Ending 49-year-old landmark Supreme Court ruling Roe v. Wade, guaranteeing a woman’s right to abortion in the United States, the ruling reverberated around the planet, with most foreign leaders shocked by the decision. Right to Life Coalition President Marjorie Dannenfelser said the ruling was a victory for human rights around the globe. Dannenfelser thinks the right to life of the unborn child transcends women’s rights because to Dannefelser and other religious fanatics the right to life must be guaranteed at all costs. Federal abortion rights were guaranteed until yesterday, when Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett decided, because on the deeply held religious convictions, to reverse 49-years of settled law, giving women, together with their doctors, the right to abortion.
Abortions in 2021 accounted to about 629,898, 11.4 out of 1,000 or 1.14%, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called the Supreme Court decision “horrific,” saying a “catastrophic blow to the lives of millions of women, girls and pregnant people,” grossly exaggerating the effect on a relatively small fraction of American women that actually get abortions. French President Emmanuel Macron said that abortion is “a fundamental right of all women,” dumfounded by the High Court’s decision. Belgium Prime Minister Alexander De Cross said he was “very concerned” about the implications of the decision, meaning that religious pro-life groups could have such influence on the Supreme Court. Vatican’s Academy for Life asked the world to digest the Supreme Court decision, believing the ruling would have profound impact.
Vatican officials aren’t afraid to express opposition to abortion, believing in the sanctity of human life no matter what the stage. “The fact that a large country with a long democrat tradition has changed its position on this issue also challenges the whole world,” said the Vatican. Vatican officials hope yesterday’s ruling will help the world think twice about abortion, now something against human rights. Dannenfelser makes the point in her Right to Life Foundation that human rights supersede women’s rights, something emphasized by the pro-choice crowd. Calling the Supreme Court ruling a “catastrophic blow to the lives of millions of women, girls and pregnant people,” the North American Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology, World Assn. of Trainees in Obstetrics & Gynecology and British Medical Assn. all condemn the latest Supreme Court ruling.
United Nations weighed in on the Supreme Court ending Roe v. Wade. “Restricting access to abortion does not prevent people from seeking abortion, it simply makes it more deadly,” said the U.N., harking back to the days when women had to go to charlatans or the back alley to get abortions. “Decisions reversing progress gained have a wider impact on rights and choices of women and adolescents everywhere,” said the U.N., opposed to restricting access to abortion. World Health Organization [WHO] Secretary-General Tedros Adhanom Gheybreyesus said that limiting abortion access would only harm women’s health. MSI Reproductive Choices, a global NGO providing abortions services in 27 countries, worried that the Supreme Court ruling would galvanize anti-abortion groups around the world. “Decisions made in the U.S. have an impact far beyond their borders.”
No one in the press questioned how the Supreme Court arrived at decision to reverse 49-years of settled federal law. How was it possible for three new Supreme Court justices to reverse 49-years of established legal precedent? No one is talking bout a litmus test applied by former President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court picks involving opposition to Roe v. Wade. Litmus tests, or determining in advance how a justice would vote on a particular issues, are strictly prohibited. Yet when Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett met in their Senate Confirmation Hearligns, they all said the Roe v. Wade with settled U.S. law. So how was it that the first case they reviewed, Dobbs v. Jackson, the decided to overturn Roe v. Wade? All three justices have deeply religious convictions opposing abortion, leading them to find a Constitutional excuse to end Roe v. Wade.
One of the three independent branches of the U.S. government, the Supreme Court was infected with Christian theology that opposed abortion for any reason. All three new justices hold deep religious convictions opposing abortion. So when given a chance to settle Dobbs v. Jackson, they used the occasion for revolutionary change. Chief Justice John Roberts went along with the decision but said he would have preferred a more “incremental” approach to changing Roe v. Wade. When it comes to Constitutionallly-mandated deliberations, Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett swore their allegiance to the U.S. Constitution, not their Christian faiths. Deciding to end Roe v. Wade, at least five, maybe Roberts included, let their Christian religious beliefs influence their thinking on ending Roe v. Wade. Religious convictions have no place in judicial activism.
