Ahlin: If only abortions could be performed with guns
Ahlin writes, "The rogue and riotous Supreme Court is reengineering the Constitution to suit reactionary belief systems of its far-right majority—belief systems frighteningly comfortable with Christian Nationalism, chaos, and minority rule."
Now that SCOTUS has affirmed guns galore (Constitutional! Constitutional!) and any abortion (Not! Not!), wouldn’t it be nice if abortions could be performed with guns? Really, it would solve so many problems. Why, maybe abortions could be done with guns on the 50 yard-line after football games and after players join their coach for non-coerced prayer. A tad bit odd, but like the old Beatles’ song says, “We Can Work It Out.”
These aren’t just weird times, people; we’ve entered the Twilight Zone. The rogue and riotous Supreme Court is reengineering the Constitution to suit reactionary belief systems of its far-right majority—belief systems frighteningly comfortable with Christian Nationalism, chaos, and minority rule. With five of nine members nominated by presidents who didn’t win the popular vote and two of those Justices seated after undemocratic manipulation of the confirmation process, they’re gleefully ripping long-settled law and precedents to shreds.
Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead. (Note: Some call the current court “YOLO,” you only live once.)
Beyond giving sacred status to guns and upending abortion this term, the Justices have trampled on separation between church and state in two separate cases, held (in Orwellian arrogance) that new evidence proving innocence for an inmate sentenced to death is not sufficient reason for a new trial, and decreed police cannot be held accountable for forgetting to read Miranda rights to people they’re arresting. Sad to say, that’s just a sampling.
By overturning Roe v Wade, SCOTUS has outdone The Twilight Zone’s late, great Rod Serling with a nutty nation-wide script, where the very same birth parents who cannot be forced to provide a kidney for their living, breathing child—even if the child’s life depends on getting a compatible kidney—nevertheless, can be forced to go through a problem pregnancy by their state government. No matter the physical or mental well-being of parents, their economic woes and responsibilities, or the needs of the children they’ve already brought into the world: a fertilized egg has more rights in the womb than does the parent with the womb, or, for that matter, an actual child.
Because North Dakota is among many states with “trigger bills,” abortion will cease to be legal in our state within a month. (Sigh… yes, another gun metaphor.) However, North Dakota also is a state which values privacy, particularly when the subject at hand has religious connotations. We showed this clearly in the last decade when initiated measures for so-called “religious liberty” (first) and “personhood” (a few years later) were decisively defeated at a ratio of about two to one on both measures. Unfortunately, those strong measure votes didn’t change the way North Dakotans vote for candidates. And that’s the conundrum because the ND Republican legislature—like SCOTUS—is reactionary and weirdly obsessed with state control of pregnancy, really, anything concerning sex.
There’s no silver bullet, people (oops, bad metaphor). Your privacy is on the ballot.
Jane Ahlin lives in Fargo and is a frequent contributor to The Forum's opinion pages. Email her at email@example.com.
This letter does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Forum's editorial board nor Forum ownership.