The Supreme Court is considering a case that could restrict abortions. One argument is that birth control eliminates the need for abortion. But contraception doesn’t offer an easy fix.
50 years ago, a noted U.S. philosopher argued that banning abortion forces women to go above and beyond to help an unborn fetus. What other individual rights are at stake if Roe v Wade is overturned?
If Roe v. Wade is overturned and abortion rights are returned to the states, access to abortion will be a geographical lottery – and the poor and marginalised will suffer.
In past rulings, the court has acknowledged that there’s a connection between the ability of women to control their reproductive lives and the economic health of the nation.
Arguments in a case that could fundamentally alter a woman’s right to abortion were heard at the Supreme Court. Justices’ questions suggest that Roe v. Wade is on shaky ground.
The upcoming debate at the Supreme Court is less about the existence of the right to abortion and more about how that right is limited by the emerging personhood of a fetus.
The big case is about abortion, but there are other very important issues before the Supreme Court – including gun rights and government funding for religious schools.
The Supreme Court is a leading player in enacting policy in the US. But it has no army to enforce its decisions; its authority rests solely on its legitimacy.
Some people seeking to influence public opinion about abortion rights claim the science is clear. It’s not, and that means abortion remains a political question – not a biological one.
Abortion and contraception were quite common among premodern Christians, who also celebrated women’s celibacy as superior to marriage and childbearing.
Over the past 48 years, women in the US have married later, attained higher education and joined the workforce in record numbers. Could a conservative Supreme Court turn it all back?
A more conservative court could choose cases that incrementally erode abortion rights, or they could push for reconsideration of the constitutional issues at the very heart of Roe v. Wade.
The death of U.S. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has re-ignited debates on the protection of reproductive rights. This might be the time to examine an overlooked inconsistency in the pro-life argument.