Opinion: Reproductive Rights v. Religious Rights- Incurring the Wrath of a Holy God?

PixabayPhoto byWikiimages

Look around you. Everything you see and hear is all connected to life, ours or someone else’s.

It’s the reason we are here. The goal we hold onto – to live a good and healthy life. To improve upon it. Make it better for our children.

But where exactly is life?

We see this during the before and after. When a loved one says goodbye, drifts into a peaceful sleep that they never awaken from. The body remains. It appears at rest, but something is missing. We know it instantly. It’s gone.

But what is it and when does it begin?

The Alabama Supreme Court recently decided that an embryo placed in a freezer at a hospital or clinic, a byproduct of in vitro fertilization so that a couple can have a child, is already a child as soon as it is fertilized. Frozen in time and space for days or years it is an “extrauterine child.” A living thing.

Alabama Chief Justice Tom Parker wrote in a concurring opinion that, "Human life cannot be wrongfully destroyed without incurring the wrath of a holy God, who views the destruction of His image as an affront to Himself."

A legal opinion or a biblical warning?

Now for some the concept of separation of church and state may spring up at this point. Why is a legal body (a state Supreme Court) making a decision based on their religious beliefs? Not on the laws of that state or based on the US Constitution but on what their religious leaders tell them during Sunday service and bible study.

Did Alabama Chief Justice Tom Parker draw from his experience as a jurist to determine that life begins at fertilization whether that takes place inside a woman’s womb or in a sterile test tube?

Or did he consult the bible, his pastor, his belief systems, and despite being a public servant took it upon himself to make a decision imposing his religious beliefs on the majority of the people within his state who might disagree with him?

Justice Parker believes that “life” begins at fertilization. That it is a child at that exact moment. Apparently like the child at a nearby daycare or the one found pushing his brother on a swing at the local playground.

No different.

And to kill an embryo whether intentionally or not is not just a sin but a crime.

And yes, as a side note, the State of Alabama does have the death penalty with 72 executions over the past 40 years and 175 inmates currently on death row. Why is it that a man or woman awaiting execution – termination of life – is not accorded the same protections as an embryo frozen in time?

The US Supreme Court already struck down Roe V. Wade based on opinions that run parallel to those of Tom Parker. Couched in slightly different terms but is there any doubt that the religious right is influencing these decisions?

So, what comes next?

***

There is already pushback on Alabama’s decision. State Attorney General Steve Marshall has stated publicly that he will not prosecute in vitro fertilization providers or families.

But in the future will a rape victim seeking an abortion in a neighboring state find herself on trial for manslaughter if the laws in Alabama are enforced?

We all have the Constitutional right to practice any religion we choose. We have no right, however, based on the same document to force another to follow that religion, and yet isn’t that what is happening, slowly and inexorably all around the US?

The belief that the United States was founded as a Christian nation even though it most certainly was not. And therefore, those who are already Christian have the right or calling to lead the way?

Historically, a herd is often kept in check by a fence. It needn’t be a strong one to achieve this result, it just needs to remain in place.

The US Supreme Court has already begun dismantling this "fence" and will continue to do so unless it is checked and its purpose returned to the one described in the document, they are there to protect.