Anti-abortion piety unduly punishes the poor
On December 1, the Supreme Court’s preliminary arguments regarding a Mississippi law restricting a woman’s right to an abortion that could end the Roe vs. Wade law again confirmed the politicization and personal biases of that court.
Five current judges have inserted their personal religious views into the objective interpretation of a law that nine judges, with the same constitution and precedents, found legal in 1972. Five judges believe that their religious views and their debt to presidents conservatives justify abandoning the previous one.
Their arguments are biased, political, prejudicial and flawed for the following reasons:
1. Establishes a de facto national religion.
The court majority overturns the First Amendment ban on establishing a national religion by forcing the religious beliefs of Catholics and Evangelical Christians on anyone who does not believe the same or believes abortion is justified in some cases.
2. Opposes âequal protection of the lawâ.
Anti-abortion arguments challenge the 14th Amendment’s “equal protection” clause. While abortions are banned in the United States, wealthy women can travel to Mexico or Canada (both have legalized abortions) for an abortion. The poor and disadvantaged must bear the burden, against their will, of having and raising children they cannot afford. The poor will have most of the children and our country will degenerate into a poor quality and poorly educated third world country.