Who Wins if Roe v Wade Falls?
Unlike the toilet that ran for a year in an auxiliary bedroom without me paying much attention, this week’s leak doesn’t allow as much of a passive reaction. When it comes to abortion, Seinfeld's Elaine Benes already made it very clear, if you don’t share someone’s views on abortion, you can’t date anymore. But just like the water bill I ended up with thanks to crumbling infrastructure in my lavatory, this topic is one I can't escape.
The discourse is everywhere. Every community. Any web space. Even LinkedIn has people sending Mrs. Lorem Ipsum messages saying they have similar ovarian profiles and would like to join her uterus on LinkedIn.
It's everywhere and everyone has a take. What most people don't have is a clear eyed view (present company excluded).
Roe v Wade, upheld by the scaffolding of the 14th amendment’s “right to privacy” sounds plausible, if not a little rickety. Of course, a ruling that agrees with you is a good thing no matter how you get there. Let’s just hope the topic of vaccine mandates doesn’t come up, because I’d hate for anyone to have to apply logic consistently across topics at the expense of their own preferences.
The Constitution and Consistency
It’s been half a century since the Supreme Court ruled on Roe v Wade. It’s been only 2 years since a Supreme Court nominee said in their confirmation hearing that Roe is settled precedent. The time before that was 4 years ago, then 5, then 16 years ago. Each justice who said Roe had been challenged and affirmed, are now poised to strike it down.
Sure, I think the Bible says something against abortion somewhere in Fallopians 13, while command it in Numbers 5, but we can’t even interpret the Constitution so let’s not add anything else to the mix just yet. Perhaps we should just accept that our founding documents are not perfect, and sometimes, they may not even useful.
The Ruling and The Wrong
I’d be remiss if I didn’t congratulate the Republicans and evangelicals on a PR victory (I'm staunchly independent if it matters). They really earned a mark on the board for this swing, even though they haven't quite caught flesh yet. I’m all for a moral victory when I can get one, but I’ve learned some hard lessons over the years in pursuit of them.
Here’s one of the biggest––sometimes being right is not what you actually wanted.
Imagine a world where the whole Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches agree (at least officially) that it's illegal to end the life of an unborn in the womb. What happens next?
Well, if the age of Prohibition is any example, we know people who are thirsty will still drink. And some of them will die trying. And yet others will turn it into a black market.
If you want to celebrate moral superiority, then congratulations on a big win. If, on the other hand you want to stop abortions, heads up because you’re aiming in the wrong direction. Saving lives is an unlikely result of the fall of Roe. The bigger issue we have at hand is that there are battles to be fought, and poverty is a bigger one.
The main reason why women choose to have an abortion is because they were unable to care for a child. Financial constraints and lack of partner support were often factors, and it was almost always multiple reasons. It’s of note that poverty rates are similar across genders during childhood, but during childbearing years, rates increase substantially for women. Roughly double the poverty rate of men.
Be assured, the drive to survive is more likely to lead to an abortion decision than any law or court ruling.
People are suffering, and the unborn are a convenient scapegoat to distract us all. It seems some would rather millions of the living face their death, or sink deep into poverty, rather than concede that they are wrong.