(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({ google_ad_client: "ca-pub-8106879304633798", enable_page_level_ads: true });
Home / News / Culture Watch / Satanist argues in court that Missouri abortion rules violate her rights
satanist
A Satanist protests in front of pro-life protesters. Satanists believe that abortion is "an act of worship."

Satanist argues in court that Missouri abortion rules violate her rights

A Satanist is upset with a Missouri law that requires doctors to give women a pro-life booklet and an ultrasound before performing an abortion. A lawyer for the Satanist argued before the Eighth Circuit Court in St. Louis this week that the requirements violate her First Amendment rights. Satanists believe that abortion is an act of worship.

The woman, known as Judy Doe, filed suit against the state in February 2018. U.S. District Judge Henry Autrey dismissed the complaint, prompting an appeal to the Eighth Circuit, according to Courthouse News Service.

READ: Pro-life Democrat shows political labels don’t always apply

James MacNaughton, representing Doe, told the three-judge panel, “We have a specific targeted action against a specifically targeted individual against a specifically targeted religious belief.”

MacNaughton filed a previous lawsuit in 2015 on behalf of another woman with nearly identical arguments. The Eighth Circuit dismissed that case due to lack of standing because the woman was not pregnant at the time of filing. The panel asked MacNaughton how this case was different. He said his new client has standing because she was pregnant at the time of filing the complaint. The judges also asked MacNaughton about what the physician can say when delivering the booklet.

“The physician delivers the booklet, but what you’re basically doing by having the physician do it is give him clerical garb and preach Catholic dogma,” the attorney said.

The panel also asked why the physician can’t say he’s practicing Catholic dogma.

“If it said it in the booklet, that would be one thing,” MacNaughton replied. “If it said in the booklet, ‘Here are all the philosophical basis on which you can decide that your fertilized egg is a human being. Here is the Buddhist tradition. Here’s the Muslim tradition. Here’s the Jewish tradition.’ This would be a different case, but it’s not. It takes a very specific philosophical religious statement.”

Deputy Solicitor Peter Reed represented Missouri in Thursday’s hearing.

“Doe’s establishment clause claim fails to get off the starting blocks because it does not allege that Missouri’s informed consent law is one respecting the establishment of religion,” Reed told the panel. “Our position is that the complaint only alleges secular beliefs or personal policy preferences.”

–Alan Goforth | Metro Voice

Can You Help?

For 30 years, Metro Voice has been a leader in the faith-based community. We have historically relied on advertising to fund the mission of our publication and sharing the Good News. We are now seeking donation partners who want to support our publication and our mission of faith-based journalism.

Do you like what you read here? Help us continue our mission by supporting Metrovoicenews.com for as little as $1. Every contribution counts, big or small. We sincerely thank you for your continued support and encouragement in these critical times.

Ongoing Support


Monthly Giving



One-Time Gifts

 

X
X