Supreme Court should uphold the right to abortion

Abortion. People’s bodily autonomy being debated by the government. A lot has happened reguarding the right to a safe abortion. 

Roe v. Wade saw the Supreme Court floor in 1973, and affirmed the right of people who are able to get pregnant to be able to get abortions. Abortion was declared constitutional through this case, but with limitations making them hard to get. 

These past years, individual states have been creating abortion bans: Mississippi, Florida, and Arizona at 16 weeks; Wyoming at ten weeks; Texas and Idaho at six weeks, Kentucky has a near total ban; and Oklahoma says abortion is only permitted in medical emergencies. 

After the upcoming June Supreme Court ruling, which has the possibility to overturn Roe v. Wade, states will have more leeway regarding abortion. Already, people in many states have little or no access to abortion, but this would restrict access further. Twenty-one states are certain to ban abortion.

There has been a leaked Supreme Court voting plan explaining that our current court will overrule Roe v. Wade. It says “we hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled.”

Here at The Olympian, we believe that abortion is a human right that should be accessed without limitations, because the government shouldn’t control bodily autonomy. 

The society we live in doesn’t set up a system that makes it easy for pregnant people or their offsprings to survive. Not everyone is financially or mentally stable to have a child, not helped by the statistic that people assigned female at birth are more likely to live in poverty, and especially people of color. Along with this, the argument for just putting up the baby for adoption or fostering is not viable because these systems are very flawed.

Just because it is banned or inaccessible doesn’t mean people will stop having abortions, in that case—which is already reality for many, people just turn to unsafe methods for this neccessary procedure. 

Mike Pence spoke at a university recently and was asked about having a gay child. He responded that he would still love him, but doesn’t agree with his constitutional rights to get married, or be himself in society, because it doesn’t align with his beliefs. He said that the rights of people need to allow for religious belief. This is similar to the argument of anti-abortion people; “because I don’t agree with it, no one should have it.” Separation of Church and State would mean anti-abortion religious laws are unconstitutional.

Having religious reasoning to ban abortion is also unconstitutional because it encroaches on others’ religious freedom. For example, Jewish law requires even third trimester abortion if there is any possibility of harm coming to the pregnant person.

Instead of banning abortion, we believe that changing the social culture of sexual health. Schools should have contraceptives and more comprehensive sex education for all people (not just cishet relationships). 

We also believe, since California will not be following suit of banning abortion with the overturn of Roe v. Wade, that California should become an abortion safe-haven, providing this essential healthcare service for people who are unable to access it in their state. 

We at The Olympian believe that banning abortion is not only unconstitutional, but unethical.

8 thoughts on “Supreme Court should uphold the right to abortion

  • May 23, 2022 at 1:46 pm

    Abortion should not be overturning. Women have the right to decide what to do with her own body. And also there are a lot of things that kids suffer because their parents problems. Babies should not live in that kind of situations.

  • May 23, 2022 at 1:43 pm

    A WOman should be the ones that hold the power of adbortion.

  • May 23, 2022 at 10:50 am

    I think before banning anything at all, there is a mandatory briefing or education on the matters that these congressmen are discussing.

  • May 23, 2022 at 9:31 am

    Roe v Wade isn’t overturned (yet) so states should not be allowed to put bans on women’s bodies. It’s as simple as this, if you don’t like abortion don’t have one. It’s ridiculous that we have to protest against this again.

  • May 23, 2022 at 8:35 am

    I think that they should NOT overturn Roe v. Wade. We need to allow people to have abortions and if we do NOT allow people to get abortions, then we will be VIOLATING women’s rights, and we can’t do that. I think that if men are allowed to control their bodies and make their choice to do what they want with their bodies, then I think that women should ALSO be allowed to control their bodies and make their choice to do what they want with their bodies. If a woman wants to get an abortion, then WE NEED TO ALLOW THEM TO GET AN ABORTION! Especially in a scenario where they need to get an abortion for their own health or they are getting an abortion because they had an unwanted pregnancy caused by a sex crime being committed against them, then how are they going to be able to get a safe abortion? THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE TO GO TO A DIFFERENT STATE TO DO THIS! They should be able to get an abortion SAFELY, and IN THEIR OWN STATE!

  • May 19, 2022 at 7:28 pm

    Bodily autonomy is a human right. Therefore, access to safe abortions is a human right. If people don’t have access to safe abortions then that is a violation of their rights. Roe was a way of recognizing all that. If SCOTUS abandons Roe, they would not only be abandoning the precedent that THEY set 50 years ago, but would also be violating the human rights of U.S. citizens.

  • May 19, 2022 at 7:28 am

    I definitely think that it is wrong for people to get their religious beliefs caught up in this because it clearly goes against Separation of Church and State. I think it’s absurd that people’s bodily autonomy is up for debate at all. There are so many reasons why safe abortions should be available for anyone who wants one, but in the end those who are able to get pregnant should be the one making the decision, not those without uteruses like many of those in the government.

  • May 18, 2022 at 7:34 am

    Old congressmen shouldn’t have an overwhelming say in women’s reproductive rights. Banning abortions only stops access to safe abortions, not the need for one.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.