This NWI.com article concerning a request by various civil society organizations to SCOTUS to continue constraining the implementation of an Indiana anti-abortion law brought something to mind.
Two Hoosier organizations committed to preserving the right of women to choose abortion are urging the U.S. Supreme Court to let stand two lower court rulings that invalidated portions of Indiana’s 2016 abortion law, enacted by then-Gov. Mike Pence.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana (ACLU) and Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky (PPINK) this week told the nation’s high court it should reject the state’s petition, filed in October by Republican Attorney General Curtis Hill Jr., that asks the Supreme Court to allow House Enrolled Act 1337 to take effect.
The law mandates that any pregnant woman who is motivated to obtain an abortion after learning her child will be born, or potentially born, with Down syndrome, another genetic disease or physical deformities that aren’t immediately lethal, to instead carry the pregnancy to term and give birth.
The statute also prohibits women from procuring an abortion due to the gender, race, color, national origin or ancestry of the fetus.
Let’s be honest: anti-abortion laws are, by and large, religiously motivated. Let’s even be more explicit – the primary religion are those sects that make up much of American Christianity these days.
When the United States, a secular nation, creates laws, they are not supposed to favor any particular religion, either by conferring power on a sect or group thereof, or by being sensible of their preferences. This is why we talk about Government interests, which is shorthand for If individuals are permitted to make decisions in this area unhindered, will this have a severely negative impact on society. Most current non-controversial laws can be seen as falling under this rubric. Consider laws against most homicides, which converts homicide to murder. Clearly, a society in which someone can kill you without official sanction leads to a society of paranoia, lacking that cohesion necessary to a vibrant and productive society.
Such societies are easy prey for other societies.
This is the bar over which anti-abortion advocates need to jump, and so far their hurdling capabilities have proven inadequate to the task. The facts of the matter is that many women, when pregnant, welcome their new family members happily, and when a miscarriage occurs, they are devastated. Second, we’re vastly overpopulated as it is. Third, a fetus is not a human, not yet. If a woman assesses her situation and believes a child, especially a disabled child, is not appropriate to her situation, aborting a fetus is a reasonable response. Raising a family in abject poverty benefits no one but the religious fanatic who won the argument to have a law against abortion.
But while I was reading the NWI.com article concerning the anti-abortion law, it occurred to me to wonder if there are even further arguments to be made against it. Consider: a number of societies around the world, some into the modern era, have practiced infanticide, the killing of infants, for a variety of reasons.
It’s not unreasonable to suggest infanticide is a cousin to abortion, so let me suggest that it’s also reasonable to conceive of a religion which made it not only acceptable, but even required to occasionally utilize abortion. It’s a religious precept.
So what would such a religious practicioner do in Indiana if that law was freed of the constraints imposed by the courts? Clearly, our hypothetical practicioner’s religious freedoms have been trampled by the American Christians who led the charge against abortion. How should SCOTUS respond to such a lawsuit, especially in the face of a finding that there is no overriding governmental interest?
Now, there may be interesting exceptions, such as not permitting abortions based on gender. If this is puzzling, see this New York Times article on the social unrest caused by Indian infanticide of female infants. But, in general, I see the anti-abortion laws as foolish.
