First the crazy: Alabama has been calling embryos and fetuses 'people' for a long time. The latest ruling says that even frozen embryos are 'people'. This ruling says:
“We believe that each human being, from the moment of conception, is made in the image of God, created by Him to reflect His likeness. It is as if the People of Alabama took what was spoken of the prophet Jeremiah and applied it to every unborn person in this state: ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, Before you were born I sanctified you.’ Jeremiah 1:5 (NKJV 1982)”.
source: archive: https://archive.is/fBJnL | https://premierchristian.news/en/news/article/created-by-him-to-reflect-his-likeness-alabama-judge-quotes-bible-in-embryo-lawsuit-ruling
USA Today points to Gorsuch as opening the gates to highly religious rulings:
The First Amendment's Establishment Clause typically limits the role religion can play in government, but the U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 changed the longstanding process by which it reviewed conflicts between government and religion. The decision to change that process was written by Justice Gorsuch, who said the court needed to rely more heavily on "reference to historical practices and understandings." Parker, the Alabama judge, specifically referenced Gorsuch in his concurrent opinion.
source: archive: https://archive.is/cPjgw | https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/02/22/ivf-opinion-from-alabama-justice-was-overtly-religious/72689378007/
Slate points out that by the Court's own logic, both the 'parents' and the clinic should be charged with murder (as well as the person who actually dropped the embryos).
source: archive: https://archive.is/7l3vx | https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/02/abortion-bans-alabamas-anti-ivf-ruling-fail.html
WITH ALL THAT:
Perhaps it is a good thing that the whole nation now has a reason to take a long hard look at what it means to be a 'person'. I've seen studies saying anywhere from 20%-60% of all pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion; most before the woman realizes she is pregnant. This paper says maybe as low as 10%, but only if you aren't paying attention: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5741961/
The spontaneous miscarriage rate varies between from 10% to 20% where 10% refers to late recognition of pregnancy and 20% refers to research involving routinely testing for pregnancy before 4 weeks or 4 weeks after the last menstrual period
This chart says there's a 30% chance of miscarrying in the first week, with reduced risks after that: https://datayze.com/miscarriage-chart
Per Alabama, is God that invested in killing 'unborn' 'people'? Given how likely it is for an embryo to naturally abort, can we ever claim "beyond reasonable doubt" that a pregnancy was ever viable?
The above Slate piece suggests the unborn be treated as property. That might work for cells you want to keep, but note that there's a Supreme Court precedent that discarded cells are NOT a person's property and can be commercialized (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks#Consent_issues_and_privacy_concerns).
If we try to define when life begins, the Religious Right is sure to get deference. Look at how they've put "heartbeat bills" in place for embryos that don't HAVE HEARTS! Personally, I don't think setting a time constraint should be involved in defining life, but we're here to chat and discuss.
Lastly, CNN offered an opinion that we could choose to be more like South Korea which ruled (as summarized in Op-Ed):
If embryonic or fetal life has value, the state shouldn’t start with criminalization. Instead, the government may have a constitutional obligation to advance its interest in protecting that life in ways that don’t limit reproductive liberty, by protecting pregnant workers, delivering better prenatal care or safe housing and reducing the rate of maternal mortality.
source: archive: https://archive.is/GV0M0 | https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/21/opinions/alabama-supreme-court-fetal-embryo-personhood-abortion-ziegler/index.html
Yeah, or rather not doing, I remember hearing about that:-).
I also recall a story of a doctor in southern Missouri (east of Springfield iirc, so near Tennessee & Kentucky: think Lindsey Graham & Mitch McConnell) who succeeded in getting funding for a new institute / center... wait, let me rephrase this: he was a JOB CREATOR who BROUGHT IN HIS OWN FUNDING to start a whole new era of medical research in that part of the country, which is their stated dream right? (what Midwestern town doesn't have as their top claim that they want to be the next "hub" for biotech/whatever?) He did not merely talk the talk, he SUCCEEDED in this endeavor.
And ofc he got death threats, for both him and his family. So, that was the end of that. He wanted to help them, but not at any cost. This was very early in the pandemic - one of the first stories like that (that I saw anyway) - but obviously it would not be the last.
Fast-forward to 4 years later, and the damage done to our entire nation's healthcare system is incalculable. BUT NOT EQUALLY distributed - some areas are affected more highly than others. Some areas have roads, bridges, police, firefighters, teachers, doctors - you know, "infrastructure" - while other areas not so much. We are fast dividing into two Americas, and while we have always had facets (rich vs. poor, white vs. black, mean vs. women), I would be hard-pressed to think of a more noticeable dividing line b/t "has access to medical care" vs. "not" (plus the latter also has almost literal slavery - with more black people incarcerated under a for-profit prison system than were ever used as slaves).
And I could even halfway respect some of that - not the death threats to be clear but I mean like if they want to pass a law and convert themselves to all become Amish then that's their own lives, so what right do I have to have any sort of opinion about how they want to be, you know? even if it means their own death, so long as it's their personal choice - the main trouble being that these people are not content to merely make choices for their own selves, but have to impose it upon others. e.g. if they choose to "not pay for medical care" in their own, rural areas, but then they drive into the cities and demand medical care there - sometimes holding literal guns while they do it too. (after the repeal of Roe vs. Wade this attitude got a lot more obvious)
Anyway, yeah, it's going to do a lot of harm. I suspect that was the point, behind one of Russia's various disinformation campaigns, though "we" (Americans) are the ones dumb enough to have fallen for the tricks.