The Weekly Spotlight: The Anti-Abortion Rebrand

Last week, we looked at the international networks linking anti-abortion campaigners, far-right politicians and conservative organisations.

This week, we’re looking at something different: the rebrand.

Rather than talking only about abortion, anti-abortion campaigners are increasingly framing their arguments around “religious freedom”, environmental protection and opposition to so-called “woke” institutions. It’s a strategy designed to broaden their appeal, build new alliances and bring reproductive rights into the wider culture war.

Here are three examples from this week.

Rebrand #1: Religious Freedom

The Trump administration has announced a major restructuring of the US Department of Health and Human Services, placing “religious liberty” and conscience protections at the heart of federal health policy.

Supporters say the changes strengthen religious freedom. But their aim is to make it easier for healthcare providers to refuse abortion care, contraception, fertility treatment and care for LGBTQ+ patients on religious grounds.

It’s a familiar strategy. Rather than arguing directly for restrictions on abortion, anti-abortion campaigners increasingly frame the debate around protecting religious rights.

Rebrand #2: Environmental Protection

If “religious freedom” doesn’t persuade everyone, perhaps environmental protection will.

This week, anti-abortion campaigners backed calls for federal agencies to investigate whether mifepristone, one of the medicines used for medication abortion, could contaminate drinking water.

Experts say there is no evidence that mifepristone poses a risk to water supplies or aquatic ecosystems. But the claim creates another avenue through which abortion can be challenged.

It’s a reminder that anti-abortion campaigners are increasingly searching for new legal and political routes to restrict access.

Rebrand #3: Fighting “Wokeness”

This week, UK anti-abortion campaigners also shared graphics accusing the World Health Organization (WHO) of becoming “woke” and calling for it to be replaced.

Among their complaints were the WHO’s support for comprehensive sex education, recognition of gender identity, work on climate and health and its commitment to universal access to healthcare.

What the graphic doesn’t mention is the WHO’s position on abortion. The organisation describes abortion as a common healthcare intervention and says access to safe, quality abortion care is essential to protecting health and human rights. It also states the fact that restricting abortion does not reduce the number of abortions, it simply makes them less safe.

For anti-abortion campaigners, evidence-based public health guidance has become part of the wider culture war.