Funding for To The Contrary provided by the E. Rhodes and Leona B. Carpenter Foundation, The Park Foundation, and the Charles A. Frueauff Foundation.

coming up.

On to the contrary, abortion rights heat up in the presidential race as court challenges proliferate and President Biden and VP Kamala Harris focus in to score points against Republicans, then church, state and your tax dollars.

You may or may not want your money going to fund Christian schools.

But what about Wiccan schools?

Intro Music Hello, I'm Bonnie Erbe.

Welcome to To The Contrary, a discussion of news and social trends from diverse perspectives.

Up first are abortion decisions a matter of health or a matter of religious wars?

The Supreme Court sides with the Biden administration dismissing the dispute over Idahos abortion law.

This will allow doctors temporary access to perform emergency abortions, at least until lower courts rule, and look for Trump's Supreme Court appointees to be a major talking point for Democrats up and down the ballot in November.

They will bring attention to the fact that Trump appointed justices were the key to overturning Roe versus Wade.

Joining us today, Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, Democrat from Washington, DC, Republican strategist and Stone, author and political scientist Laura Brown and Jenny Gentles of the Independent Women's Forum.

Welcome, everybody.

So, Eleanor, the Supreme Court is now close to wrapping up its term.

How would you, summarize what it's done for or against abortion rights?

And how will that play in, in terms of the elections?

Well, the Supreme Court has not been very cordial to abortion rights, and it has made abortion rights a major issue in this coming election.

So you would say it's the it's the Trump appointees and the, and, Justices Clarence Thomas, who was a was a Bush appointee and, Alito, who are responsible for abortion being a if not the major issue for Democrats this this year.

Yeah, it's always elevated the issue.

It's it's propelled the issue.

The Supreme Court has done that, and it's made it a major issue in this upcoming election in November.

Your point is, a long time court watcher and Yale educated lawyer, as I love to point out and bother you about it.

but anyway, or are these are these votes on the court, do you think, responsible in large part?

In no part at all for public approval rating of 37%?

Oh, I certainly think so.

These, these, decisions, have, had a terrible effect on the Supreme Court and I think, partly if not entirely responsible for its low, low ratings with the public.

Let me go to you.

And as a long time pro-choice Republican, when there were such people in large numbers in your party, your thoughts on the Supreme Court's term thus far and what it will do to President Trump's, chances for reelection in November?

It's like the old adage, of the dog that chases the bus and catches it by the tailpipe, then what does it do?

truly, they're in a position now of getting what they thought they wanted and finding out it was not everything, that they thought it would be.

And a big part of it is, as I've said to people getting again, the Republican side failed to realize that every state initiative since ro in 1973, every single state initiative, the pro-choice side always won whenever this went to the voters.

Voters overwhelmingly, even in states that said they were pro-life, voted pro-choice.

And that is because the label pro-life.

Pro-Choice is meaningless.

The Republican Party now has a closer division pro-life.

Pro-Choice side advantage.

Still pro-choice.

But if you ask them who should make the decision, it's 70 to 80% of Republicans want women in charge of the decision.

People want women to control their own lives.

And that's why this really hurts the Republican Party that says the party of giving people control of their lives and certainly wanting government out of the boardroom.

And we're saying we'll get them out of the bedroom.

Two.

Right.

That used to be a very popular phrase.

Still is right.

I did want to jump in.

We don't comment on abortion, but Independent Women's Voice has done polling when it comes to contraception, and there is a strong majority in the United States that wants access to safe and affordable and a wide variety of contraceptive options.

It's, I believe, like nine out of ten overall, eight out of ten independents and even pro-life supporters, eight out of ten support access to contraception.

So where I'm concerned with all of these, responses to the Supreme Court rulings with vilifying the Supreme Court, I don't think that in itself is good for our country with pretending that, that Republicans and conservatives are against contraception.

it's that it's just fundamentally not true, and it doesn't reflect what the American people want.

You're saying pretending that Republicans are, are not for, contraception, how do you deal with all these cases against the which were Republican generated, telling The FDA doesn't have the right to make Mifepristone legal, even though they have decades of studies showing that it's not harmful to women.

It's safer than having a baby.

There might be individual cases and individual people within their conservative movement and and well aware of that in her decades of work.

So I just wanted to make the point that the majority of conservative leaning people, conservative leaning women, do you want access to contraception.

Yeah, you'll get a kick out of this.

Bonnie.

When Ken Cuccinelli ran for governor and he got attacked for being against contraception, he said, me, I'm not against contraception.

I said, Ken, you're sure the personhood amendment that outlaws most major forms of contraception looks like it does.

I said, well, I think.

That but there's no excuse for a politician being unaware of a policy that he.

Said they're male, that they're unaware, they don't think it through.

I don't I wouldn't paint all males with, you know, a broad brush A lot of them.

across the tops of their foreheads.

But a lot of them, because it doesn't affect their lives like it does us.

