It’s a very cool argument, isn’t it?

This early declaration — along with the First Amendment, which Thomas Jefferson solemnly revered “as building a wall of separation between church and state” — illustrates the unprecedented experiment our founders sought to test: a secular republic ruled by democratic laws, not sectarian faith; a nation whose government based its authority upon “we, the people” and not commandments handed down by distant gods. It is a brilliant endowment, given that in a pluralistic democracy such as ours, with people of many faiths and no faiths at all, we purposefully govern ourselves via secular legislation, not religious decrees.

But today, this bold pillar of American democracy is rotting fast. It is under attack by theocrats, especially those who sit on our Supreme Court. Their recent ruling making it nearly illegal for a woman to get an abortion in Texas is the latest terrifying case in point.

The problem is not religion, or even Catholicism. After all, many of our leaders, such as President Biden, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Justice Sonia Sotomayor, are themselves Roman Catholics, and they all affirm reproductive choice as a constitutional right. In fact, 56% of Catholics in the United States support this right.

A;ll of this in support of the insistence that legislatures, those engines of democracy, must not be allowed to pass laws about abortion.

21 thoughts on “It’s a very cool argument, isn’t it?”

  1. “President Biden, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Justice Sonia Sotomayor, are themselves Roman Catholics”

    No they are not. I’m more RC as a member of the CoE.


    Lol. People not descended from the founders object to the descendants of the founders having a say over their own laws.

  3. Basing abortion rights on an obscure reading of the right to privacy could only last so long. Perhaps a specific constitutional amendment will come which guarantees it.

  4. “our Supreme Court. Their recent ruling making it nearly illegal for a woman to get an abortion in Texas ”

    No it bloody didn’t. It simply accepted, for the time being, the right of the Texas legislature to make law on the subject. (Which had been the constitutional position until SCOTUS decide to do a bit of legislating of its own with the judicial coup that was Wade-Roe.)

    I’m not anti-abortion – I am anti lying about it.

  5. It was a republic founded for people who were overwhelmingly Christian; plus some Roman Catholics, I’ll grant you. The point was to avoid the Republic having an established religion – the constitution didn’t ban those individual states that already had an established religion from carrying on with it. It didn’t even ban states adopting an established religion after the Constitution was signed – but the Union, the Federation, was not to have an established religion.

    This, of course, would be a bloody obvious policy for the Britons who wrote the Constitution because of the example of Britain which had two different Established religions. The novelty of the Constitution tends to be exaggerated by Americans, partly because of their ignorance of history. I particularly enjoyed once seeing an American opine that the trouble with England was that it had never had a Bill of Rights.

  6. The same people who argue, without smirking, that the US Constitution somehow guarantees the legality of infanticide and pornography simultaneously claim that it doesn’t guarantee the right to own weapons.

    Almost as if these people are mentally ill liars, or something.

  7. At the risk of repeating a truism… if the left didn’t have double standards they would have none at all.

    We, at the risk of tilting towards Ecksism, should stop being amazed and start fighting back. I’m teaching my children to object, argue and to point out hypocrisy. And I’m looking to leave the UK.

  8. Like some others on here, I tend to the view that abortion should be legal and that it should be hedged with restrictions. That said, on what utterly mad world do the pro-abortionists come from that they cannot understand that there are perfectly defensible ethical reasons for opposing abortion? One need not be a theocrat to hold the view that abortion should be made more difficult.

    I think the SCOTUS overreached horribly with Roe vs. Wade, and their subsequent contortions underline the error they made. I also think the new Texas law is overly restrictive and the implementation is absurd – allowing individuals to sue to enforce the law – if upheld would allow for idiotic vexatious laws to be written all over the place.

  9. AA

    So where would you go to that’s better than the UK??

    Texas isn’t as woke (though we’re close to Austin), but Good God, man – Texas? Apart from anything else, the place is flooded with idiot Californians, who seek to do to TX what they did in CA.

