abortion [x]. His stance on abortion hasn’t changed; he’s only fine-tuned his talking points to prepare for the upcoming election.


Robinson has been vocal about his extreme anti-abortion beliefs for years. He previously said, “Abortion in this country is not about protecting the lives of mothers. It’s about killing the child because you weren’t responsible enough to keep your skirt down,” and, “If I had all the power right now, let’s say I was the governor and I had a willing legislature, we could pass a bill saying you can’t have an abortion in North Carolina for any reason” [x]. Yet, in the ad he pivots to supporting “commonsense” legislation with “exceptions.”


This ad is a perfect encapsulation of the GOP’s rhetorical strategy since Dobbs v. Jackson. This article is going to detail how and why this is just the latest attempt by the anti-abortion movement to save face now that the harsh reality of abortion bans has really come to light post-Dobbs. The anti-abortion movement thrives off of abortion stigmatization, medical misinformation, and emotionally charged rhetoric. This 30-second ad is full of it.


Fueling Abortion Stigma


In the ad, Robinson says, “30 years ago, my wife and I made a very difficult decision – we had an abortion. It was like this solid pain between us that we never spoke of”. Then his wife, Yolanda, states, “It’s something that stays with you forever”. Robinson continues, “That’s why I stand by our current law. It provides commonsense exceptions for the life of the mother, incest, and rape … Which gives help to mothers and stops cruel late-term abortions. When I’m governor, mothers in need will be supported”


While neither Robinson went into detail about Yolanda’s abortion during the short ad, it’s important to note a few things. Research shows that people experience a mix of positive and negative emotions in the days after having an abortion, with relief predominating. The intensity of all emotions diminishes over time, mostly over the first year. The vast majority, 95%, of people who get abortions said that it was the right decision for them. People who are denied abortions have worse physical, mental, and economic outcomes than those who seek and receive abortions [x].


Robinson starts by contributing to the idea that abortion itself is a difficult decision. Abortion is sometimes difficult and sometimes not - there are many nuances around having an abortion. Every decision to have an abortion is unique, individual, and deserving of respect. Just like the Robinsons were able to decide to have an abortion 30 years ago, all people should be trusted to make the reproductive healthcare decisions that are best for them, including abortion, on their timeline and with the resources they need.


The beginning of the ad further implies that abortion is something regretful and shameful and therefore the wrong decision to make. Abortion stigma is perpetuated by abortion restrictions and inevitably leads to criminalization even when there are no authorizing statutes [x][x]. Abortion stigma is everywhere, whether it’s the protesters at the clinic harassing you on your way in for your appointment, your parents threatening to kick you out, a teacher you confide in who tells you that’s not something you should talk about, a toxic romantic partner pressuring you against what you want for your pregnancy, the societal pressure to become a mother while ostracizing child-free people, or the laws creating barriers to abortion care [x].


The anti-abortion movement’s post-Dobbs rhetorical pivot


More and more horror stories have emerged since the overturn of Roe v. Wade of people being forced to carry doomed pregnancies, give birth in a car after being turned away from the emergency room, or forced to travel out of state for abortion care - and the anti-abortion movement knows this [x].


Post-Dobbs, Republicans have had to deal with how unpopular and harmful their abortion bans are. Rather than admitting that pregnancy is too complex to legislate and addressing how these bans are detrimental to pregnant people, the anti-abortion movement is focused on fine-tuning their talking points by focusing on exceptions in abortion bans that do not work, moving away from calling abortion bans “bans” and instead calling abortion bans "commonsense consensus” or “compromise”, and performative amendments that do nothing but attempt to repair their image.


By Design, Exceptions Do Not Work


On paper, abortion bans may include exceptions. In reality, these exceptions are nothing more than PR points for the anti-abortion politicians who pass these nightmare bans. These supposed “exceptions” are intentionally vague and so narrowly defined that it’s impractical to actually use them - and that’s the point. When Republicans fall back on how the current ban has exceptions for the life of the mother, incest, and rape, this is a rhetorical strategy to defer the actual problem, which is the wide-ranging harm caused by banning abortion. It's a pivot that appeals to less stigmatized reasons for getting an abortion.


In North Carolina, abortion is banned after 12 weeks with a few vague exceptions up to 20 weeks. For example, the state’s exception for the life of the mother defines a medical emergency as the following (emphasis added):


“Medical emergency. – A condition which, in reasonable medical judgment, so complicates the medical condition of the pregnant woman as to necessitate the immediate abortion of her pregnancy to avert her death or for which a delay will create serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function, not including any psychological or emotional conditions. For purposes of this definition, no condition shall be deemed a medical emergency if based on a claim or diagnosis that the woman will engage in conduct which would result in her death or in substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function”.

The language used does not define what exactly constitutes a “major bodily function” or what constitutes a “substantial and irreversible physical impairment” to a major bodily function. This intentionally vague language puts physicians in a bind when pregnant patients need an abortion for health reasons. It shifts the decision away from the medical providers and patients and over to the facility’s lawyers. The second part of this definition shows how Republicans anticipate that abortion bans will make people suicidal, so they specifically outline that abortions are not allowed to preserve psychological or emotional well-being of the mother.


How much of an “exception” is it if people have to wait for their vital signs to crash before they’re legally allowed treatment? How much permanent harm to one’s organs is an acceptable trade-off? Exactly how close to death does one have to get to receive treatment?


