State lawsuits defend abortion access with religious freedom

[In It to Win It]

AP News

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) — Cara Berg Raunick watched with bafflement as Indiana's Republican legislators took less than two weeks to debate and pass an abortion ban that the governor signed quickly into law.

The women’s health nurse practitioner from Indianapolis was struck by just how frequently faith was cited in the arguments as reason to ban the medical practice. But Berg Raunick, who is Jewish, said those views go against her beliefs.

To her, a pregnant woman's health and life is paramount, and she disagreed with legislators' assertions that life begins at conception, calling that a “Christian definition."

“That is a religious and values-based comment," said Berg Raunick. "A fetus is potential life, and that is worthy of great respect and is not to be taken lightly, but it does not supersede the life and health of the mother, period."

Arguments like this were central to an Indiana lawsuit filed in September against the state's abortion ban, which is on hold amid multiple legal challenges. On Dec. 2, a judge ruled the ban violates the state’s religious freedom law, signed by then-Republican Gov. Mike Pence in 2015.

[wryter2000]

1. Hallelujah

I thought that argument ought to work. Their own "religious freedom" arguments backfiring.

[GreenWave]

2. And since most abortions occur naturally???

Do they dare to arrest Mother Nature? Or the Gran Wazoo of everything?

[CrispyQ]

3. Tissue from an aborted pregnancy at six weeks, which many "heartbeat" laws are based on.

Does anyone see a heart? More info & photos here:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/18/pregnancy-weeks-abortion-tissue

snip...

Sometimes, patients want to see the tissue after an abortion. “They are stunned by what it actually looks like,” says Fleischman. “That’s when I realized how much the imagery on the internet and on placards – showing human-like qualities at this early stage of development – has really permeated the culture. People almost don’t believe this is what comes out.”

[LeftInTX]

5. I don't know if I see a neural tube or just tissue

[Lunabell]

6. I have worked for 2 women's clinics where abortions were performed.

This is exactly what we saw when examining the tissue to ensure the procedure was complete.

[CrispyQ]

11. Thank you for verifying the article's accuracy!

That little white clump has more rights than the breathing women already living their lives in some states. The insanity of it just boggles the mind, especially in light of republicans horrendous family policies.

[2naSalit]

12. +1

[republianmushroom]

4. like it

[TheRealNorth]

7. Our religions/religious interpretations don't count.

Only the "real" religions of "real" Americans get those type of protections under the 1st Amendment by Conservative courts.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

15. Jewish Leaders: Banning Abortion is 'Absolutely' a Violation of Religious Freedom

Under Jewish religious law, it is clear that life begins at birth and there is no prohibition in the Torah on abortion. According to my Rabbi, the life of a fetus is only potential life and the life of the mother is more important than the life of a fetus. Alito's proposed opinion elevates Christian beliefs over Judaism.

Link to tweet

https://jezebel.com/jewish-leaders-banning-abortion-is-absolutely-a-violat-1848885645

Conservatives—namely, white evangelical Christians—have long weaponized religious values as a shoddy defense for their decades-long conquest to criminalize abortion in the United States. But after a leaked draft of the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down Roe v. Wade sent shockwaves through the public consciousness on Monday night, a different kind of group of religious text-swinging heroes has emerged.

Coalitions of Rabbis across different sects of Judaism and a contingent of Jewish abortion activists are defending Jewish pregnant people’s right to abortion access, raising what they claim is a valid legal challenge: A national abortion ban would violate their right to religious freedom as guaranteed by the First Amendment. And as the right to bodily autonomy for women and pregnant people is threatened—largely impacting low-income Black and brown people—by conservative justices’ arguments that we should simply rewind to the good old years when women didn’t have any rights because, you know, some 17th century witch-hunter said so, Jewish communities are putting their foot down to say, “Not in my religion.”......

For evidence, Rabbi Ruttenberg points to the Book of Exodus in the Torah, which discusses a case where two men accidentally knock over a pregnant person and cause them to miscarry:

“When men fight, and one of them pushes a pregnant woman and a miscarriage results, but no other harm ensues, the one responsible shall be fined when the woman’s husband demands compensation; the payment will be determined by judges. But if other harm ensues, the penalty shall be life for life.”

