Supreme Court ends Roe v. Wade?

A leaked draft of a SCOTUS opinion written by Justice Alito purports to be a majority opinion overturning Roe and Casey decisions. Could this be the day that the great stain of our time ends?

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473

LORD, in your mercy, hear our prayer!

 

I hope not. The last thing this country needs is more uncertainty surrounding fundamental rights, or more assertions of “states’ rights.”

 

it is certain that such a ruling will result in much ugliness.

however, our comfort must take a backseat to what is right.

 

I recognize no such imperative. Prior to viability I don’t see it as any of the State’s business, other than to regulate procedures so they are performed safely. Many of the states are run by the lunatic fringe. Some of them will probably try to make it a capital offense, or least make it carry a lengthy prison sentence, whether or not their laws contain exceptions for things like rape. Handing legislative power concerning a fundamental right back to gerrymandered good ole boy legislatures will only result in the unequal treatment of citizens and further damage the legitimacy of the whole system. Oh, and it won’t actually prevent abortions. The way the Right approaches this whole issue is backwards and disgusting.

 

Tell me all about it, I live in California!

 

I consider CA one of the good ones. I live in one of the Third World states in the US.

 

I assure you it is close to an apocalyptic third world wasteland here. There are homeless encampments the likes of which I will guess you might not be able to imagine. It’s heartbreaking

 

*Heavy sigh* I don’t doubt it. Homelessness appears to be growing everywhere. It’s a national problem, stemming from the high cost of housing, which is the direct result of decades of misguided policy. I don’t think it’s fair to blame California for a problem that was thrown upon it and all the other states by Washington, if that’s any consolation. What California is able to control on its own, it does a reasonably good job of managing. That’s why it’s consistently a net contributor to the federal budget rather than a net recipient like many of the Southern states.

 

Lord let it be so…

 

Roughly 63.5 million babies have been the victims of infanticide since Roe v Wade dreamed up a mother's constitutional right to murder her children in utero. What holocaust can boast such numbers? And no honest Christian would but applaud any move that would help to end such an atrocity

In the words of Mother Theresa, "Millions are dying deliberately by the will of the mother. And this is what is the greatest destroyer of peace today. Because if a mother can kill her own child – what is left but for me to kill you and you kill me?"

If abortion is not evil, indeed the great evil of our time, then nothing is evil. If killing a baby is not outside the bounds of basic human decensy, then no action is out of bounds.

So, if the report turms out to be true, I for one will cheer the court's decision to overturn Roe and start to undo the evil it has wrought these last 50 years.

 

I can only hope

 

We will see if the army of Moloch doesn't rise up now
They leaked the draft of the decision, to muster the demons and pressure our justices to rescind their defense of children

 

This is inflammatory hyperbole at its worst. People see stuff like this coming from Christians and conclude that Christians are ignorant fanatics who are disconnected from reality and therefore potentially dangerous. They're then turned off by the Gospel before they've even had a chance to hear it.

There has been no epidemic of "infanticide" in the United States, nor did Roe v. Wade "dream up" a right to "murder children". Infanticide is something that happens after birth, and is indeed murder. Abortion is something that happens before birth, and is not "murdering children". It is one thing to hold that elective late-stage abortions (an almost nonexistent category) are immoral, or even that most or even all abortions are immoral. I myself happen to believe abortion is immoral (but not murder) in most cases. It is quite another matter to act as prosecutor, judge, and jury and apply judicial and legal categories that were never intended to be applied to these situations.

Let's come back to reality here: the Scriptures nowhere - repeat, nowhere - teach that abortion is murder, nor do they define 'personhood' for us, nor do they mandate belief in body/soul dualism, such that we could have meaningful discussions about human embryos "having souls" from the "moment of conception". Such concepts are not to be found in the Scriptures. Inflammatory language like this can have consequences that can include inciting violence, and I for one hope you do not talk this way in public.

 

It looks like one loyal soldier is already in our midst

 

Invictus is right in that overturning Roe will have real, messy and unpleasant consequences.

Of course we’d all the SCOTUS to rule in a direction that we are partial towards, but ultimately the decision of a court is (or ought to be) an impartial ruling on the application of the law, and not a moral commandment.

Whether abortion will continue ought to be, as the court apparently believes, a matter for legislation to decide. And I believe that is correct. Rule by judiciary holds no appeal to me.

 

'Dislike' button. Spare us the ad hominem attacks. The issue has literally nothing to do with "Moloch" (seriously, who comes up with this silly nonsense?), nor does being fanatically on the other side have a thing to do with Christianity. It is political extremism, in pursuit of the power to punish, without accountability. There are a number of perfectly good words for that in the English language.

 

Overturning Roe will kick it back to the states, where it properly belongs in the US.

 

Congress could conceivably pass a law protecting abortion nationally as well, which democrats are now calling for. We’ll have to let the legislature figure it out, which is as it ought to be in a Democratic Republic.

I hope they don’t, but that’s a different matter.

 

I agree it should be determined by legislation, but by whom? The notion that this is or should be a "state" issue is a lie. State legislatures don't get to decide what the Constitution means. You can't have fifty different bodies saying "I think there is/isn't a right to privacy" in the Constitution, and applying it 50 different ways. If this ill-conceived ruling goes through, all the right-wingers who thought the Supreme Court was terrible for decades will tell the rest of us ad nauseum how wonderful the Court is and how we should have the utmost respect for their "sacred deliberation" (to quote the execrable Sen. Scott of FL), despite their complete lack of legitimacy to act as a de facto alternate legislature. And then without batting an eye that very same group of people will try to legislate criminal penalties for abortion at the federal level, overriding the will of the dissenting states, at the same time that they're challenging other privacy-based rights in the federal courts. The "states' rights" advocates in the South were more than happy to rely on federal power to interfere with the will of antislavery Northern states when it came to the Fugitive Slave Act or the Dred Scott decision. The whole antiabortion platform is disingenuous from beginning to end. It's not about "states' rights", it was never about actually ending/minimizing abortions, it doesn't have a thing to do with the Gospel or Christianity, and it certainly is not an expression of any pro-democracy sentiment. The majority of the national population is in favor of some level of abortion access, albeit with certain restrictions, and it is the national majority that should have the final say over what an American citizen's rights are, not the good ole boy corrupt state legislatures. It's time we had a nationwide referendum, to settle the matter of what the will of the people really is.

 

The original Roe v. Wade was extreme judicial overreach. Anyone who knows the history of that decision knows it was legislation by extreme judicial fiat, by the “progressive” Scotus bench.

Thus is why it’s unconstitutional. Not the specifics of what it mandated (which are atrocious enough, but beside the point here).

Roe v. Wade was and is unconstitutional. It should be struck, and if it’s partisans want it, they should pass it by legal means. Which they know they’ll fail at since most Americans are still decent human beings who will never actually support it if it came to that.

I’m shocked there are Christians here who aren’t opposed to going into the womb with a saw and hammer, bust a fetus brain into pieces, and sever its limbs, in order to pull it out piece by piece. Sick, vile, sinful. I guess that’s Episcopalian catechesis for you.