After President Joe Biden’s tragic spectacle of administrative incompetence, pundits said Afghanistan was going to be the chief issue in the midterm elections. Then the Supreme Court showed up as justices refused to halt a Texas legal maneuver that could stop abortions in the state and later elsewhere despite Roe v. Wade permission. Progressive punishment awaits.
The usually fiery, furious portion of the pro-choice crowd is especially aghast just as many in the pro-life crowd are saying that, if Texas can do it, so can every other conservative state out there. Gone, at least for a period, is what looked like a more analytically instructed, more socially cohesive future on the nation-ripping issue.
A majority of Americans had been coming to think early abortions acceptable but later abortions unacceptable except in extreme cases, something of a compromise.
The whole, politically blistering issue about how much human life counts got going, of course, in 1973 when the Supreme Court removed abortion from state control, saying abortions would be legal up until the third trimester. At that point, as fetuses became viable and it would take something wrong with the fetus or something like a mother’s fearsome health issue to say, go ahead, abort. The ruling was based on a right to privacy that may be implied in the Constitution but isn’t really there.
Challenges to Roe v. Wade have been endless and futile until Texas cleverly said we are not going to have state officials out there breaking federal law. We are instead giving citizens the right to sue when an abortion is performed after the first heartbeat six weeks into pregnancy. A successful plaintiff will be recompensed all legal expenses plus $10,000.
The Supreme Court did not detect a constitutional violation, state courts can maybe intervene, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi plans to hop in with a new federal law, Democrats figure on winning midterm elections and the Supreme Court justices may take another look.
Definite dangers are that Democrats in Congress will do away with the filibuster to get Pelosi’s legislation through the Senate and pack the Supreme Court, a significant blow to our republic and constitutional authority.
During the infighting, we will continue to endure all the old, worn-out, pro-abortion arguments, such as the callously expressed right of a woman to control her body as if there is not a second body involved. Early on, you might see this evolving miracle as just a process, but oh so quickly we have a human creature, an unborn child getting ready for love and awareness.
Most abortions, it’s reported, result from unintended pregnancies — how about cheap birth control? — and we’re told here are unwanted children as if there were not vast numbers of people eager to adopt. But look, why should women with their special traits endure nine months serving humanity when men with their special traits get off so easily, as in the draft, the loss of all their rights often including existence? The draft’s gone now but may return.
Yes, abortion can be important for a woman’s health and laws can’t stop all abortions because many will seek risky abortions behind the scenes. But along with actual births, the number of abortions has been dropping. The Texas solution, the sort of thing that could be used to sue a neighbor for owning a gun, is not the right solution, but neither is our president. He not only wants the right to abortions but also wants taxpayers to finance them no matter what their own convictions are.
Interestingly, he once said that, as a Catholic, he would never accept abortion in his personal life but would not impose his religious morals on others.
Lots in the secular camp don’t like killing the innocent, either.