PoliticsRead Next
International
Forced destruction of embryos in the UK to protect sperm donor's autonomy
Cassy Cooke
·Spotlight Articles
Indiana Supreme Court hears arguments on abortion as an act of religious freedom
The Indiana Supreme Court has begun hearing arguments to determine whether or not Jewish women have a religious "right" to abortion.
Indiana's Senate Bill 1 took effect in 2023, protecting nearly all preborn children from abortion.
The ACLU sued on behalf of five women and Hoosier Jews for Choice, claiming the law violates religious freedom.
A temporary injunction was placed on the law, followed by a permanent block earlier this year, which the state appealed, sending the legal battle to the state Supreme Court.
The Indiana Supreme Court has begun hearing arguments; its decision could set the precedent to create a religious "right" to abortion across the country.
In 2022, the Indiana General Assembly passed Senate Bill 1 (SB1), protecting most preborn children from abortion, albeit with exceptions included for the life or health of the mother, rape or incest, and when the child is expected to die during pregnancy or at birth. The ACLU quickly sued to block the law, acting on behalf of five women, as well as Hoosier Jews for Choice, claiming that the law violated the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
Yet according to the lawsuit, at least one plaintiff has no religious affiliation or established belief:
Anonymous Plaintiff 2 does not belong to a specific religious tradition but has personal religious and spiritual beliefs that guide her life, including her moral and ethical practices.
She does not believe in a single, theistic god, but believes that there is within the universe a supernatural force or power that connects all humans and is larger than any individual person. She believes this could be described as a universal consciousness, and because of this connectedness through a supernatural force, she believes all humans are directed to act in a manner that promotes and does not harm other humans or this community of humanity.
One of her central spiritual beliefs is that people are endowed with bodily autonomy that should not be infringed upon. To do so constitutes a spiritual and moral wrong and inhibits the full expression of a person’s humanity.
Aside from the hypocrisy of killing preborn children while also claiming that humans are directed to never hurt other humans, this vague description hardly qualifies as "religious beliefs," and seemingly exists solely to create the widest loophole possible. Accepting this as a "religious belief" would essentially open the door to any woman being able to claim she should be allowed to have an abortion, with vague and meaningless spiritualized language used as a justification.
In December of 2022, Marion County Superior Court Judge Heather Welch ruled in favor of the ACLU and placed a temporary injunction against the law. The state of Indiana appealed the ruling, but an appeals court agreed with Welch, upholding the injunction.
Marion County Superior Court Judge Christina R. Klineman issued a permanent injunction against SB1 in March of 2026, but narrowed the injunction to apply only to those who claim the law violates their religious beliefs. The state filed another appeal, and the Indiana Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
Arguments have begun in the closely watched case, as the Indiana Supreme Court decision could set a precedent either finding a religious "right" to abortion or confirming that there is none.
ACLU Legal Director Ken Falk argued before the justices that it is improper to allow exceptions for rape, incest, and health, but not religion. "It just diminishes religion to somehow require religious exceptions to take a backseat to secular ones," Falk said.
Indiana Solicitor General James Barta argued that none of the women are pregnant and therefore don't have standing. Yet Falk hit back, saying the law is causing the plaintiffs injury.
“The individual plaintiffs in this case are two women whose sincere religious beliefs have compelled them in the past to obtain abortions, but are no longer able to obtain such religiously required abortions because of Indiana’s abortion law,” Falk said. “Because of this they have been forced to change their behaviors today, in the most personal and fundamental ways, to avoid pregnancies they would not be able to terminate even when religiously required.”
Meanwhile, Josh Blackman, an attorney with the coalition and professor at the South Texas College of Law, told the Jerusalem Post there is no specific Jewish teaching about abortion. “From a theological perspective, it’s hard to say what is the single Jewish teaching on abortion," he said.
He added, “At a time when there’s growing hostility between people on the right and Jews, I'm not sure this is the best use of Jewish resources. This could actually backfire in significant ways.”
