Roundtable: What's your response to Supreme Court eliminating abortion protection?

What is your response to the U.S. Supreme Court eliminating the protection for abortion and allowing states to set their own laws regulating the procedure?

Court's majority has no interest in equal citizenship stature

The United States was established by and for property-holding white northern European men. Our founders were white, male supremacists. Darker people’s humanity was in question and women were chattle “an item of property not real estate.” When justices say they’re following the intent of the founders, these are the people whose ideas they are speaking of. When the franchise was extended, in 1870, being male was a surer qualification than being white. The 15th amendment said that all U.S. citizens, even the previously enslaved, could vote, them being male was understood.

Whether it’s the Federalist Society or the Proud Boys the male-supremacist premise is shared. And these, sad to say, are the stalwarts of the current Republican Party. No wonder they didn’t like Ruth Bader Ginsberg who testified at her nomination hearing that the constitution protects a woman’s “right to decide whether or not to bear a child,” and that ”legal challenges to undue restrictions on abortion center on a woman's autonomy to determine her life’s course and thus enjoy equal citizenship stature.” The current Supreme Court majority have no interest in our equal citizenship stature. — Laurie Muelder

Abortion column: Sallee Wade: Women’s bodies, women’s wisdom

Decision returns the matter to the people

The decision will have little effect on most state laws. In Illinois the Democrats already control the governorship and legislature, so they can do whatever they want. Polls show that a majority of Americans favor early abortions, but find late-term abortions repellant. If progressive Democrats insist on abortion at any time, they will be handing the Republicans a strong issue to campaign on.

Alito explained in the majority opinion that Roe was being attacked from all sides by new laws and lawsuits, so more delay would simply overwhelm the court. Kavanagh said that this was because the court should not be making law — that was for Congress or the state legislatures. Roe (and Casey) had sought to end the debate, but failed spectacularly. This returns the matter, for better or worse, to the people. — William Urban

This has been a GOP wish for decades

There wasn't a recent epiphany that Roe versus Wade was flawed and that the SCOTUS should have never upheld it. Striking down this 50-year-old decision has been part of the GOP wish list for decades, and now they have the radical agenda-driven conservative court to deliver on that promise. It's nonsensical to believe the reason to overturn this precedent was to protect the unborn's life, give women more choices, and return this decision back to the states to decide.

The GOP has signaled that it isn't stopping at banning abortions, they want it all. Civil Rights, Affirmative Action, and laws designed to protect the LGBTQ community face being overturned. The thought a 13-year-old rape victim is required to carry the baby to full term or face decades in prison is draconian. Women who want abortions will get them regardless of its legality. Expecting nonprofits and churches to provide postnatal support services isn't a realistic plan. Overturning Roe will now create a new set of issues once the baby is born. — John Hunigan

Abortion letter: LETTER: Keep abortion as a legal health-care option

Decision constitutes profound threat to personal freedoms

The Supreme Court’s 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade, grounded in the due process clause of the 14th Amendment, found that Americans of all genders enjoy a fundamental right to privacy. That right gives constitutional protection for women (and trans men) to choose to terminate a pregnancy, within specified limits. For 50 years, women — and their partners and families — have lived more securely in the knowledge that the law of the land guaranteed them that right.  Last week’s decision strips away that constitutional protection, opening the door to draconian restrictions that recognize no exceptions and also threaten criminal prosecution.

While public opinion has from the start been divided, this decision goes far beyond what most Americans believe is right. We need to ensure abortions remain legally available and work toward federal legislation guaranteeing this right. Moreover, the legal argument behind this decision challenges the right to privacy more broadly, putting at risk other key constitutional guarantees, such as access to contraception and same-sex marriage, and potentially giving the state back the authority to criminalize our most intimate personal interactions. Coupled with the court's decisions eroding the separation of church and state, this constitutes a profound threat to our personal freedoms. — David Amor

Abortion letter: LETTER: No implicit constitutional right to abortion!

Issue should have been with the states all along

Abortion, as we have been reminded over the past few weeks, is an incendiary issue with passionate feelings on both sides. In America, we have traditionally resolved explosive issues like that through our political process. Voters select people who hold their beliefs and eventually a solution is reached, often by compromise.

Roe was decided when I was in law school and my feelings about it have not changed since. Setting aside the moral issues, by cutting off debate, the Supreme Court made compromise impossible. The Notorious RBG agreed with my position. She, too, felt Roe went too far too fast. Several of her criticisms of the original decision also formed the basis for Justice Alito’s opinion in Dobbs.

The issue is now back in the political arena where different states will enact laws based on their citizens’ beliefs. That is where I think the issue should have been all along. — Harry Bulkeley

Court decision is about controlling women

The recent SCOTUS ruling fully opened the door to current Texas law regarding abortion. That Texas law makes it so a brood mare that miscarries a foal has more rights to medical treatment than a woman who miscarried. About 10% of pregnancies result in miscarriages in women. Women with ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages are now finding it difficult to get the needed drugs or procedures to treat a miscarriage in Texas. Couple that with the Texas law regarding a $10,000 civil court “bounty” if a woman terminates a pregnancy at six weeks or more. Conceivably a woman, who naturally miscarries, may now have to provide proof to some overzealous religious crazed person that may file a civil suit against her, her doctor or even a person that drives her to the hospital.

Then there is the attempt by many to indicate that a heartbeat defines a viable person. A friend recently wrote: “The 'heartbeat' argument is specious. A heartbeat doesn't make a 'person' ... sentience does. That's why life support is removed when brain waves go flat. In the end, reasonable people can disagree whether a fetus is a person, but there is no questioning whether the woman hosting it is.” I will also add an opinion of a self-made, successful, intelligent woman that I love and respect. She stated: “It's the first step in taking away all women and minority rights. ... It's about controlling women and keeping us second class citizens.” — Stephen Podwojski

There is no constitutional right to an abortion

My initial response is, “It’s about time!” There is not now and never was a constitutional right to abortions. It was entirely a myth; a manufactured, not a natural right, conceived for the incredibly irresponsible.

To paraphrase Justice Clarence Thomas: There is a clear right for citizens to keep and bear arms in the Constitution (Amendment II{2}) but there’s not a single word of a right to abort. Since the Constitution is very clear, in Amendment X (10): “The powers not delegated to the United States are reserved to the States respectively or to the people.”

The Supreme Court, this time, merely affirmed what the Constitution says and turned the decision back to the individual states, where it belongs. Now we are watching the left, in real-time, doing what they always claim conservatives do; they are throwing a fit, committing and advocating violence because they can’t have their way. — Charlie Gruner

The Community Roundtable runs each Sunday and is made up of local writers. Community writers answer one question each week in 150 words or fewer. 

This article originally appeared on Galesburg Register-Mail: Roundtable: What's your response to court removing abortion protection