Ross: Supreme Court rules against pro-life challenge, so what’s next for the Christian Nationalists?
Jun 17, 2024, 6:32 AM
Demonstrators participate in a abortion-rights rally outside the Supreme Court as the justices of the court hear oral arguments in the case of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine. (Photo: Anna Moneymaker, Getty Images)
(Photo: Anna Moneymaker, Getty Images)
The Supreme Court last week unanimously turned down the pro-life challenge to the FDA’s decision to make Mifepristone widely available for the purpose of ending a pregnancy. The court ruled the pro-life plaintiffs who sued had no business complaining about a pill they had never used — and that they had no business trying to challenge the FDA’s regulation of others.
That a conservative court would rule this way was a shock to the pro-life movement, which is even now trying to decide what the next reproductive crusade should be. I was thinking this would be a good time to focus on making sure all children are well-fed, have comprehensive medical coverage and can have affordable daycare.
More KIRO Newsradio opinions: Is it time to put police back in Seattle schools?
But it seems to be moving towards some kind of Christian Nationalism, going into the states to get tougher abortion restrictions. The New York Times quoted the president of a group called “Students for Life” lamenting that many young women no longer want to have children at all, suggesting it’s because their parents weren’t religious and didn’t take their kids to church.
Personally, I think it could also be that young women today know that a positive pregnancy test can instantly make them subject to laws based on religious beliefs they do not share.
But it raises an interesting prospect: If the Christian nationalists are serious about a return to Bible-based values, will they also bring back the rules that used to apply to men?
Being fruitful and multiplying was job No. 1 in the Old Testament, and God held males responsible for doing their part.
Genesis 38 verses 9 and 10 – this is a little delicate, so I won’t quote it – but let’s just say it was considered a serious sin for a man to “misfire” in any way. In fact, God is on record as summarily severing the brain-body connection of a man named Onan who did just that. Could this be the next reproductive frontier? Could men be next?
More from Dave Ross: Let the rich pay the exorbitant ‘luxury lane’ toll prices
The Supreme Court drew a line last week, saying that just because you hold a sincere moral belief doesn’t allow you to get all up in other peoples’ business. But the zealots are undeterred. They want to bring us back to a time when what happened in your bed was everybody’s business.
I won’t try to predict what might happen, but it’s something to keep in mind as you’re trying to decide which flag to raise over your beach house.
Listen to “Seattle’s Morning News” with Dave Ross and Colleen O’Brien weekday mornings from 5-9 a.m. on KIRO Newsradio, 97.3 FM. Subscribe to the podcast here.
-
Tune in to KIRO Newsradio weekdays at 5am for Dave Ross on Seattle's Morning News.