However, Cecily Routman, MSW of the Jewish Pro-Life Foundation, explained, "Jewish abortion advocates and their confederates have reconstructed Judaism into their image of a baby killing cult deserving constitutional protections. This deceit provides cover for scurrilous charges of anti-semitism and racism targeted at Christian pro-life activists and educators, and in legal challenges to life saving legislation." She further noted:
Judaism prohibits destroying the life of innocent children in the womb, permitting it (not requiring it, as some falsely claim) only in very rare cases where the pregnancy threatens the mother’s physical life. Today, this situation occurs in less than 1% of cases. Every pro-life law includes this exception. This fact invalidates the claim that legal protections for unborn citizens threaten Jewish religious practice. Judaism believes every life is precious and that God has a plan for each of us. Every person has value from conception to natural death.
[LAN Editor’s Note: Abortion — the intentional killing of a preborn child — is not medically necessary, as life-respecting alternatives are available.]
The Indiana Supreme Court has not given a timeline of when it will rule on the case.
Live Action News is pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective.
Our work is possible because of our donors. Please consider giving to further our work of changing hearts and minds on issues of life and human dignity.
Contact editor@liveaction.org for questions, corrections, or if you are seeking permission to reprint any Live Action News content.
Guest Articles: To submit a guest article to Live Action News, email editor@liveaction.org with an attached Word document of 800-1000 words. Please also attach any photos relevant to your submission if applicable. If your submission is accepted for publication, you will be notified within three weeks. Guest articles are not compensated (see our Open License Agreement). Thank you for your interest in Live Action News!
Cassy Cooke
·
Politics
Cassy Cooke
·
Politics
Bridget Sielicki
·
Politics
Cassy Cooke
·
Politics
Bridget Sielicki
·
Politics
Bridget Sielicki
·Politics
Cassy Cooke
·
International
Cassy Cooke
·
BREAKINGInternational
Cassy Cooke
·
Fact Checks
Cassy Cooke
·
Analysis
Cassy Cooke
·Indiana Supreme Court hears arguments on abortion as an act of religious freedom
The Indiana Supreme Court has begun hearing arguments to determine whether or not Jewish women have a religious "right" to abortion.
Indiana's Senate Bill 1 took effect in 2023, protecting nearly all preborn children from abortion.
The ACLU sued on behalf of five women and Hoosier Jews for Choice, claiming the law violates religious freedom.
A temporary injunction was placed on the law, followed by a permanent block earlier this year, which the state appealed, sending the legal battle to the state Supreme Court.
The Indiana Supreme Court has begun hearing arguments; its decision could set the precedent to create a religious "right" to abortion across the country.
In 2022, the Indiana General Assembly passed Senate Bill 1 (SB1), protecting most preborn children from abortion, albeit with exceptions included for the life or health of the mother, rape or incest, and when the child is expected to die during pregnancy or at birth. The ACLU quickly sued to block the law, acting on behalf of five women, as well as Hoosier Jews for Choice, claiming that the law violated the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).
Yet according to the lawsuit, at least one plaintiff has no religious affiliation or established belief:
Anonymous Plaintiff 2 does not belong to a specific religious tradition but has personal religious and spiritual beliefs that guide her life, including her moral and ethical practices.
She does not believe in a single, theistic god, but believes that there is within the universe a supernatural force or power that connects all humans and is larger than any individual person. She believes this could be described as a universal consciousness, and because of this connectedness through a supernatural force, she believes all humans are directed to act in a manner that promotes and does not harm other humans or this community of humanity.
One of her central spiritual beliefs is that people are endowed with bodily autonomy that should not be infringed upon. To do so constitutes a spiritual and moral wrong and inhibits the full expression of a person’s humanity.
