Perhaps you’re thinking of Josh Blackman’s article arguing that Reform Judaism’s anti-abortion doctrine doesn’t count as a “sincerely held belief”?
(To his credit, Blackman later recanted his argument.)
But they didnt-
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/supreme-court-abortion-pill-decision-06-13-24/index.html#:~:text=CNN’s%20Annette%20Choi-,The%20Supreme%20Court%20unanimously%20rejected%20a%20lawsuit%20challenging%20the%20Food,an%20in-person%20doctor’s%20visit.
The Supreme Court unanimously rejected a lawsuit challenging the Food and Drug Administration’s approach to regulating the abortion pill mifepristone with a ruling that will continue to allow the pills to be mailed to patients without an in-person doctor’s visit.
IIRC that’s because the convoluted arguments for standing were so poor that even they could not ignore them, rather than any merits of the case or their desires for more restrictions (from the conservative and reactionary members).
So they dumped the issue lest the courts be flooded from now until the end of time by the change in precedent. I will continue to hold my breathe once other challenges hit the SCOTUS.
Ah, that may very well be what I’m conflating.
Maybe because he played a role in the Trump administration?
Also they left the doors wide open for: someone else with standing to bring a case; Congress to act; or a future Trump executive branch to direct action. All of which would be allowable.
This was not a pro choice win. It just was not a loss at this time.
Yes. Under Jewish law, the fetus isn’t actually a person until it draws a breath. Breath and soul are the same word in Hebrew, and God ensouled Adam by breathing into him:
And Judaism holds “saving a human life” as paramount. You can break almost all the other commandments to save a life. So while Judaism generally frowns on abortion for a variety of reasons, if the woman is endangered by the pregnancy, Jewish law demands that she be protected from the pregnancy, by abortion if that’s what’s necessary.
Rabbinic sources relate to difficulty in birthing even a full-term infant and the right or obligation to dismember the fetus for the mother’s safety. In other discussions, the fetus does not have the status of human (nefesh ) until birth. The fetus in a difficult birth is considered a pursuer (rodef ), who can or must be dismembered to save the mother’s life.
Agreed - that’s why I was pointing out to @DrDeth that it wasn’t in any way the SCOTUS reactionaries supporting abortion access, just that they shut down the case for procedural issues (which, equally IMHO, shows just how badly the 5th Circuit wanted it to happen to ignore all of this) - not that there was any any hope that the RWNJ portion of our current SCOTUS would stop in their twisted interpretations and callous disregard for precedent.
Thus my stated worries for -all- the future cases that are bound to be slightly less tortuous for the SCOTUS to weigh in on.
It would be nice if all members of any Trump administration resigned in disgrace just because they were members of a Trump administration, but the world doesn’t work that way.
I looked up what actually happened. Rob Porter resigned due to domestic violence allegations while he was the White House Staff Secretary for Trump.
So what I conclude from this is that, while saving the mother’s life is not a central tenet of Judiasm, refusing to dress a wedding cake to celebrate a gay wedding is a central tenet of Christianity. Is this stated in the bible?
Oh, definitely. There’s a whole section on baked goods, recipes, restrictions on who can make them, who you can make them for, etc. It’s all in the book of Duncan Hines, chapters 5-12.
Your post is spot on, of course.
I’ve had the following conversation with my Conservative Catholic FiL a number of times, and I have to say I love it every time.
Well, Mormons consider themselves Christians.
They absolutely are not! A group gets to decide who its members are!
OK, well, who decides for Christians?
The Christians!
Which ones? You know a significant number of Evangelicals think the Catholic church isn’t really a Christian church?
That’s silly. Of course it is.
Usually at this point he’s too mad to continue the conversation. He really doesn’t see why I find his argument utterly lacking in logic or reason.
Remember: He doesn’t belong to a church.
He belongs to The Church.
I would like to call your attention to George Washington’s to the Newport, RI synagogue:
Here is one paragraph, but the entire letter is in this spirit:
“The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.”
6/9 of SCOTUS would disagree.
That was the Enlightenment. This is now.
Heck, Thomas Jefferson didn’t even limit it to “Judeo-” Christian.
Right. And I’m sure that’s what he’s thinking. But while most of the family is VERY religious (my wife somehow escaped this) about one generation back half of them split and went evangelical. All were Catholic before this.
So I suspect that he has forced himself to accept the Evangelicals since they are his siblings. I guess the fun experiment would be to get some of them to go Mormon and see how he reacts.
They didnt have to reject it. But they did.
They really did. That case has the potential to throw our entire drug approval prices in disarray, and make healthcare even more expensive and random than it is now. It had implications way beyond abortion, and would have been an incredibly disruptive and damaging ruling.
The only thing that’s shocking is that the case got as far as it did.
Yep. see you got Justices like Gorsuch and Roberts who are true “letter of the law” conservatives. SCOTUS also shrugged away all of trumps election challenges…
The Court is conservative no doubt, but it is not controls my MAGA types.