On Friday, June 24, in a historically disappointing decision, the Supreme Court overturned the ruling affirming a constitutional right to abortion found in Roe v. Wade. The removal of such an important precedent marks the concern that other religiously-disputed protections may soon suffer a similar fate.
Many of my thoughts on the importance of Roe v. Wade align directly with the editorial published by my colleagues and myself earlier in the year following the initial draft opinion from the Supreme Court being leaked to the public. I won’t dive much further into the harsh reality that not only women in our country face, but all those who will have to stomach the full repercussions of pregnancy with no choice in the matter because of a “pro-life” centric state legislature.
Among the many dangerous precedents that this court ruling could unearth, one I’d like to discuss is the revival of an extreme evangelical state — a dangerous ideology for the so-called “land of the free” to subscribe to. While arguments against abortion extend beyond the confines of religiously-fueled concepts of morality, the loudest group of apologists surrounding the Supreme Court’s most recent bombshell flaunt their religion as something that should return as a cornerstone of American politics.
Religion in and of itself can be an extremely powerful and beautiful force. The ability worship has to strengthen communities is one of the pillars that many individuals in this country stand by to this day. With that being said, as with many other forms of ideologies, there is a slippery slope in knowing the boundaries of one’s beliefs before impacting the lives of others negatively and unnecessarily.
For the larger part of the dark side of American history, actions in the name of the Christian God have needed no more justification than that. Catastrophic events for oppressed groups have been excused for having been decided as “God’s will.” Pivotal moments in the story of America, such as westward expansion and all of the gruesome injustices it caused, have been written off as being destined by God himself.
Using an extremist’s revision of religion as a tool to incite forceful change in the way that others practice their daily lives is, and always will be, an incorrect philosophy on how united people operate. One of the beautiful aspects of the culture we have created in the U.S. is the ability to worship any higher power of one’s choosing, and the equal ability to not worship at all. What good is supposed equality of religious diversity if our country reverts to justifying policy in the name of one religious figure that’s not worshiped by all of the country’s inhabitants?
That being said, I’m well aware that the Supreme Court justified its overturning of Roe v. Wade on the basis of there being no federal constitutional right to abortion. In that decision, no direct link to religion is made, and it couldn’t be officially thanks to the establishment clause found in our Bill of Rights. However, biases always come to light, and the reaction to the news from the evangelical-extremist population tells all that needs to be said.
Associate Justice Clarence Thomas was a major proponent of the court’s landmark decision to overturn nearly 50 years of precedent. Thomas seems all but committed to revisiting historic decisions from the Supreme Court, such as those found in cases involving Griswold, Lawrence and Obergefell, to apply the same treatment Roe v. Wade suffered.
On its own, the dismantling of the precedent found in Roe v. Wade can be attributed to a number of schools of thought that do not directly center themselves around religious ideologies. However, openly aiming to take down precedents that protect contraceptives, same-sex romantic relationships and same-sex marriages serves no purpose other than to further burden the lives of already oppressed groups. The removal of these protections is supported largely by subscribers to southern evangelical ideologies. With recent shifts in the culture of the Republican party, pushes for deeming these precedents as unconstitutional at a federal level are almost certain to happen.
The listing of these three specific court cases by a Supreme Court justice acts as a clear indicator that extreme evangelicalism is once again rising to the forefront of American politics, in a similar fashion to the way it took the country by storm in protest of the Civil Rights Movement.
Using the Constitution as a cop-out for removing protections for bodily autonomy and the security of America’s LGBTQ+ population is nothing short of cowardice. Holding a governing document, in its original form dating back 234 years, in the same regard as a holy text from thousands of years prior to that as the end all be all of who can live freely is a level of refusal to adapt to the times that should not reside in American politics.
