The Supreme Court of the United States could make history in the coming months and reverse the ruling of Roe vs. Wade, which opened the doors to legal abortion across the country in 1973. If this were to happen, what impact would it have on Latin America?
Pro-life leaders in Latin America spoke about how a pro-life ruling would impact each of their countries and that Roe vs. Wade be reversed. Among these effects, they pointed to a change in the pressures to legalize abortion in the region, which all too often come, politically and economically, from the United States.
This December 1, the Supreme Court, known as SCOTUS for its acronym in English, began to hear oral arguments in the case Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, on a Mississippi state law that restricts most abortions after 15 weeks’ gestation.
A ruling in favor of Mississippi pro-life law could affect the sentences of Roe vs. Wade already Planned Parenthood vs. Casey of 1992, in which the Supreme Court reaffirmed the first ruling and established that “a State cannot prohibit any woman from making the final decision to terminate her pregnancy before viability.”
A baby is considered “viable” outside the womb at around 24 weeks ‘gestation, although in recent years babies born around 21 weeks’ gestation have survived.
Rodrigo Iván Cortés, president of the National Front for the Family of Mexico, and vice president of the Political Network for Values, told ACI Prensa that a “historic decision” reversing Roe vs. Wade “It would mean a huge setback for the ideological activism in favor of the culture of death” deployed by the United States in Latin America, especially under the government of Joe Biden and his vice president, Kamala Harris.
In Mexico, Cortés said, “It has been clearly noted that this Administration is putting pressure on Mexico for changes in laws and policies to impose abortion and gender ideology ”.
In addition, he said that this change “would mean a very important reference” for the ministers of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation of Mexico, who “are clearly subordinate to that ideology of death.”
The case Roe vs. Wade It’s built on a lie Norma McCorvey used the pseudonym “Jane Roe” when presenting the case to the Supreme Court in the early 1970s, saying that she became pregnant after being raped by a gang. Years later, she would admit that it was all a lie and denounced having been manipulated by the promoters of the legalization of abortion.
During the Supreme Court proceedings, McCorvey gave birth and her baby was put up for adoption.
Norma McCorvey converted to Catholicism and dedicated herself to defending life from conception. He passed away on February 18, 2017.
Julia Regina de Cardenal, president of the Yes to Life Foundation of El Salvador, stressed that if it were reversed Roe vs. Wade “It would help El Salvador, in the sense that the arguments and lies that were used in the United States to legalize abortion and that are still used here by promoters of the abortion business would be distorted.”
Although one would expect “more pressure from the International Planned Parenthood Federation, in a desperate attempt to legalize its lucrative business that would be greatly affected,” the president of the Yes to Life Foundation stressed that with a pro-life ruling from the United States Supreme Court “the humanity of the 15-week fetus would be further evidenced, which has already been demonstrated by science and technology ”.
Ligia Briz, executive director of the Asociación la Familia Importa (AFI) of Guatemala, affirmed that reversing Roe vs. Wade “For us it would be excellent news.”
“The organizations that are trying to move this issue in our countries, against our legislation, especially in Guatemala, because by law they will have to cease,” he said.
“We believe that it’s a historic opportunity to change this sentence, because right now there is a majority of judges who seem in favor of life, “he added.
Giuliana Caccia, director of the Origen Association in Peru, said that reversing Roe vs. Wade “It would be a clear example of an indisputable premise, which is that the truth always triumphs.”
“In Peru I think that, if it were reversed, it would give us an indisputable argument, because this ruling was always appealed. Abortion has no legal basis, and no sentence or law can deny that it is a duty to defend life from conception, under any circumstance, “he said.
“Our country is one of the nations that has resisted the most, because abortion is legal in Argentina and in many countries in the region. The reversal of the ruling it would be one more weapon to continue containing the advancement of this regional agenda that is walking steadily through NGOs financed by international cooperation ”, he pointed out.
The president of the Fundación Más Vida de Argentina, Raúl Magnasco, told ACI Prensa that “the possibility of reversing” Roe vs. Wade “Means, for everyone, a very important light of hope, because with this abortion is reversed in practically the entire country “.
“Being the United States the most influential country in terms of communication media, it would mean a great advance for the entire region and the world, which would understand, in light of the North American experience, that the future is inclusive regarding the care and recognition of the two lives, both that of the mother and that of the unborn child ”, he stated.
Jesús Magaña, president of the United for Life platform in Colombia, stressed that the ruling of Roe vs. Wade “It has been disastrous not only for the United States but for the world”, because “abortion is legalized through a legal act that ends up exceeding the functions of the Supreme Court, because it is practically a legislation contrary to the spirit of the Constitution that defends nature human rights and the people as a whole ”.
“In fact, In Colombia, the model that has been used to decriminalize abortion has been precisely that of the United States, since the Constitutional Court, acting against the Constitution, has decriminalized abortion ”, he pointed out.
For Magaña, “that the ruling is reversed would be very important because it would put the Judiciary back within its fair limits and in its democratic channels.”
In this way, he continued, “this terrible imbalance that we have today in our countries, where the interference of the Judiciary is so aggressive that it ends up destroying the democratic system, by invading the spheres of the Legislative Power or the Executive Power” would be avoided.
For Elizabeth Bunster, director of the Esperanza de Chile Project, “the possibility of reversing the ruling Roe vs. Wade it would be a sign of hope, in the face of a strong onslaught against life in Latin America and the Caribbean ”.
Although on November 30 the Chamber of Deputies rejected a bill for free abortion up to 14 weeks, he said, “we know that there are groups that will continue to insist on this law.”
“For Chile it represents a great hope that this ruling will be reversed, that among the arguments that are used to legalize abortion there is talk of progressivism of developed countries,” he said.
“In these issues, the United States is seen as a model“, he pointed.
Walter Sánchez Silva and Diego López Marina collaborated on this article.
– .