Aside from the hypocrisy of killing preborn children while also claiming that humans are directed to never hurt other humans, this vague description hardly qualifies as "religious beliefs," and seemingly exists solely to create the widest loophole possible. Accepting this as a "religious belief" would essentially open the door to any woman being able to claim she should be allowed to have an abortion, with vague and meaningless spiritualized language used as a justification.
In December of 2022, Marion County Superior Court Judge Heather Welch ruled in favor of the ACLU and placed a temporary injunction against the law. The state of Indiana appealed the ruling, but an appeals court agreed with Welch, upholding the injunction.
Marion County Superior Court Judge Christina R. Klineman issued a permanent injunction against SB1 in March of 2026, but narrowed the injunction to apply only to those who claim the law violates their religious beliefs. The state filed another appeal, and the Indiana Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
Arguments have begun in the closely watched case, as the Indiana Supreme Court decision could set a precedent either finding a religious "right" to abortion or confirming that there is none.
ACLU Legal Director Ken Falk argued before the justices that it is improper to allow exceptions for rape, incest, and health, but not religion. "It just diminishes religion to somehow require religious exceptions to take a backseat to secular ones," Falk said.
Indiana Solicitor General James Barta argued that none of the women are pregnant and therefore don't have standing. Yet Falk hit back, saying the law is causing the plaintiffs injury.
“The individual plaintiffs in this case are two women whose sincere religious beliefs have compelled them in the past to obtain abortions, but are no longer able to obtain such religiously required abortions because of Indiana’s abortion law,” Falk said. “Because of this they have been forced to change their behaviors today, in the most personal and fundamental ways, to avoid pregnancies they would not be able to terminate even when religiously required.”
Meanwhile, Josh Blackman, an attorney with the coalition and professor at the South Texas College of Law, told the Jerusalem Post there is no specific Jewish teaching about abortion. “From a theological perspective, it’s hard to say what is the single Jewish teaching on abortion," he said.
He added, “At a time when there’s growing hostility between people on the right and Jews, I'm not sure this is the best use of Jewish resources. This could actually backfire in significant ways.”
However, Cecily Routman, MSW of the Jewish Pro-Life Foundation, explained, "Jewish abortion advocates and their confederates have reconstructed Judaism into their image of a baby killing cult deserving constitutional protections. This deceit provides cover for scurrilous charges of anti-semitism and racism targeted at Christian pro-life activists and educators, and in legal challenges to life saving legislation." She further noted:
Judaism prohibits destroying the life of innocent children in the womb, permitting it (not requiring it, as some falsely claim) only in very rare cases where the pregnancy threatens the mother’s physical life. Today, this situation occurs in less than 1% of cases. Every pro-life law includes this exception. This fact invalidates the claim that legal protections for unborn citizens threaten Jewish religious practice. Judaism believes every life is precious and that God has a plan for each of us. Every person has value from conception to natural death.
[LAN Editor’s Note: Abortion — the intentional killing of a preborn child — is not medically necessary, as life-respecting alternatives are available.]
The Indiana Supreme Court has not given a timeline of when it will rule on the case.
Live Action News is pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective.
Our work is possible because of our donors. Please consider giving to further our work of changing hearts and minds on issues of life and human dignity.
Contact editor@liveaction.org for questions, corrections, or if you are seeking permission to reprint any Live Action News content.
Guest Articles: To submit a guest article to Live Action News, email editor@liveaction.org with an attached Word document of 800-1000 words. Please also attach any photos relevant to your submission if applicable. If your submission is accepted for publication, you will be notified within three weeks. Guest articles are not compensated (see our Open License Agreement). Thank you for your interest in Live Action News!
Cassy Cooke
·Politics
Cassy Cooke
·Politics
Bridget Sielicki
·Politics
Cassy Cooke
·Politics
Bridget Sielicki
·Politics
Bridget Sielicki
·Politics
Cassy Cooke
·International
Cassy Cooke
·BREAKINGInternational
Cassy Cooke
·Fact Checks
Cassy Cooke
·Analysis
Cassy Cooke
·