On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Center. This decision overturned Roe v. Wade, which protected the right to abortion. In 1986, the Missouri state legislature passed an anti-abortion bill, S.C.H.H.B. 1596, which would go into effect should Roe v. Wade be overturned. In 2022, the law automatically went into effect, banning abortion across the state except in cases of medical emergency. At the time, there was only one abortion clinic in the state that was forced to close its doors. This provision also requires that all Missouri laws be interpreted by reference to it. 14 members of the clergy from diverse faiths challenged this and several other laws surrounding abortion in the case Rev. Blackmon v. Missouri, using the Establishment Clause.
They challenge the statute on the basis that its purpose is to enshrine a religious belief. The statute codifies that the “life of each human being begins at conception” and requires that the laws of Missouri “shall be interpreted and construed” in a manner that gives all fertilized eggs, embryos, and fetuses the same “rights, privileges, and immunities available to other persons”. The appellants contend that these statements are religious and metaphysical beliefs, not medical ones. Enshrining these beliefs, they argue, gives preference to specific religious beliefs about when life begins, and coerces Missourians to live according to those religious beliefs. One Rabbi, Reverand Blackmon, explained that in the Jewish faith, life begins at the child’s first breath. A Unitarian Universalist minister said the restrictions are at odds with her religious beliefs about consciences. Many say their faith calls them to support abortion access because it is critical to the health, autonomy, and economic security of women. They argue that enacting the law imposed one religious belief on all the others practicing in Missouri, violating the Establishment Clause.
Does the Missouri state law banning abortion by declaring that life begins at conception, and compelling all following legislation to follow this statute, constitute an unconstitutional establishment of religion?
The legislation states that “Almighty God is the author of life” and that “the life of an individual human being begins at conception . . . ”. The statute also defines “unborn children” to include the “offspring of human beings from the moment of conception until birth at every stage of biological development.” This brings up concerns about neutrality both between religions and between religion and non-religion. Non-religious people in Missouri would disagree with the statement that ‘God is the author of life’. And, the legislation is written from the perspective that an unborn embryo is equivalent to a human life and that killing it would be impermissible under the Constitution. But, making this belief a part of the law is a threat to the beliefs of religious minorities. 14 different faith leaders contend that the other statements are in opposition to their religious beliefs and teachings about when human life begins.
When signing the bill, one Missouri legislator said “As a Catholic, I do believe life begins at conception and that is built into our legislative findings.” Of course, not every legislator may have signed the bill with this same intention. However, its effect dictates a Christian perspective on all Missouri residents, who may have differing views on when life begins. In her concurring opinion in Lynch v. Donnelly, Justice O’Connor proposes an Endorsement Test in favor of the Lemon test to determine if an impermissible establishment of religion is present. She asks if the government action has “the effect of communicating a message of government endorsement or disapproval of religion.” To a reasonable observer, the language used is religious in nature, and only represents one faith’s conception of life, endorsing one faith’s conception of life. I find this an unconstitutional establishment because the effect of this law coerces all to abide by one faith’s religious belief, an impermissible violation of freedom of conscience.
https://www.au.org/how-we-protect-religious-freedom/legal-cases/cases/rev-blackmon-v-missouri/
file:///Users/sarahdowney/Downloads/Religious_Liberty_and_the_American_Supreme_Court_T..._----_(Chapter_35._Lynch_v._Donnelly_465_U.S._668_(1984))%20(1).pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment