The SCOTUS "Draft" Overturning ROE-v-WADE Is Unconscionable and Immoral... Are We On a Path to Theological Law In the USA?

 

In light of the SCOTUS "draft" decision, which if affirmed will overturn overturn ROE-v-WADE, we post a bit of interesting and useful information found on Progressive Eruptions. It seems that in 1968 a commission authorized Pope Paul VI found that the RCC's stance on abortion did more harm to Catholics and their marriages that it did good. Advising the ban on abortion be lifted. 

PS. On July 25, 1968, Pope Paul VI stunned Catholics around the world with his announcement of Humanae Vitae, "Of Human Life," a document in which he forcefully reaffirmed the church's previously stated position on the use of artificial birth control, calling it "intrinsically wrong."

If you read the history of that 1968 Papal Bull, you will find that a commission authorized by Pope Paul to study birth control was ignored by Pope Paul because he didn't like the outcome. The outcome? The commission, which was comprised of devote lay Catholics, doctors, theologians, found that the RCC's opposition to birth control did more harm to Catholics and their marriages than it did good and advised the ban be lifted. Pope Paul ignored the findings because he was afraid if the RCC admitted it was wrong on this doctrine, then people would question others by the RCC. So he ignored the findings and thus, Humanae Vitae reaffirmed the RCC's ban on artificial birth control.

90% of Catholics, btw, use birth control. The opposition to birth control was a man-made (by a previous pope) doctrine.

MORE HERE

The conservative catholic Court is actually considering overturning the right that ALL women have to control their own bodies. Which naturally including their reproductive rights. Opening the door to further restrictions on civil liberties.

It is becoming clear that the nation's Evangelical conservative movement, and the authoritarian conservative SCOTUS,  is preparing to openly steer the nation down a path that could very well lead to secular politics and secular law being heavily influenced by conservative theological ideologies.

America- Beware!

WAIT! - There's More

The media is ignoring the horrifying fact that this draft ruling also says Griswold vs Connecticut was wrongly decided because our constitution does not explicitly give us a right to privacy.

Silly me, I thought by banning unreasonable searches the authors were clearly protecting our right to privacy. I would bet they assumed that it is so glaringly obvious that a right to privacy is as much a key to liberty as the right to breathe is crucial to our right to life that it didn’t need to be stated explicitly.

The right to privacy is a sine qua non for freedom and democracy to exist. It is one of the things autocrats take away by spying and encouraging citizens to spy on each other.

Authoritarian regimes like the USSR and Nazi Germany even rewarded kids for reporting on their own parents. Undoing Griswold is even more threatening to our freedom than is overturning Roe.

Most people don’t understand that before Griswold states could deny even married women access to birth control because preventing pregnancy is supposedly a violation of “natural law”. Natural law (i.e. God’s law) is the basis of the Catholic Church’s opposition to birth control and Catholic judges like Clarence Thomas has used that concept, to justify legal positions.

Many anti-abortion activists also want to ban some of the most effective forms of birth control — the pill and IUD as well as the “morning after pill” — because they claim they cause abortions. That belief is based on a religious belief that even a fertilized human egg has a soul and is therefore a person.

As I said in a previous comment, The non-Catholics were terrified that the US would be "Vaticanized" should JFK attain the presidency. With 6 conservative Catholics on the SCOTUS, that fear has come true.

Opposition to birth control is a CATHOLIC Church opposition, based on a pope's opinion. And members of the current SCOTUS have expressed their agreement with that.

SOURCE