The state of Indiana has appealed a county judge’s ruling from early December which blocked the state’s law protecting most preborn children from abortion. The state is asking the Indiana Supreme Court to rescind the injunction and is also requesting that the Superior Court bypass the lower appeals courts and take up the case directly.
“Requiring the parties to go through the normal appeals process would only delay final resolution of issues likely headed to this Court anyway,” the attorney general office’s filing said.
Though the state’s law had already been blocked on the claim that it may violate the state’s constitution, Marion County Superior Court Judge Heather Welch issued another injunction against it on December 2 on the grounds that it violates the religious freedom of the plaintiffs, who claim that their respective religions don’t believe life begins until a child is born.
“The undisputed evidence establishes that the plaintiffs do not share the state’s belief that life begins at fertilization or that abortion constitutes the intentional taking of a human life. To the contrary, they have different religious beliefs about when life begins, and they believe that under certain circumstances not permitted by Senate Enrolled Act 1, they would be required to receive abortions. Under the law, the court finds these are sincere religious beliefs,” Welch said in her ruling.
But though the plaintiffs claim that their religion doesn’t recognize the presence of life until a child is born, there is scientific certainty that life begins at fertilization. As Dr. Tara Sander Lee, a molecular geneticist and Director of Life Sciences for the Charlotte Lozier Institute, explains in the following video:
At the moment a sperm fuses with an egg (known as fertilization or conception), a new, unique human being that is genetically distinct from both parents comes into existence. Gender, ethnicity, hair color, eye color, and countless other traits are determined at that moment. This genetic blueprint remains the same for his or her entire life, and no other human being past or future will have one identical to it.
In response to the lawsuit, Rokita has said, “The State is aware of no case in America holding that a religious belief entitles someone to medical intervention of any kind, much less intervention that ends human life.”
As the Supreme Court considers whether or not to take up Rokita’s appeal, it will also be considering another lawsuit against the law, as it determines whether or not it violates the state’s constitution. Hearings in that case are slated to begin on January 12.
