At what point does the potential for life overpower the human right to bodily autonomy?

September 1, a Texas law known as the Texas Heartbeat Act went into effect, essentially banning abortions beyond six weeks of gestational age after the detection of a fetal heartbeat, which can occur as early as three weeks after conception.

However, most abortions occur past the six-week gestational age, because most pregnant people don’t know they’re pregnant until then. The gestational age begins at the first day of the previous menstrual cycle, not at conception. That means the time you’re allowed bodily autonomy starts slipping away before you’ve even conceived.

This law is an infringement on human rights. Although the law is confined to Texas, regulations like this set a dangerous precedent for anti-abortion legislators across the country.

During the controversial Roe v. Wade case in January 1973, the Supreme Court ruled that states’ laws prosecuting those who receive abortions before three months of pregnancy are unconstitutional. Since then, anti-abortion legislators have pushed legislation to subvert this ruling.

The Heartbeat Act is in direct violation of the Roe v. Wade ruling. Though it had been interrupted by the Supreme Court, the bill has not been blocked. The Supreme Court heard arguments on the law and discussed its constitutional legality November 1 and again with a similar law passed in Mississippi December 1.

Over the course of the hearings, all six conservative justices expressed willingness, if not desire, to overturn Roe v. Wade. A decision in these cases is expected by summer.

If the bill is not blocked, other states with anti-abortion legislators will have the means and capability to introduce their own bills banning abortions, a catastrophic blow to reproductive healthcare. In addition to Mississippi, Florida has put a similar bill into motion.

Such laws are not just an attack on abortion. They are a direct attack against the right to bodily autonomy, and that affects everyone in the country, not just people who can get pregnant.

Consider this: if you are not an organ donor, you are legally protected against the removal of your organs after your death. Even if your organs are the only means of survival for someone else, if they will die without an organ transplant that only you are capable of providing in time, nobody has a right to the use of your body without your explicit consent.

And yet so many turn a blind eye to that right when it comes to abortion.

Furthermore, abortion rates are actually reduced in countries where abortion is legal, due largely to coinciding comprehensive sexual education and easy access to birth control. On the other hand, countries with strict abortion regulations see high abortion rates because of the lack of focus on pregnancy preventative measures.

Implementing systems to help reduce unwanted pregnancies will decrease abortion rates in the United States, but anti-abortion lawmakers won’t implement them, because it’s never been about abortion. It’s about control.

Abortions will always be accessible for certain groups—especially for conservative politicians and the wealthy looking to avoid scandals when their daughters or mistresses become pregnant. But abortion is a systemic issue, and the controversy regarding it is rooted in racism, sexism, and class division. These ideals largely support the lifestyles and political power held by anti-abortion politicians, and they’re not enthusiastic about abolishing them. Doing so would diminish their power.

Understandably, abortion is a volatile topic, but nearly everyone, regardless of their position on it, can agree that action needs to be taken to reduce abortion rates. But Texas’s Heartbeat Act is not the way.

The country needs better sexual education and access to birth control. Beyond that, we need sensible regulations on abortions whenever they’re needed. It’s a human right.