Written By: Alondra Recendiz
A recently relevant event that exposes the entanglement of religion and society is the 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade. When the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, it got rid of the constitutional right to an abortion that had existed since 1973. The reactions to this outcome were not only political but theological. This outcome resulted from decades of campaigning and arguments by religious institutions. This paper examines the history of Roe v. Wade, the religious ideas that shaped its original decision and its recent overturning, and the effects that the overturning had on American society.
The original Roe v. Wade case was decided on January 22, 1973. The Supreme Court ruled seven to two that the Constitution’s implied right to privacy, expressed in the Fourteenth Amendment, protected a woman’s right to seek an abortion. Pregnancy is divided into trimesters. During the first trimester, the decision is up to the woman and her physician. During the second trimester, states could regulate an abortion to protect the mother’s health. During the third trimester, the states could prohibit an abortion with the exception of preserving the life or health of the mother. During this time, Texas was nearing a total ban on abortion, but that was no longer the case after the ruling, and this affected many states with similar regulations.
The context of the case emerging is shaped by religious and moral controversy. Historically, abortion had been progressively criminalized across the United States. This was largely due to lobbying of the American Medical Association and reform movements rooted in Protestant and Catholic social conservatism. As time went on, abortions became more common and dangerous. Feminists, civil liberty organizations, and progressive physicians began pushing for legalization. The Catholic Church simultaneously started mobilizing in opposition. When the original case was decided, there was a mutual understanding that the religious and cultural war was over, and that the moral status of the fetus, the autonomy of women, and the proper reach of law were no longer a debate.
The movement to overturn Roe v. Wade has been, from the beginning, heavily religious in character. Sociologist Kristin Luker, in her study of abortion activists, demonstrated that the debate was not only about the legal status of a medical procedure but about different worldviews. Especially ones that were deeply rooted in religious and moral frameworks. She found that pro-life activists tended to hold views that were based on traditional Catholic or evangelical Protestant theology, in which life begins at conception, and motherhood is the central vocation of women. Pro-choice activists leaned toward a liberal religious framework which emphasized individual autonomy, separation of religion and law, and women’s equality (Luker 1984).
Luker’s research reveals that these opposing groups are not divided by politics but by a deeper division of systems of belief about gender, the body, and life. For pro-life activists, the fetus is a human at conception, which is a belief inseparable from Catholic natural law’s teachings. Asking for a compromise was not a political negotiation but a request for religious submission. For pro-choice activists, the pregnant woman was the moral priority, and the decision on what to do with her pregnancy belonged to her. Luker argues that this divide explains why abortion became and continues to be a contested issue in American society.
Evangelical Protestants, who were united on the opinion of abortion in the early 1970s, were mobilized in the 1970s and the 1980s during the rise of the Religious Right. As political scientists Andrew Whitehead and Samuel Perry have argued, the mobilization was inseparable from the ideology of Christian nationalism. This is the belief that the United States should be a Christian nation governed by Christian values and laws. Within this framework, the legalization of abortion was not about a policy of error but an act of national betrayal (Whitehead and Perry 2020). Anti-abortion activism became one of the central projects of Christian nationalism, merging religion with politics, which would reshape American politics.
Whitehead and Perry further argue that Christian nationalism gave pro-choice more to fight for than politics. They saw themselves as people of God reclaiming their nation from secular forces. Their belief that they are on a divine mission helped the movement persevere through decades. (Whitehead and Perry 2020)
In June 2022, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, overturning Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which reaffirmed Roe and modified the trimester framework. Representing the majority, Justice Samuel Alito argued that abortion was not deeply rooted in the nation’s history and tradition and not protected by the Constitution. The main argument was backed by the pre-Roe legal history, which was a product of the nineteenth century religious and moral campaigns to criminalize abortion.
The religious reinforcement of the majority opinion was widely noted. Alito’s reasoning drew on a concept of natural law with deep roots in the Catholic philosophical tradition, which is in the worldview Luker identified among pro-life activists. His dismissal of the interests of women reflected a moral framework in which the status of unborn life is the priority, which is another thing Luker addressed (Luker 1984).
The Dobbs majority reflects the success of the Christian nationalist judicial strategy described by Whitehead and Perry. Five of the six judges who favored overturning were Catholic. They were also all appointees of Republican presidents. The alignment between religion and the republican party needs to be accounted for as well. The alignment between the theological commitments and the legal outcome was not coincidental and was rooted in religious beliefs.
The effects of the Dobbs occurred almost instantaneously. Within months, approximately half of the states put a near-total ban or significant restrictions on abortions in place. Many reverted to the laws that were in place before Roe v. Wade. In states with strict bans, physicians reported delaying or withholding care for patients with serious pregnancy complications due to fear of prosecution. Reports of women being denied treatment for ectopic pregnancies and septic miscarriages circulated quick which make it nationally known the consequences of applying a theological framework to binding law.
The decision also had significant effects on the dynamic between religion and democratic legitimacy. Luker predicted that the ruling did not resolve the conflict but instead intensified it. Those in favor of the outcome felt like years of hard work had paid off. Those who did not, including many religious Americans, believed that there was a violation, and they let their beliefs govern the rights of all citizens. Luker’s analysis of both sides shows that their disagreements do not stem from facts but rather from deep-rooted moral values (Luker 1984).
The political consequences were also significant. The ruling influenced the contribution of the 2022 midterm elections. Several state ballot initiatives supported abortion rights. This outcome is consistent with Whitehead and Perry’s observation that though Christian nationalism is powerful, it does not always have majority support from the general public (Whitehead and Perry). The gap between religious institutions' positions and their members' views is a significant part of post-decision society.
The history of Roe v. Wade and its overturning illustrates the complex relationship between religion and society. Luker’s work shows that the abortion argument is not a medical or constitutional one but one between religion and morals. The persistence and intensity of the conflict stem from people’s belief that, if something fundamental of morality is at stake, compromise is not an option (Luker 1984).
Whitehead and Perry’s analysis adds a further explanation of how the anti-abortion movement was not a moral campaign but a nationalist one. By embedding abortion opposition within Christian nationalism, the movement transformed a theological position into a political one. It was believed ot hold an opposing moral view meant you were on the wrong side against God and the country. By fusing religion and nationalism, the movement had endurance (Whitehead and Perry 2020).
Together, these accounts illuminate what occurs when religious conviction is at play in legality and politics. Religion can be a powerful influence on morals. Especially when religious morals can cause significant harm by imposing on others' morality. The outcome demonstrates how far religious conviction can and should reach into shared institutions of a larger society.
Roe v. Wade and its overturning represent one of the most consequential intersections of religion and law in American society. As Luker demonstrated, the conflict over abortion has always been about the conflict in religious and moral views. Each side has its own belief about life, women, and the relationship between moral and public law (Luker 1984). As Whitehead and Perry showed, the eventual legal victory of the pro-life movement can not be separated from the rise of Christian nationalism and its project to reclaim American law. The outcome is a cautionary tale of what happens when deeply held religious beliefs influence the law, and of the consequences for both law and religion when this boundary is blurred.
Luker, Kristin. Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood. Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1984.
Whitehead, Andrew L., and Samuel L. Perry. Taking America Back for God: Christian Nationalism in the United States. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020.