    France is a dangerous mixture of you can’t do that-isms, mixed with widespread poverty and decline, mixed with real actual scary idiot socialists and real idiot scary female children of nasty rightwing people, and EU, and idiot Greens, and malevolent unions,…

  10. Ken

    Seems t’me that TX has, in essence, re-established a form of outlawry with that law.

    Which probably is unconstitutional, since all citizens must be offered the same protection under the law (or summat)

  11. Just what I was about to say, dearime. Maryland was a Roman Catholic colony. An established protestant church would have caused havoc, and might have led to its secession.

    The trouble is that after more than two centuries during which the concept of an established church has been almost unknown in the United States, they’ve forgotten what it means. And although it has no bearing on this issue, it is actually highly relevant in these times of “taking the knee” and “cancel culture” in the universities. That’s exactly what the Founding Fathers were worried about; they just never imagined tests of secular faith.

  12. Do we make murder a crime because the Bible tells us to do so, or because we find it morally unacceptable to murder? If we follow these peoples’ logic, we cannot make murder a crime, because the Bible has weighed in on the matter, and we must legislate morality only where religion fails to speak so as not to empower the religion.

  13. “ So where would you go to that’s better than the UK??”
    Canada elected Trudeau and is becoming increasingly woke and self-flagellating, worst current election scenario is he ends up still with a minority government propped up by some extorting smaller group, a lot of the pipeline issues in BC were due to the Greens holding the minority government to ransom at the time.
    On a similar note I wonder how long before the western world follows the brave Afghan lead in proactively dealing with the terrible sexual assault/rape crisis in higher education that’s constantly being reported?

  14. BniC

    I’ll agree that it will eventually be found that opposition to the wise Afghan policy on the rape crisis is sexist, racist and leads to obesity and global warming.

    As for abortion, I tend to dither about the matter. The only point I agree upon is the SCOTUS refusal to institute an emergency ban on the Texas law.

    If common sense prevails (hah!!!), SCOTUS will wait until it becomes plain how the law is working, and the legal cases finally work their way through the system until one reaches the top.

    The only argument against this is that leftists will thus be subject to the same endless legal harassment that they perpetually inflict on the right. My degree of sympathy is zero.

  15. Canada elected Trudeau

    That’s not really true. He gained power because FPP works like that. It doesn’t mean he was that popular. It means his opponents split their vote.

    Then again, Adern’s first “victory” was after getting less seats than the National party.

  16. The trouble is that after more than two centuries during which the concept of an established church has been almost unknown in the United States, they’ve forgotten what it means.

    Not quite. What you’ve got are Jewish atheist communists trying to implement their wokism as faith.

    The trick is to avoid the 60 million dead that arise from their first attempt in Russia.

  17. So where would you go to that’s better than the UK??

    I used to hold out hopes for NZ, but that horse has bolted. And as for Oz, Boganboy, I can remember when the view (from the UK, at least) was that Aussies were bold, self-reliant and forthright – what has happened? Or is it (like the UK) just the cities where everyone seems to be engaged in an unending struggle to out-woke each other?

    Hungary looks attractive, but I could never master the language.

  18. Yep Chris. Out in the country it’s a bit more sensible.

    Indeed that’s why we were ruled by Bjelke Peterson aka New Zealand’s Revenge (he was born in New Zealand) for quite a while. The Labor party instituted a gerrymander that gave extra weight to country voters, who at that stage were dominated by labour unions.

    But true Aussies tend to come and bludge in the cities, so the farmers began importing seasonal workers, who don’t have a vote.

    Thus ghastly Bjekle ruled us for quite a while. His policy was to encourage business so he could pay for more goodies for the mob with increasing mining royalties.

    The media were understandably appalled at such evil, so a vigorous campaign finally got rid of him. The Labor party then made sure to re-gerrymander Queensland properly so such a hideous mishap could never happen again.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *