The Supreme Court heard arguments regarding the Constitutionality of a 2018 Mississippi law severely limiting access to abortion. Julie Rikelman argued on behalf of the Center for Reproductive Rights to overturn the law. A ruling is not expected before June of 2022. The arguments today were very thoughtful and civil, except for a couple pointed barbs from Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan aimed at Brett Kavanaugh.

Since 1973 when the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decided Roe vs. Wade on the basis of a penumbra of privacy in the First Amendment to the Constitution, the science around pregnancy has grown exponentially, contraception has changed, the arguments by the pro-abortion crowd has not changed. Listening to attorney Julie Rikelman argue before the court that was very clear.

Roe vs. Wade was a heavy handed decision, political decision made during a time of huge societal change. Back in those bad old days, women did not have access to birth control methods and were expected to be second class citizens. Today, birth control is cheap and readily available, even in Mississippi, Miss Rikelman.

Julie Rikelman argued that Roe is settled law (stare decisis). Settled law is like settled science. Things change. She said that forcing a woman to go through with a pregnancy deprived women of the fundamental right of bodily autonomy and that ending the right to abortions would propel women backwards. Rikelman also argued that abortion up to viability should be 100% a woman’s choice and that 15 weeks is pre-viability and not enough time to make a decision. Fetal viability has been pushed back as medicine advances. In the summer of 2020, a 21 week old fetus survived and is thriving today.

Even worse, Julie Rikelman argued that abortion has been a woman’s right since before the founding of our country. It is true that abortion has been around for thousands of years. Until quite recently, until the baby was born it was considered to be a “clump of cells”. For about 3,000 years, medical arts practitioners believed that cutting someone and bleeding them was a healing procedure. We know that is dangerous and stupid now. It is anti-life. When we know better, we do better.

I find it amazing that being pro-life is considered a strictly religious position. It is a pro-science position. One could be agnostic or even an atheist, and if one believed in science, one could be pro-life. Medical science moves in leaps and bounds. Life is life. Five summers ago, the Cincinnati Zoo believed that Bibi the Hippo was pregnant. For the first time ever, the Zoo did an ultrasound on a hippopotamus. At two minutes into the video, you will see the discovery of a hippo fetus heart and spine.

It all went great but Fiona the Hippo was born six weeks early at 29 pounds. Pre-viability the pro-abortion types would say. Fiona is a healthy four and a half year old today. What is pre-viability?

Justice Sonia Sotomayor is still in the clump of cells camp, the anti-science camp. She doesn’t believe a fetus can feel pain.

Stewart countered that there have been medical “advancements” since Roe was decided in 1973 and since the court’s 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. That ruling has held that states can impose some restrictions on abortion as long as they do not present an “undue burden” but the procedure cannot be prohibited before fetal viability, generally considered to be 23 to 24 weeks into pregnancy.

Sotomayor asked Stewart what that the medical advancements have been since Casey, and he said “knowledge and concern about such things as fetal pain” prior to 24 weeks.

Sotomayor accused him of using junk science, and said there’s a “small fringe of doctors” who hold that view and it’s “not one well-founded in science at all.”

“How is your interest anything but a religious view?” Sotomayor later asked. “When does the life of a woman and putting her at risk enter the calculus?”

Quick personal story. I used to love steaming hot showers. When I was barely pregnant with my son, I got in the shower and as I turn to the shower head, the water hit my stomach. My less than two month fetus crawled up my chest to get away from the pain. Fetal pain is a thing.

Then, Sotomayor compared a fetus to a brain dead person. I told you she was in the anti-science, clump of cells camp:

Justice Sotomayor argues that a fetus responding to a painful stimuli is the equivalent of a clinically brain dead person having a reflex response to painful stimuli. pic.twitter.com/gyUVTPIoDV

— Mockingjay.BackUp (@Mockingjay8911) December 1, 2021

Julie Rikelman is a mother. I think she sees herself as the white savior of poor black women in Mississippi. Sonia Sotomayor has no children. She is anti-science and not particularly fond of the Constitution. They both need to stay in their lane. They know nothing about science. Science is pro-life.

Featured Image: Tom Driggers/Flickr.com/cropped/Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)