Anti-abortion push not about life, but power

“(His) opinion for the court was arguably the worst he ever wrote. He ignored precedent, distorted history, imposed a rigid rather than a flexible construction on the Constitution, ignored specific grants of power in the Constitution, and tortured meanings out of other, more-obscure clauses.”

No, the above quote is not about Justice Samuel Alito and his highly suspect opinion last week that overturned two previous decisions — Roe vs. Wade and Casey vs. Planned Parenthood — that established the constitutional right to abortion in the United States.

That quote may not be about Alito, but it surely fits the opinion he wrote concerning Roe, the one that was leaked and which we all read months ago.

The quote, instead, comes from the online version of Encyclopedia Britannica and concerns the Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott decision. That was written by Justice Samuel Tanney and said that even though Scott had been taken to a state where slavery was outlawed, he was still a slave because African Americans were not and could never be citizens of the United States.

It was a ridiculous notion even in 1857 — a number of African-Americans already were citizens of various states — today we can just see it for what it really was: Pure racism from the Supreme Court.

As a group, white men in America — from the highest levels of government to the lowest — have never taken well to the idea of sharing their power with anyone else. Dred Scott is merely one example. The difficulty women had in getting to vote is another. There are innumerable others.

Power. That’s the real reason behind last week’s abortion decision. Who controls women’s bodies? From the Continental Congress to the Constitutional Congress until today the answer by and large has been men.

White men are the dominant force in Texas and almost everywhere else. It doesn’t matter that there are a few women in the legislature, there are not nearly enough of them to stop men from doing what they wish.

This is just as true on the Supreme Court, where three women justices sit — more than ever before. Men rule what finally happens.

The move to overturn Roe v. Wade, though it took 50 years, is rooted in who gets to control what happens. Consider: What power is greater than having the say over who gets born and who does not?

If you can make a woman give birth — and some would like to control over any method to prevent pregnancy in the first place — you pretty much have final say over that person’s entire life.

And don’t forget that any positive power a government possesses without check means that it also controls the negative side of the equation. For instance, if a government has the ability to say that a woman cannot get an abortion under any circumstances, it also has the power to tell a woman that she must get an abortion.

Don’t believe that? Consider what happened in China under their policy that mandated no more than two children. Parents were told to abort female fetuses in almost every case or face various consequences, all of them negative.

I know you all think the “exceptional” government of the United States would never consider such a heinous policy but you have a tad more faith in a government run by the likes of Greg Abbott, Dan Patrick and Bryan Hughes than I can muster. The proof is in what we’ve seen so far.

A great many people are blaming mainline Christianity for what the Supreme Court has done. But this is not about a moral code, or a Biblical passage or devout faith beliefs. It is about Power.

It’s true that numerous people who are genuine believers and others who claim to be are rejoicing over the decision. They really believe it will reduce abortions.

That’s highly doubtful, moreover, it is almost certain to increase deaths. Now, instead of considering abortions, women aren’t going to risk that they miss some arbitrary deadline. They don’t know if they can handle the responsibility, so they won’t risk the chance.

Then there are those who have valid medical reasons for not carrying a pregnancy to term. Some of them will risk their own lives so as not to risk violating the law, even if a doctor tells them of the danger.

As much as some would have you believe, there isn’t an easy way to slow, much less stop, abortion. The more government tries to use its strong arm to stop abortions, the worse the problem will become.

Government might be able to reduce abortions if, say, it offered paid health care for infants up to two years old. Or perhaps if reduced-cost childcare were an option. Maybe we could increase paid maternity leave.

Those in control would not want any of those solutions, though. Do just one of those things and I might be ready to believe that the sanctity of “life” had a single thing to do with their actions.

Instead, it is much more tied to greed but underpinned by the greatest of all reasons: The desire for power.

Power of this sort can only be taken away — if it can be wrested away at all — through voting. In our system there is hardly any other legal way. If you don’t want the government controlling your birthing options, you’ll have to vote and get other like-minded people to vote with you.

If you decide not to get involved, there’s not much anyone can do to help. It really is all up to you.

If you found this useful, please consider subscribing to Voices from Behind the Pine Curtain to support the effort. It is free.

Phil Latham also writes another newsletter on Substack, American Slave Stories, which aims to keep the memory of slaves alive. Subscriptions are used to help defray the ongoing cost of research. It costs $5 per month.