Pro-life cause stymied, but not because of court decision

Pro-life cause stymied, but not because of court decision
Incremental abortion legislation has one purpose, repealing Roe. One way to repeal Roe is to make abortion unattainable, because somehow, having abortion available is itself a moral failing and an invitation to divine retribution.

The deeper reality is that controlling women and controlling society are the same thing. If women are not behaving correctly, can society be preserved? Women have picked up on this, which is why the feminist defense of abortion rights is more truth than hyperbole.

The other method is the insane belief that just one more justice means repeal, which is the hole in the dike of federal due process supremacy that will allow states to again be the last word in all things racial, criminal and sexual, from controlling immigrants to banning consensual sodomy. This goal is unattainable. The language of state power is the logic behind Plessy. The Court will never retreat from federal supremacy and the pro-life movement is a scam to the extent that it does not recognize this.

Protecting the unborn is not and never was the issue. The issue is governmental power. As I wrote Saturday on my Christian Left blog, calling abortion murder and asserting an equal protection right for the unborn brings with it equal protection implications on who is punished and who is investigated. There are no "special murders" where ordering the act can evade punishment nor can investigating it shield all failed pregnancies from state scrutiny.

Chief Roberts rulings are not suspect. He votes on law, not policy. How free speech exists is a matter of law and equity. Requiring a redux on which states deserve prior review is helpful, because Ohio, North Dakota and Pennsylvania are now worthy of being added to the list. The other justices are more likely to vote on policy on both sides. Roberts seems to be the adult in the room.

The bishops certainly are not behaving as adults. The landmark abortion case this term was not June, it was Espinoza. Blaine Amendments are now dead letter law. Catholic schools can now seek funding, not only through vouchers, but directly. Doing so, however, has ramifications. As I wrote yesterday in that other blog, bishops need to behave as adults in dealing with legal abortion. It is not a political issue. Civil rights should never be.

There is no logic to not accept state money for parochial schools, which have become agents of inequality because only rich parishes can support them. The demand that such schools be open to unions is reasonable in order to get public funds and the objection that the unions support abortion is irrelevant. Neither supporting or opposing abortion has no impact on its legality. It never will.