Abortion divide grows between blue, red states

With shift in makeup of Supreme Court, red states adopt measures meant to challenge Roe v. Wade, while blue states try to codify it into permanent law

Several hundred protesters, the local portion of a nationwide rally to defund Planned Parenthood, crowd the sidewalk outside the Planned Parenthood on Tustin Ave. in Orange, Calif. on Saturday, February 11, 2017. (Photo by Kevin Sullivan, Orange County Register/SCNG)

In New York, it’s easier than ever to obtain an abortion up until the moment of birth. Not so in Kentucky, Mississippi and Ohio, which enacted legislation this year banning most abortions after the detection of a fetal heartbeat, as early as six weeks.

The 1973 Roe v. Wade decision was supposed to create a national standard on the procedure, but with Roe on the ropes, a flood of abortion legislation has expanded and underlined the divide between red states seeking to overturn the high court ruling and blue states fighting to preserve it.

Mary Ziegler, professor at Florida State University College of Law, attributed this year’s aggressive legislative push on both sides of the abortion issue to a combination of the increasingly polarized political climate and a “reaction to the court.”

“The heartbeat bills are designed to be a vehicle for the court to overturn Roe quickly, and the New York bill is one of the kinds of things you’d expect to see in anticipation of a post-Roe world,” she said.

The most ambitious pro-life bill with a chance of passage is in Alabama, where Republican state Rep. Terri Collins introduced legislation this month that would forbid most abortions two weeks after conception.

“With liberal states like New York rushing to approve radical late-term and post-birth abortions, passage of this bill will reflect the conservative beliefs, principles, and desires of the citizens of Alabama while, at the same time, providing a vehicle to revisit the constitutionally-flawed Roe v. Wade decision,” Ms. Collins said in a statement on Alabama.com.

Time was when a state legislator would have been reluctant to sponsor an ambitious abortion measure on either side of the issue for fear of alienating moderate voters. No longer.

“This is emblematic of the divide, the cultural and political divide, in the country,” said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins.

He attributed the red state reaction in part to the New York bill, which was greeted at the signing ceremony with enthusiastic cheers, and Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, who was accused of condoning infanticide in his comments this year about a late-term abortion bill.

“I think Gov. Cuomo really ignited something,” Mr. Perkins said. “New York took the first step by passing the law and celebrating the law, and what you see in legislatures is other states pushing back.”

Full story at The Washington Times.

Comments

  1. St. Christopher says

    As the Bible shows, Christ has His own children and they know His word and works. Satan, too, has his own children and they follow him. Just as countries in history are evil and Satan influenced, so too are USA States. Those people who believe in the right to kill your baby, go to Blue States, while those favoring life, and for whom eternal life is sought, they go to Red States. Remember what the Bible also says about the “Prince of Persia” and how he blocked an angel from assisting mankind for a time. The Price of California is certainly enthroned there and will seek to increase his own power. Time to act as John the Baptist and remind Satan’s children of the risks to their souls.

    • Evangeline says

      I agree with you in a general way, but would like to point out people cannot just up and move to another state, no matter how much they may wish they could. Generations tend to stay in the same state, and there are ties such as one’s family, career, home, etc., that just cannot be tossed aside so one can move to a more preferable political climate. Young people unattached and move where they want to, but those of us with jobs and family, not so much. Then you must endure, as best you can. Believe me, we’re in Blue Land, and we’d love to move to Red Land, but family ties and jobs prevent.

  2. Not all evil persons are in the blue states, and vice versa. What about the so called ‘purple’ states?

  3. Your Fellow Catholic says

    I seriously doubt that Roe will be overturned by the Supreme Court even with the Republican’s unconsitutional failure to take up the nomination of Merrick Garland. Face the facts: the Consitution is clear that women have the civil right to abortion as a matter of personal privacy. People are very clear that they don’t want government interfering in their personal family choices, In the meanwhile, if we haven’t already, we have to continue to make catholic moral teaching clear to families considering this difficult decision, and offer them compassion if, after seriously considering the issue, choose somethine we’d rather them not.

    • YFC, you have finally exposed yourself as being pro-abortion, there is NO Civil right to killing a child no matter what you and the rest of the progressive thugs think. The Left wants abortion because they want sex without consequence.

    • Wm. Hamilton says

      Face the facts? Really? You characterize the Senate’s failure to act on the Garland nomination as “unconstitutional.” Based on what theory of interpretation? Then you write, “the Consitution is clear that women have the civil right to abortion as a matter of personal privacy.” Wrong again. Even the Roe court said the right was not included in the constitution per se, but in its “penumbra.” Obviously you have an axe to grind as opposed to an interest in facts.

    • Say what? “People are very clear that they don’t want government interfering in their personal family choices”
      It’s a child not a choice and it’s not in the Constitution…Life (first) liberty and the pursuit of happiness are clearly spelled out and no one has the right to kill another unrepeatable human life. In fact it says just the opposite.

    • St. Christopher says

      Word count does not permit the proper response “YFC.” First, no constitutional right exists to have forced a vote on Garland and none has been shown. Second, no Catholic can morally elect abortion as an option and no Catholic can support those that do. . . ever. Third, Roe is entirely unconstitutional in nature, relying on judge-made “rights” that do not exist in the constitution; one can expect some, or all, of Roe to be reversed, except that the cowardly Chief Justice may try to invent a reason to prevent it (for political, not legal, reasons). Forth, abortion is a political issue, not a religious, or constitutional, one. The State is entirely proper in choosing to protect life. The Church must always do so.

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.

Speak Your Mind

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.