Free AI web copilot to create summaries, insights and extended knowledge, download it at here

Abstract

cumstances such as the physical or mental health of the mother or fetal abnormalities.I think my favorite, by far, is that while the religious right insists that life begins at conception, the Jewish religion says that a fetus is not a person until after it is born and takes its first breath.Good luck trying to find a compromise there.But that’s not all. The lawsuits say that abortion bans violate religious liberty guarantees and the separation of church and state.Are you enjoying this as much as I am?In Indiana, where Mike Pence once held sway as governor, a judge has issued a preliminary injunction blocking the state’s abortion ban because it violates the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act which was passed in 2015.<blockquote id="86b6">“The court has concluded that the plaintiffs’ religious exercise is being substantially burdened, that they are suffering irreparable harm.”</blockquote>Needless to say, the state has appealed saying that abortion access is not “religious exercise.”They go on to say:<blockquote id="364d">“Plaintiffs identify no principle that makes abortion a religious act any more than countless other actions that they believe to affect their well-being. Other acceptable means for plaintiffs to achieve such ends in the context of childbearing include sexual abstinence, contraceptives, IUDs and natural family planning, just to name a few.”</blockquote>Am I the only one who thinks that this is a specious argument cuz the reason why women seek abortions is very often because the “acceptable means” have failed?Multiple red states have these Religious Freedom Restoration Acts, modelled on the<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_Act"> federal one

Options

passed in 1993</a> and sponsored by Democrats, Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) in the House and the late Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) in the Senate.What the acts say is that the government, in this case the state government, cannot pass a law that is an undue burden on a person’s religious freedom. Which red states loved but may not love as much any more since it has been turned against them.In fact, both Oklahoma and West Virginia have amended their Religious Freedom Restoration Acts to exclude challenges to abortion bans.Hmm … Kinda defeats the whole purpose of the Religious Freedom Restoration Acts, doesn’t it? But who am I, a lapsed Presbyterian, to tell the religious right what they should or should not believe or do?Down in Florida where DeSantis’ touted six-week abortion ban is thankfully on hold, lawsuits against the ban say that:<blockquote id="0450">“Abortion restrictions violate ‘clerical obligations and faith’ and impose ‘severe barriers’ on religious belief, speech and conduct.”</blockquote>To date, none of the lawsuits have resulted in a ruling, but they are just another way that sensible Americans are fighting a very un-American decision made by the Supreme Court when they struck down Roe v. Wade.All of a sudden throwing the abortion issue back to the states is not looking like such a good idea, even in red states.Of course, the real solution here isn’t SCOTUS decisions or lawsuits, it’s Congress getting its shit together and passing a federal law legalizing abortion across the land. And for that to happen, we need to vote in enough Democrats. These narrow majorities are not getting the job done.Come on, ladies. We can do this. We are more than half the population. We outnumber the shitheads.</article></body>

POLITICS

Women are Suing to Overturn State Abortion Bans

They claim the bans violate their ability to practice their religions

There are some interesting lawsuits making their way through state court systems. A bunch of savvy women and their legal representatives are turning the tables on the religious right by claiming that abortion bans violate their freedom to practice their religions.

God, I love the irony.

How many decades have we had to listen to religious fanatics insist that legalizing abortion somehow violates their religious beliefs?

No, it doesn’t. Legalizing abortion just allows people who don’t share those beliefs to pursue appropriate healthcare.

No one is forcing anyone to violate their religious beliefs by forcing them to abort their pregnancies. And if they choose to have an abortion, we promise not to tell anyone so that they can continue the charade of being pro-life.

Honest. We understand.

Anyways, 15 lawsuits are being filed in 8 states to overturn existing abortion bans or to prevent bans from being enacted. They are being filed on behalf of women who are Jewish, Episcopalian, Buddhist, Unitarian, and members of the United Church of Christ.

All of those religions say that abortion should be allowed in certain circumstances such as the physical or mental health of the mother or fetal abnormalities.

I think my favorite, by far, is that while the religious right insists that life begins at conception, the Jewish religion says that a fetus is not a person until after it is born and takes its first breath.

Good luck trying to find a compromise there.

But that’s not all. The lawsuits say that abortion bans violate religious liberty guarantees and the separation of church and state.

Are you enjoying this as much as I am?

In Indiana, where Mike Pence once held sway as governor, a judge has issued a preliminary injunction blocking the state’s abortion ban because it violates the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act which was passed in 2015.

“The court has concluded that the plaintiffs’ religious exercise is being substantially burdened, that they are suffering irreparable harm.”

Needless to say, the state has appealed saying that abortion access is not “religious exercise.”

They go on to say:

“Plaintiffs identify no principle that makes abortion a religious act any more than countless other actions that they believe to affect their well-being. Other acceptable means for plaintiffs to achieve such ends in the context of childbearing include sexual abstinence, contraceptives, IUDs and natural family planning, just to name a few.”

Am I the only one who thinks that this is a specious argument cuz the reason why women seek abortions is very often because the “acceptable means” have failed?

Multiple red states have these Religious Freedom Restoration Acts, modelled on the federal one passed in 1993 and sponsored by Democrats, Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) in the House and the late Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) in the Senate.

What the acts say is that the government, in this case the state government, cannot pass a law that is an undue burden on a person’s religious freedom. Which red states loved but may not love as much any more since it has been turned against them.

In fact, both Oklahoma and West Virginia have amended their Religious Freedom Restoration Acts to exclude challenges to abortion bans.

Hmm … Kinda defeats the whole purpose of the Religious Freedom Restoration Acts, doesn’t it? But who am I, a lapsed Presbyterian, to tell the religious right what they should or should not believe or do?

Down in Florida where DeSantis’ touted six-week abortion ban is thankfully on hold, lawsuits against the ban say that:

“Abortion restrictions violate ‘clerical obligations and faith’ and impose ‘severe barriers’ on religious belief, speech and conduct.”

To date, none of the lawsuits have resulted in a ruling, but they are just another way that sensible Americans are fighting a very un-American decision made by the Supreme Court when they struck down Roe v. Wade.

All of a sudden throwing the abortion issue back to the states is not looking like such a good idea, even in red states.

Of course, the real solution here isn’t SCOTUS decisions or lawsuits, it’s Congress getting its shit together and passing a federal law legalizing abortion across the land. And for that to happen, we need to vote in enough Democrats. These narrow majorities are not getting the job done.

Come on, ladies. We can do this. We are more than half the population. We outnumber the shitheads.