There are two predictions I can make with some surety (though I’m all too often out in the weeds) surety.
No, it is not the inevitability of death and taxes.
The issues are these: The Catholic church will never change its position on life and will always oppose abortion on demand as well as oppose any and all changes to laws that would allow abortion in cases of rape, incest or life of the mother.
Women, 75% of whom see this as a reproductive rights bedrock issue, will never support turning the clock backwards.
If President Trunp’s next appointment to the Supreme Court is the very conservative Judge Kavanaugh, and he leads a new majority that overturns Roe vs. Wade, all hell will break loose – a clash of the immovable force and the immovable object.
The terrible swift sword of retribution will be aimed primarily at Republicans, especially Republican men. If there is one issue that a solid majority of women from all walks of life agree upon, it is reproductive rights and unfettered access.
Most folks are familiar with the old country admonition “be careful what you wish for.” In this case the question is aimed at those seeking repeal of Roe vs. Wade. Many have forgotten that if repeal occurs state law takes effect. Needless to say some of these state tweaks are far more restrictive than Roe vs. Wade.
Conservative legislators will end up in a trap of their own making. They’ll be hammered by both sides and unable to appease either.
The issue is a tough one. Governor Andrus always said he was pro-life but the proponents of overturning the ruling did not view him that way because he believed there should be exemptions for rape.incest or life of the mother.
I personally adhere to the Catholic church’s view that life begins at conception and is a continuum until natural death. I still believe, however, that the church allows for individual conscience to prevail. That tells me that if a family decides to back a daughter who has been raped or the mother’s life is at stake, the family has an absolute right to assert and select an abortion option. I cannot imagine any father ordering his daughter to carry a child to birth if the daughter has been raped by a thug and she doesn’t want to carry to delivery.
There has to be some flexibility in any beginning of life or end of life issue. The church recognizes in good faith this primacy right of one’s conscience.
The main reason Andrus vetoed the infamous HB 625 was not because he no longer viewed himself as pro-life, for he continued to see himself in that light. He too came to recognize an individual family’s right to privacy on a difficult question with no easy answer. He could care less what the Uhlencutts and the Nuxolls of the world thought.
Andrus did do one thing differently. Usually he signed or vetoed proposed new laws quickly. In this case he took his time—the full ten days— before zapping it. He did this as a “teaching moment” for Idaho’s citizens .
It will be interesting to see how the Legislature handles this “cow pie” that will be back in their pocket.
