Even though Roe vs Wade may be overturned someday, it doesn’t mean criminalizing women or doctors for abortion. If abortion is necessary for saving the life of a woman, it will not be a criminal act. The extended issue is who pays? Should we use public dollars or make insurance companies or individuals pay for their abortions? But, beyond this, what gives the federal government jurisdiction over reproductive choices?
There is no constitutional mandate for the federal government to fund and operate reproductive clinics. However, there is a mandate to protect life in the 14th Amendment. Also, as implied by the Preamble, we can only presume unborn children are persons who “the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” is directed. One must presumably have been born to have liberty.
Since human life is sexually transmitted, would this not be the time for a woman to exercise choice? So, would creating life be the sovereign choice of a supreme being based upon the human choice to have sex? And here we have the paradox of the pro-choice constituency: humans choose to have sex but do not have the right to terminate a future person according to pro-lifers. Those who reverence a supreme being do not want to support with public dollars what is seen as a transgression into the jurisdiction of God. Let’s end public funding for abortion, abolish Planned Parenthood and predicate what is lawful between an unborn person, a mother, her doctor, her God and who pays.
Rick Phillips, Pella