A pro-abortion writer for Slate inadvertently makes the case for pro-lifers. Looking at recent court rulings that discovered a right to abortion in state constitutions, the writer applauds this invention. By enshrining abortion in state constitutions, pro-aborts can prevent any damage from the Supreme Court ever overturning Roe v. Wade. All that such a decision would do is return the issue to the states. And if the states have already based a “right” to abortion in their constitutions, then nothing changes.
Of course, liberals would never think of going the democratic route by asking people to approve an amendment. No, they rely on the courts to manufacture the precedent, by twisting the current wording of the state constitutions.
- Since 1980, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4, in Harris v. McRae, that the federal Constitution doesn’t require Medicaid to pay for medically necessary abortions, pro-choice groups have been asking state courts to upend their funding restrictions by rooting the right to choose in their own constitutions. “Ignore McRae,” goes the argument. “Our state constitution requires something more.”
So here is where it begins: Courts overturning state laws banning the spending of taxpayer dollars on abortions for poor women. Pro-life taxpayers forced to pay for the murder of unborn children because liberals say we should. But when Catholics say parents should be able to use their tax dollars to send their kids to the school of their choice, liberals rail against the idea as forcing religion on the non-religious. Nanny-government tells us, “We know what’s best for you. Now hand over your money and hand over your children for sacrifice to Moloch.”