As one who “religiously” reads Peggy Noonan’s Saturday Wall Street Journal columns, my deist uncertainty was made certain by her Catholic reaffirmation that embracing fetal material (up to quickening— the movement of sustainable life outside the womb) was worth sacrificing our secular democracy.
She is a practicing Catholic, as are the majority of Justices on our Supreme Court, thanks to the packing of the Court by Trump. Read about Noonan’s background here.
She apparently calls for her truth upon her scientifically flawed statement about fetal tissue in her May 7, 2022, piece entitled “The End Of Roe Will Be Good For America” by capping her convoluted (better to have multiple states’ conflicting views argument which affect minority or poor young women most) with her emotional attempt to justify by saying, “I am pro-life for the most essential reason: That’s a baby in there.”.
She and Catholic Chief Justice Roberts seem more worried about the Alito draft opinion leak than the traumatic outcomes for the poor young women who will be most affected by that Alito decision if it becomes the final decision.
Okay, that’s not quite a Faulknerian length sentence, but I suggest you read her column here.
The End of Roe v. Wade Will Be Good for America – WSJ https://t.co/n7HiDY4BkN
— Peggy Noonan (@Peggynoonannyc) May 6, 2022
Is the Mississippi case now under Supreme Court review calling for a limit of 15 weeks a fair limit with no provision for rape or incest or threat of death to the mother? Why not leave Roe alone?
What I found in reading her opinion was this otherwise talented public affairs professional excruciatingly twisting her way through her argumentation to find the needed conclusion to fit her own Catholic ideology that dangerously impinges on a woman’s private health decisions and simultaneously threatens the core beliefs of our democracy such as LGBTQ and reproductive rights when put under state-by-state control!
The effect of further increasing the existing divisiveness in our already badly divided country never seems to bother these one issue anti abortion zealots.
That gun violence and countless other major lingering governing problems which are long overdue for fixing can go unattended also puts major shame on our legislature branch!
But that situation should not encourage the Supreme Court to ignore precedence (Stare decisis) as three of the newest justices appointed who seemed to promise to uphold precedence at their Senate nominating interrogations.
Sad. If a careful balanced account of this contentious issue would be of interest read below the May 7th article in The Economist entitled “How to save the Supreme Court from itself”.
Here are a few excerpts:
Perhaps the judges will change their mind or temper their arguments before the final opinion is issued. Even so, with a 6-3 conservative majority, not the 5-4 split that has held for the past half-century, the court is poised to reopen some of the most contentious questions in American public life. In this, it risks damaging itself and accelerating the division of the country into two mutually hostile blocs.
The outsize power wielded by the court in 2022 derives from a political system that struggles to strike compromises. Lining up a majority in the House, 60 votes in the Senate (to override a filibuster) and a presidential signature is too hard. It is easier for politicians to fundraise off controversy rather than solve problems. Time and again on the thorniest questions—carbon-dioxide emissions, gay marriage, guns, abortion—Congress has failed to reflect public opinion.
By their dereliction, legislators dump big decisions on the justices. As a result, Supreme Court confirmations have become trials of strength where the Senate majority holds sway. Donald Trump, who ran on a promise to pick judges explicitly to overturn Roe, further dissolved the idea of judicial independence. All these politicking heaps intolerable pressure on the court.”
Read The Economist opinion piece in full here.
Political questions are best solved by politicians, not judges. Only if the legislature rediscovers the art of compromise, can the court could act as the arbiter it was originally meant to be https://t.co/w4FKLtkZio
— The Economist (@EconUS) May 7, 2022
Our Democracy, now in a deep state of fragility, can only be fixed by a majority of citizens whose vision exceeds the simplistic inanity that one issue can control all others! Principal among our citizens are those head many of our major corporations who have stepped up to offer their employees the ability to exercise their right to an abortion if needed.
“What Can Be Done Now to Save Habitable Life on Planet Earth?”: https://t.co/fHuh0CG6JD
“We Humans Overwhelm Our Earth: 11 or 2 Billion by 2100?”: https://t.co/TA4j7cp1tE
“From the Dissident Left: A Collection of Essays 2004-2013”: https://t.co/lkC2t3E1A9 pic.twitter.com/bQsL2mLBcO
— Church and State (@ChurchAndStateN) November 1, 2021
Supreme Court that rarely leaks does so with Roe v. Wade draft
‘It’s precedent’: how supreme court justices spoke about Roe v Wade in the past
Experts Depict The Grim Reality Of A Post-Roe America
How The GOP Ended Up Hating Abortion | AJ+