Justice Thomas hints SCOTUS will soon tackle question of trait-selective abortion

Make sure to let us know what you think... we now have comments turned ON below the article!

The national debate over abortion has reached a fever pitch in recent months as some states have moved to relax restrictions on the lethal procedure for unborn babies while other states have moved to protect the unborn with tough restrictions that truly make the procedure “safe, legal, and rare,” with an emphasis on “rare.”

It has become increasingly obvious that advocates on both sides have dug in on their positions and it will soon become necessary for the Supreme Court to weigh in on the matter definitively, as a recent concurrence issued by Clarence Thomas strongly suggests.

Holding pattern…for now

An op-ed in the Washington Examiner recently called attention to the veritable signal flare from the court on the abortion issue, which was sent up by Justice Thomas.

Thomas weighed in with his thoughts on the court’s decision as to whether or not it would hear arguments on two provisions in an Indiana statutes, the first of which dealt with methods of disposal for fetal remains following an abortion, the second of which was focused on the prohibition of abortions based solely on the race, sex, or potential disability of an unborn baby.

The court as a whole decided to take up the first part of the case about the proper disposal of fetal remains, but declined to take up the selective abortion issue. While Thomas concurred with both decisions, he went out of his way in a separate opinion to explain why he believed the second issue was one of great importance that would need to be settled soon.

“Modern-day eugenics”

Thomas wasted little time in getting down to the heart of the matter — abortion based solely on select immutable characteristics like race, sex, or genetic disability is little more than a “tool of modern-day eugenics.”

The respected jurist laid out a brief, if informative, history of the eugenics movement and noted how it was a driving force behind the agenda of Margaret Sanger, the founder of abortion provider Planned Parenthood.

As a rather extreme form of “birth control,” Thomas asserted that trait-selective abortions fit right in with Sanger’s desire to reduce the population of the “ever increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all.”

“This case highlights the fact that abortion is an act rife with the potential for eugenic manipulation,” Thomas warned. He later added, “Enshrining a constitutional right to an abortion based solely on the race, sex, or disability of an unborn child, as Planned Parenthood advocates, would constitutionalize the views of the 20th-century eugenics movement.”

Duty of the court

“Given the potential for abortion to become a tool of eugenic manipulation, the Court will soon need to confront the constitutionality of laws like Indiana’s,” Thomas wrote. “But because further percolation may assist our review of this issue of first impression, I join the Court in declining to take up the issue now.”

“Although the Court declines to wade into these issues today, we cannot avoid them forever. Having created the constitutional right to an abortion, this Court is duty bound to address its scope,” he concluded.

In other words, the court will most likely be tackling this critical issue in the future, though probably after laws in other states that are similar to Indiana’s are passed and challenged in the judiciary, providing a broader basis for legal review once arguments are eventually heard.

105 Responses

  1. The next time I read a blog, I hope that it doesn’t fail me just as much as this one. After all, Yes, it was my choice to read, nonetheless I actually believed you’d have something helpful to talk about. All I hear is a bunch of whining about something you can fix if you were not too busy seeking attention.

  2. An interesting discussion is worth comment. I think that you should publish more about this topic, it may not be a taboo matter but generally folks don’t discuss such issues. To the next! Cheers!!

  3. I absolutely love your blog.. Great colors & theme. Did you create this web site yourself? Please reply back as I’m wanting to create my own personal website and would love to know where you got this from or just what the theme is called. Thank you!

  4. An outstanding share! I’ve just forwarded this onto a colleague who has been doing a little homework on this. And he actually ordered me dinner because I stumbled upon it for him… lol. So let me reword this…. Thanks for the meal!! But yeah, thanx for spending time to discuss this subject here on your web page.

  5. I really love your blog.. Pleasant colors & theme. Did you build this web site yourself? Please reply back as I’m wanting to create my own blog and would like to know where you got this from or exactly what the theme is named. Many thanks!

  6. Aw, this was a really nice post. Taking a few minutes and actual effort to generate a really good article… but what can I say… I hesitate a whole lot and don’t manage to get nearly anything done.

  7. Oh my goodness! Amazing article dude! Thank you so much, However I am experiencing problems with your RSS. I don’t know why I cannot join it. Is there anyone else getting similar RSS problems? Anyone that knows the solution can you kindly respond? Thanx!!

  8. Right here is the right webpage for anyone who wants to find out about this topic. You realize a whole lot its almost tough to argue with you (not that I personally would want to…HaHa). You certainly put a fresh spin on a subject that has been discussed for many years. Great stuff, just great!

  9. Good post. I learn something totally new and challenging on sites I stumbleupon every day. It will always be interesting to read through articles from other authors and practice a little something from other websites.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.