submitted by Anna-Marie Visser, Director of Communication/Education, Right to Life of Michigan
On December 1, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. At stake are Mississippi’s ban on abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, and perhaps Roe v. Wade and the non-existing right to abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. The arguments on December 1 mostly revolved around how and when the Supreme Court can overturn prior decisions.
On the prolife side, Mississippi had an easy argument: abortion was never added to the Constitution. Justice Clarence Thomas repeatedly asked the lawyers representing the abortion facility and President Biden about what the right to abortion is, and neither could articulate exactly what it is.
The pro-abortion lawyers did articulate one very clear point: they argued Roe v. Wade must not be overturned because women rely on abortion. In their minds, there is a war between women and children, and only one can win.
Do you remember the 2012 election? One of the main attacks against Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign was that he was conducting a “war on women,” because he expressed prolife beliefs.
Is it true? Are women and their children in a permanent war against each other—a struggle to the death? If so, then isn’t all of society? Are we at war with anyone with a claim on our time? Teachers at war with students? Middle-aged children at war with elderly parents? Neighbor against neighbor; the rich against the poor: a war of all against all?
One particular exchange during oral arguments highlighted the absurdity of that argument. Justice Amy Coney Barrett was asking the pro-abortion lawyers about safe delivery laws and adoption, and if they meant women already had a legal means to avoid parenthood in any situation. Justice Barrett is proof positive that children are not fatal to career success. Justice Barrett is the mother of seven children, including one with Down syndrome and two adopted children.
It’s unclear what will happen. The consensus of court watchers is that arguments went very poorly for the abortion facility, but the Supreme Court is unpredictable. In 1992, the Supreme Court was going to overturn Roe v. Wade, until a justice bowed to pressure to change his mind, allowing another 33 million abortions to take place since then.
What is clear is that America faces two paths: one of peace and one of permanent war—with tens of millions of casualties to come.