Indiana judge says state's abortion ban violates religious freedom of those seeking abortions

[Nevilledog]

https://www.friendlyatheist.com/p/indiana-judge-says-states-abortion

In a stunning decision out of Indiana, a judge has blocked the Republican-led state’s near-total abortion ban saying that it violates the religious freedom of those whose beliefs require them to get an abortion when they believe it’s necessary.

The lawsuit itself dates back to 2022, when Republicans passed a law effectively banning all abortions with exceptions only in the case of rape, incest, or lethal fetal anomalies—and even then, only within certain time limits. Furthermore, surgical abortions could only be performed in hospitals or surgical centers owned by a hospital—something that happened fewer than 2% of the time in Indiana in 2021, according to one report—further limiting access for women who met the already narrow requirements to have the procedure done.

It was a law designed to punish women who didn’t want to be pregnant. It was cruel. It was unnecessary. It forced women to give birth against their will. The consequences were predictable—and I suppose it worked as intended: at least one woman died because she couldn’t access medical care, which was the logical conclusion to the Republicans’ wishes.

That’s why the ACLU sued various state officials who were in charge of enforcing the new law as well as the Medical Licensing Board of Indiana. They did it on behalf of Hoosier Jews for Choice and a group of five anonymous Plaintiffs who held a variety of religious beliefs.

*snip*

[Eko]

1. Why do people with a religion get more protection for basic rights than those without a religion?

Because it was filed as a class action, the ruling only applies to people whose religious beliefs direct them to obtain abortions. People who simply want to get one for personal reasons would still be unable to do so.

Seems very wrong.