On December 1, the U.S. Supreme Court heard the oral arguments in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.
The case deals with the constitutionality of a 2018 Mississippi state law that bans abortions after the first 15 weeks of pregnancy.
Those who call themselves “pro-life” and those who call themselves “pro-choice” are respectively optimistic and panicked over the chance that previous court rulings Roe v. Wade, Doe v. Bolton, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey could be overturned as a result of what the court decides in the Dobbs case with a decision probably coming sometime in the middle of next year.
Put simply, the legal and constitutional right for a woman to lose a child to abortion could be dramatically changed.
Overturning previous decisions would probably leave it up to the individual United States to decide their own openness to abortions.
Let us pray
Before I go any further, I’d like to ask us all to pause and pray for all of those affected by abortions: The mothers, the fathers, the relatives, the friends, the people who work in abortion facilities, or anyone else touched by the effects of an abortion.
You are not forgotten and we love you. God loves you.
In the hands of the court
As I listened to the oral arguments, a few thoughts popped into my head.
One of them was that lawyers and justices/judges are impressive people. I respect anyone who, in a courtroom setting, is essentially playing grown-up debate club, sometimes with lives at stake.
That led to my next thought — here we have learned and accomplished individuals all together using logic, reason, precedent, and other arguments all to determine life.
Once points have been made, nine people in all of their flawed weakness and humanity are going to decide on the existence of the unborn.
That’s a lot to ask of anyone.
Can you imagine if every several years, along with renewing your driver’s license, you had to go before a panel and be deemed still a “life”?
Heaven help you from others if you didn’t meet recent and ambiguous criteria for “life,” but I digress.
As I heard the arguments from both sides in the case, it just reiterated what the abortion argument has always been about (see above) — life versus rights.
One side is arguing that since life begins at the moment of conception, it should be protected as any other innocent human being is once outside the womb and breathing.
The other side downplays that life argument and argues for rights. Rights for the mother with the child in her womb. Rights to make decisions on what is best for her body, putting aside the rights of the body inside her.
[Again, let’s pray for everyone who has gone through this terrible thing. Play the “you’re a guy, you have no say” card against me if you wish, but I know enough to know how difficult and complicated abortion is for all who have been affected by one.]
The pro-life side has been stuck in a stalemate, with some minor legislative and judicial progress since 1973 because two different concepts are being shouted past each other — life versus rights.
No one is really against either, but debating these concepts in a court setting leaves crucial decisions in the hands of humans — biased, weak, flawed, and fickle.
Making the case for life
Of all things, you’d think life would be the easiest to prove to anyone, and yet it’s not. Abortions happen, murders happen, suicides happen.
What kind of a people are we where we are told we need to prove life? How did we get here?
No blaming or finger-pointing, please, that’s just going to waste precious time.
As a wise deacon once said, “What’s more important than life?”
Life, all life, should get the most rights of all.
Convince the courts, convince everyone — life matters.