On Substack, feminist writer Jessica Valenti points out, “This is all by design; Republicans deliberately write in exceptions that will be near-impossible to use. So why in the world aren’t Democrats shouting as much from the rooftops? Instead, they’re giving Republicans a tremendous gift: The ability to point to exceptions that no one can actually use as proof that they’re ‘softening’ on abortion … If the exceptions meant to save people’s lives aren’t usable, what makes anyone think those for rape and incest would be?” [x]


Reporting requirements and time limits place barriers in the way of survivors of sexual assault seeking abortion care in states with abortion bans [x]. When you add in a culture that doesn’t believe victims about sexual violence, the purpose and ineffectiveness of rape and incest exceptions become more evident [x]. When the state forces victims to provide proof of their assault to receive healthcare, the state inevitably creates policy that protects sexual abusers. This is the side that wants you to think that they’re the moderate ones.


Compromise? Who? Common Sense? Where?


In the ad, Robinson says, “30 years ago, my wife and I made a very difficult decision – we had an abortion. It was like this solid pain between us that we never spoke of”. Then his wife, Yolanda, states “it’s something that stays with you forever”. Robinson continues, “That’s why I stand by our current law. It provides commonsense exceptions for the life of the mother, incest, and rape which gives help to mothers and stops cruel late-term abortions. When I’m governor, mothers in need will be supported.”


When Robinson calls North Carolina’s 12-week abortion ban “common sense” and intentionally avoids calling it a ban, he's using tactics that appeared last year when the state senate debated SB 20. As Valenti points out, “Bill sponsor Sen. Joyce Krawiec says, ‘this is a pro-life plan, not an abortion ban.’ (Let that sink for a moment: Republicans are so afraid of abortion rights’ popularity, they’re not even willing to call their bans ‘bans’ anymore)” [x][x]. Mandating humiliating, burdensome, and time sensitive barriers to healthcare is far from "common sense”. Going directly against medical providers warnings about the harms caused when abortion is banned is not “common sense”.


Post-Dobbs, polling shows that the vast majority of Americans want abortion to be legal. Over 80 percent of Americans don’t want pregnancy to be legislated, 78 percent believe the decision to have an abortion should be left between the patient and doctor, and 70 percent voters support access to abortion medication [x]. Republicans began to really embrace the stance that they believe in exceptions for abortions to make it seem like they are willing to compromise to appeal to moderate voters in the aftermath of the overturn of Roe v. Wade. In reality, they aren’t compromising on “common sense” legislation - they’re compromising the health and well-being of the very people they’re claiming to protect.


Medical Misinformation: Late-Term Abortion Edition


In true Republican fashion, Robinson mentions "late-term abortions" at the end of the ad. The anti-abortion movement thrives off of emotionally-inflammatory rhetoric and abortion stigma, which are two characteristics of the phrase “late-term abortion”. This was Robinson’s subtle way of appealing to moderate voters with extremist policy that’s been rhetorically watered down to make it more palatable in order to gain votes come November.


In the ad, Robinson says, “30 years ago, my wife and I made a very difficult decision – we had an abortion. It was like this solid pain between us that we never spoke of”. Then his wife, Yolanda Robinson, states, “It’s something that stays with you forever”. Robinson continues, “That’s why I stand by our current law. It provides commonsense exceptions for the life of the mother, incest, and rape which gives help to mothers and stops cruel late-term abortions. When I’m governor, mothers in need will be supported.”


The phrase “late-term abortion” is a political buzzword that anti-abortion proponents have latched onto as a talking point to demonize abortions later in pregnancy when the vast majority, 98.7%, of abortions are before 21 weeks [x][x]. The anti-abortion movement has a reputation for using stigmatizing, emotionally-charged rhetoric to justify banning abortion and to ostracize the people who get and provide abortions [x]. Anti-abortion opponents made up the phrase “late-term abortion” and embrace it because they define it however they want as a part of their language war [x][x].


Graphic showing that 98.7% of abortions take place before 21 weeks

According to experts like the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG), the term “late-term abortion” has no medical significance and is not used in a clinical setting or to describe the delivery of abortion care later in pregnancy [x]. When health care providers use language like “full term” and “late term” in the context of pregnancy, they’re talking about how far along the pregnancy is, with “full term” meaning between 39 and 40 weeks and “late term” meaning more than 41 weeks. It’s important to note that they do not use these terms to categorize types of abortion care. 


The reasons people seek abortions later in pregnancy include medical concerns such as fetal anomalies or maternal life endangerment, as well as barriers to care that cause delays in obtaining an abortion [x]. What’s cruel is delaying and denying people the healthcare they need.


Despite all this, leaders in the anti-abortion movement can’t even agree on exactly when a "late-term abortion" supposedly happens. It seems to be determined by whatever Republican or anti-abortion organization writing the bill wants it to be.


For example, in 2021, congressional Republicans sponsored the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (model legislation created by the National Right to Life Committee), a bill that determined abortions after 20 weeks to be “late-term”. The next year, they sponsored the “Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act,” that determined “late-term” to be after 15 weeks. The anti-abortion Charlotte Lozier Institute claims the phrase is appropriate for abortions performed after only 13 weeks of pregnancy.


Taking A Page Out of the Playbook


Since abortion bans are highly unpopular and harmful, Mark Robinson is using the rhetorical tactics directly from the post-Dobbs playbook. It’s easier to fine-tune an extreme candidate’s political messaging in the months before the election than it is to address the wide-ranging devastation caused by their own policies that harm the people they claim to protect.


For years, Mark Robinson has been vocal about his anti-abortion stance by perpetuating abortion stigma and medical misinformation. This pre-election rhetorical shift is no different. Don’t let him fool you. As he said, if it were up to him, we would have a total abortion ban with no exceptions. Remember this in November when you go to the voting booth, and remember to donate to the local abortion fund [x].


This article was first published by Triangle DSA.

Comments


bottom of page