Posted on 07/10/2018 2:23:52 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
President Trump’s nomination of D.C. circuit court Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill the seat on the United States Supreme Court vacated by Justice Anthony Kennedy may furnish the fifth vote needed to overrule Roe v. Wade, the 1973 landmark ruling that legalized abortion in every jurisdiction of the United States. Judge Kavanaugh is a textualist who is suspicious of the kind of judicial innovation that led to the court’s ruling in Roe. That decision removed a matter of grave moral concern—about which there was and remains no public moral consensus—from the democratic process.
Reversing Roe will not make abortion illegal in every jurisdiction. It would simply affirm the right of the people, through their legislators, to make the law, while upholding the right of the judiciary to say what the law is. Thus more than 40 years after the court ushered in an era of abortion virtually on demand, voters may once again have the right to debate the issue and determine what public policy should govern. This should be a welcome development for the millions of people who in dozens of public opinion polls have registered their objection to the expansive permissibility of the Roe settlement. It should also be welcomed by all those who believe that democracies should settle such matters by argument and voting rather than judicial fiat. The prospect of reversing Roe increases the stakes in this nomination battle. That potential reversal, however, effectively returning abortion politics to the states, offers the way to prevent the issue from continuing to dominate future Supreme Court nominations.
Yet the possibility of a fundamental change in the abortion debate also affords the church an opportunity to reimagine its public witness on this and other pro-life issues. The church should not abdicate its responsibility to bear witness to a consistent ethic of life from conception to natural death. But the possibility that Roe might be overturned impels us to consider how we might more effectively use our voice in the public debate that will follow. We should begin by avoiding the intramural argument that has consumed too many Catholics—namely, whether other pro-life issues are as important as or more important than abortion. This argument is itself an artifact of Roe’s removal of abortion from normal political debate, which has led to claims that opposing Roe must override all other pro-life concerns. The truth is that there are grave and important issues for pro-life people beyond abortion, including euthanasia, the death penalty and sane immigration policy. These issues, however, must not be traded off against the defense of the lives of unborn children.
If Roe is overturned, continued Catholic advocacy for a comprehensive medical and social safety net for expectant mothers will be crucial in order to save lives and render abortion an even less appealing choice to the public conscience. At this juncture, anyone who recognizes the humanity of the unborn should support the nomination of a justice who would help return this issue to the legislative arena. Overturning Roe would save lives and undo a moral and constitutional travesty.
Yes, reasonable article, although still politically correct.
“Anyone who recognizes the humanity of the unborn should support the nomination of a justice who would help return this issue to the legislative arena.” True.
Let’s cut to the chase: every student and teacher at a Jesuit university must actively support Kavanaugh.
The only way abortion will be stopped in the USA is with the support of the Democratic Party.
It would need to see itself facing extinction.
The best argument that can be made that will be effective at changing minds is that abortion has cost Social Security trillions of dollars in lost revenue.
~$200,000 lost FICA/SE tax per dead baby on average
~50,000,000 dead babies
~$10 trillion in lost FICA/SE taxation revenue
But with regards to this editorial, they don't go feet-first into hellfire. And I bet they'll be slapped for it in the combox.
True, the left will grab anything they think can divide America, including this.
We have more important things to worry about right now.
Deal with that later.
So they are arguing for an expanded Welfare State, to bribe low income women from having abortion?
No. The welfare system needs to be dismantled.
Because both the Democratic and Republican Parties want it.
On abortion, everyone wants the ultimate "fix" to the human consequences of lawless, loveless copulation.
On illegal immigration, the Republicans want the cheap labor and the Democrats want the cheap votes.
Both parties need to be destroyed and remade from the ground up.
Give him time (and a couple million enthusiastic active supporters), and Trump may be able to accomplish quite a bit on the political front. On the spiritual front, God help us.
That's because nobody wants to attempt a thorough restoration of a Marriage and Family Culture. This is the only milieu in which babies can be safe, children can grow up sound, women can be respected and men can be the men God intended.
Restoration of marriage culture is the only viable long term solution, and the welfare state undermines that.
The thing is the vast majority of the children murdered in the womb were by liberal idiots who no doubt would have raised another burden on society and another lemming democrat voter. As much as I dislike it if it were not for Roe V Wade the US would have twice as many demwit voters.
My older son will tell you that abortion (among other social crimes against humanity) is an inevitable result of philosophical (classical) liberalism, in both its modern permutations: progressive liberalism (Democrats), and the “conservative” flavor of liberalism (Republicans).
He will tell you that liberalism (including both permutations) is condemned by the Church.
And thus, we social conservatives don’t really fit well with what are really libertarians (the “right” side of the right-left divide of philosophical, or classical liberalism). We will always be beggers at the table of a party driven by markets, commerce, and atomistic autonomy.
The Jesuits often have a bit of an inkling of this, but their solution is to ally themselves with the progressive, Democrat side of philosophical liberalism. But the Jesuits do pay well.
I wouldn’t get my hopes on Roe vs Wade getting overturned on a 5-4 decision. The Supreme Court would be reluctant to revisit a issue unless it had a “supermajority’ or at least one that had the chance of getting at least a equal amount of votes.
Roe vs Wade was decided by a 7-2 vote.
I don’t see the court deciding to overturn its decision unless it gets another two Trump conservatives to pound it into history so future 5-4 votes don’t overturn its verdict.
It’s sad but that’s my realistic prediction.
I’m pro-life, that said I think Roe vs Wade is not going to come up in the USSC in the next 10 years...The taking of a life is murder and the women needs to know the facts...if she doesn’t want the child, put it up for adoption. People are looking for babies to adopt and that’s why overseas adoption is popular...
Your son sounds like somebody I’d like to know.
Oh. In certain cases I meant to say "a 'prompt' peaceful death...
I think in the end we will not win by obvious power, position, political prowess, force. We will win when we are exhausted and battered and down on the ground, with nothing to hope in except God --- and then God drops the victory in our laps.
Most of his published work is not about politics, per se. A couple of years out of college, most of his published stuff is still from his editorial work on his college newspaper.
As convolutedly passed, that’s for sure.
Emancipate the unborn, to be born into their God given right of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness!
“Personhood” begins at implantation...with all of the unaliendable Creator-bestowed rights befitting every child of God!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.