The Hebrew Bible, she says, does not regard the fetus as a person, for the Torah doesn’t specify how long the woman has been pregnant when the miscarriage happens. Another annotated text states, “If she is found pregnant, until the fortieth day it is mere fluid,” meaning the fetus does not have agency for at least forty days of pregnancy. For that reason, some interpretations of Jewish law say that personhood begins with the first breath. “It’s not murder, basically, and the Talmud lays that out really explicitly,” she says.

I like the idea of a lawsuit filed on the basis of the First Amendment. Alito's draft opinion favors conservative christian theology over the faith all all or most Jews.

[Takket]

8. this is a facinating case......

I'll be curious to see what completely inappropriate and hypocritical argument SCOTUS eventually comes up with to dismiss it, when this eventually gets to SCOTUS, in a few years.

[gratuitous]

17. First, the desired outcome

Then apply a generous dollop of Colonel Sammy's magic reverse engineering elixir, including opinions from medieval zealots and the writings of witch-burning bluenoses, and as the French say, Wa-lah! More ground-breaking precedent-setting overturning of so-called established law.

[intheflow]

9. Republican laws come back to bite them on the ass!

Hahahahahaha!!! Wasn't the Religious Freedom Restoration Act meant to curtail same-sex marriage and allow companies to discriminate freely against whoever disagrees with their religious opinions? Now being used for good because they forgot to include discriminatory language spelling out that they think religious freedom is for Christians only.

[Mad_Machine76]

10. How ironic LOL

But religious freedom doesn't mean freedom for one religion, nor does it mean that one religion can dictate the laws for everybody else.

[2naSalit]

13. A point too easily forgotten. ...nt

[LetMyPeopleVote]

14. South Florida synagogue sues over Florida's new 15-week abortion ban

Jewish law is clear. The life of the mother always comes first

Link to tweet

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article262496912.html

A South Florida Jewish congregation has challenged a new state law that blocks abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, contending the measure violates privacy and religious-freedom rights.

The lawsuit, filed Friday in Leon County circuit court by Congregation L’Dor Va-Dor, seeks to block the law from taking effect July 1. Abortion clinics also filed a lawsuit this month in Leon County challenging the constitutionality of the restriction.

Both cases include allegations that the law, signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis in April, violates a privacy right in the Florida Constitution that has long played a pivotal role in abortion cases in the state.

But the lawsuit filed Friday by the Boynton Beach congregation also contends that the law violates religious-freedom rights.

“For Jews, all life is precious and thus the decision to bring new life into the world is not taken lightly or determined by state fiat,” the lawsuit said. “In Jewish law, abortion is required if necessary to protect the health, mental or physical well-being of the woman, or for many other reasons not permitted under the act [the new law]. As such, the act prohibits Jewish women from practicing their faith free of government intrusion and thus violates their privacy rights and religious freedom.”

[TlalocW]

16. I've often said in discussions with my religious friends and relatives

That the wins they've been racking up in the SCOTUS apply to everyone, and that it will come back to bite them. Conservatives never think things through because it's not really about their religious freedoms - it's about thinking that they're "owning the libs." So, if a Christian religion gets access to public schools, so does the Satanic Temple. When the ACA was going through congress, Grassley introduced an amendment to it that congress should use the exchanges thinking the democrats would balk, and they could say, "See? Even democrats don't want to use their own program," but democrats thought it was a good idea, and for the first time in a long time, staff had access to health plans that included abortion coverage. Don't want your Christian cake going to a gay wedding? Okay, but an anti-gay Christian group had their holiday reservations at a restaurant cancelled (at the last minute because the owners are heroes) because their deeply-held beliefs mean not subjecting their LGBTQ waitstaff to them. They can talk cancel culture all they want, but it's the world they wanted before thinking it through. Same with "Big Tech." They were fine with businesses and companies being considered people when it benefited them. Not so much now.