August 5: The Pro-Choice Religious Liberty Argument
Always on the lookout for a new wrinkle on ancient battles, I drew attention to a recent legal development at New York:
Though the constitutional law of “religious liberty” is a murky field, we are all accustomed to hearing anguished claims from conservative Christians that laws requiring them to provide or pay for reproductive-health services or treat LGBTQ employees and customers equally are an unacceptable violation of their beliefs. Now that the Supreme Court has struck down the federal right to an abortion, it’s clearer than ever that the Christian right and its Republican allies are aiming to construct a system where they are free to live their values as they wish, regardless of the impact on others.
But as a new lawsuit in Florida shows, what’s good for the conservative goose may also be good for the progressive gander. A group of religious officials are arguing in state court that the new anti-abortion law enacted this year by Florida Republicans violates their right to religious expression. The Washington Post reports:
“Seven Florida clergy members — two Christians, three Jews, one Unitarian Universalist and a Buddhist … argue in separate lawsuits filed Monday that their ability to live and practice their religious faith is being violated by the state’s new, post-Roe abortion law. The law, which is one of the strictest in the country, making no exceptions for rape or incest, was signed in April by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), in a Pentecostal church alongside antiabortion lawmakers such as the House speaker, who called life ‘a gift from God.’”
The plaintiffs in these suits most definitely want to rebut the idea that forced birth is the only authentically “religious” perspective on abortion services. After all, as United Church of Christ minister Laurie Hafner explains, the anti-abortion cause has little biblical sanction:
“Jesus says nothing about abortion. He talks about loving your neighbor and living abundantly and fully. He says: ‘I come that you might have full life.’ Does that mean for a 10-year-old to bear the child of her molester? That you cut your life short because you aren’t able to rid your body of a fetus?”
The legal theory in the lawsuits focuses specifically on the counseling of pregnant people and their families that clergy engage in routinely, and that under the new Florida law may be treated as the illegal aiding and abetting of criminal acts. Hafner’s suit alleges that this violates both federal and state constitutional rights, along with Florida’s version of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (a 1993 federal “religious liberty” law):
“The dramatic change in abortion rights in Florida has caused confusion and fear among clergy and pregnant girls and women particularly in light of the criminal penalties attached. Given her general duties and work as a Pastor, Plaintiff intends to engage in counseling regarding abortion beyond the narrow limits of HB 5 and, therefore, risks incarceration and financial penalties.”
It’s unclear how this argument will fare in the courts. Conservative judges may stipulate that anti-abortion laws impinge on religious-liberty rights that are nonetheless outweighed by the state’s “compelling interest” in fetal life. But at least, for once, the judiciary and the public will have to come to grips with the fact that many millions of pro-choice religious Americans passionately oppose what is happening to our country in the name of “life.” During the run-up to this week’s resounding “no” vote on a constitutional amendment removing any hint of abortion rights in the state’s constitution, a Presbyterian Church in Kansas displayed a sign that read, “Jesus trusted women. So do we.” This was likely an allusion to the “Trust Women” motto of the famous Kansas abortion provider Dr. George Tiller, who in 2009 was assassinated in the foyer of the church in which he was serving as an usher. His legacy lives on in houses of worship and now in the courts.
All four polls on 2.004 show a trend, unfortunately, of Kerry peaking, and now the momentum shifting to Bush. I just don’t see how you are getting a “Kerry won” out of the third debate. It lookslike after the second debate Bush bottomed out and then it’s turned and now Bush has the upward momentum. I’m not happy about it but the figures are there. in the Zogby poll, but parallel in the others.
Interesting, then, that the blaring headline on CNN this morning is that Bush has a five point lead, which seems to come from the Zogby/Reuters poll- and actually says the exact opposite of DCorps. Zogby is claiming that Kerry is stuck at 44% while Bush is the one persuading the undecideds.
The only reason I watched these debates was to see whether independents and those on the left of center would be energized by Kerry. To me, understandably biased, it looks like Kerry has done well in clarifying his message, and stood up well to a lot of bashing by the broken-record we have as president.
I’d also like to plug the volunteer page of Kerry’s website, http://calls.johnkerry.com, which lists phone numbers of like-minded folks in swing states. They’re encouraging people to call them and tell them about volunteer opportunities in their areas.
Correy
My pet theory — Kerry won the pre-debate “expectations game” because of the GOP’s massive, months-long negative campaign against him. Even though I was planning to for Kerry, I had never seen him in action before. And I was surprised by how strong, calm, and “presidential” he looked. I had not expected to be impressed, and that’s because the Republicans did such an effective job of attacking him before the debates.
There were probably millions of people watching the debates who had never seen Kerry for an extended period of time — all we knew were soundbites, media impressions, and Republican attacks.
I think the next week will be The Moment of Truth.
*If* Kerry takes the lead, I think even the ‘Wingers will start to worry a lot about this election. On the other hand, I would be perplexed and disappointed if “Shrub” actually gains.
The media reaction to the third debate was interesting. THE WEEKLY STANDARD, NATIONAL REVIEW etc. claim “Shrub” won hands down whereas the rest (including all the opinion polls) felt Kerry was better. I suspect both assessments are honest, since they indicate “Shrub” is great at firing up his base but Democrats and a majority of independents favor Kerry.
MARCU$