They don't think it through.

Tell me your thoughts on the numbers that Ginny just brought up.

How is it that the polls are showing that majority of conservative Republicans are for you know, access to contraception, and yet you have a court and Christian conservatives fighting hard to outlaw access to it all over the place, because.

You have pockets of extremists on the issue that, have the money to be able to file the cases.

But the extremists, you're calling them.

Okay, but they are the base of the Republican Party.

And I don't understand why is it that this small group of people who you are saying are out of polls, show are way out of line with, where the Republican Party is heading policy wise?

Can take the party in that direction.

Because you have extremists that have some very large donors who spout money that will fund this stuff.

It's way out of touch with where the majority of the people are, and they don't bother to ask.

They make a lot of assumptions.

And Ginny's exactly right with the numbers she's giving.

But let me let me both agree with Ann, but also disagree.

I think one of the things it's important to realize is that in this debate, we have seen Republicans all across state legislatures and in state courts defend and come out against everything from IVF to contraception to, you know, even being against, the life of the mother as being a legitimate reason for an abortion.

And that's where this Idaho, you know, Supreme Court case is really only a temporary small reprieve, until other legislation ends up coming before the court to argue whether or not a woman who is dying can have an abortion in an emergency situation, the Republicans have, by and large, including in the state of Texas.

We've seen it in Florida.

We've seen the gubernatorial Republican nominee in North Carolina say it does not matter how you got pregnant.

Keep your skirt down, and we don't care what happens.

So why this is becoming such a contentious issue and why it is far beyond abortion is because Republicans all across state legislatures and in many of the sort of House races and in Congress have decided to be against really, a woman's right to reproductive choice and freedom for her own body.

And I would just temper what Lara said simply by saying extreme Republicans is not all that broad brush.

Because, again, Ginny's numbers are right.

Broad brush.

Republicans are on the on the side of Democrats on contraception.

There are extreme elements.

Unfortunately, they've gotten elected to state legislatures.

A lot of them are getting thrown out as a result of these extreme positions.

So that's what the next, next round, we have to get rid of them.

Oh, Lara, I appreciate that you're referring to women's reproductive freedom because a real concern that I have coming out of this decision was that Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson referred to pregnant people, and that worries me.

If we can't say women, if we can't say one in and women's rights, we can't define what a woman is or even say it, then are women going to lose rights in this country?

Your thoughts?

Eleanor, in response to Ginny's point, I mean, I have to say it bothers me.

This business of calling, you know, that was clearly started by the left, this business of talking about pregnant persons.

Yes.

There may be some trans people who have been able to get pregnant because they had a uterus, and then they transitioned to men or something, but they're still in the vast that there aren't thousands of them worldwide.

There aren't even hundreds of them.

And the fact is that pregnancy is still the province of females in this world.

Is that do you think that is hurting the Democratic Party at all?

The, the the party wants to call a spade a spade.

And so referring to, to pregnant persons does not have an amply does not amply describe pregnancy.

What they are trying to do is recognize biological women who identify as men and who have decided that they are trans males, even though, they actually have all of the reproductive capabilities of a woman.

And I, I happen to agree with you, I actually think if you still have all of the reproductive abilities to, become pregnant and birth a child, then we should think of you as a woman.

And, Jenny, thank you for bringing this up, because I really think this is something that has hurt women overall and is definitely hurt.

The Democratic Party.

And it is one of the reason minorities, especially Hispanics, are moving to Republicans.

Really that you see that as a trend?

Yeah, it's in the polling.

Yeah.

Okay.

All right.

Very interesting.

they do not like it, okay.

So let's get back to and let's sum up if we can, where we think all this is going to play out politically in the fall.

do you think that the party's position on abortion, the Supreme Court rulings on abortion, Ann Stone are going to deliver the presidency to Joe Biden?

No, because I think there's going to be ticket splitting.

I don't think it's going to affect the national vote.

I think it may affect Senate close Senate races, and it may affect some House races, especially Senate, though, because they're the ones that they see tied to the judges.

that's where I see it's more likely, but there's going to be definite ticket splitting and Trump the way his positions of an issue has helped himself.

inoculate.

I'll leave the political, predictions to to.

And I'm a policy person through and through.

Okay.

Lara.

Well, I actually think that it is going to roll up and it is going to matter.

if we look back to 2016, the reality is, in the most contested Senate races, the Republican senators won those in states like Wisconsin and, Florida.

And what that actually did was they earned more votes than Donald Trump did in 2016, and they are the ones who actually helped pull him over the Electoral College finish line.

And I do think that we will see a similar thing, but with the opposite party being the beneficiary in this election, candidates like Kari Lake will essentially be losing.

And because she will lose, her, Democratic opponent, Ruben Gallego, will likely help bring, President Biden over the reelection finish line.

Eleanor, your thoughts and particularly on the black vote, I know we had this conversation four years ago with you where there were all these Republican claims that, you know, Trump was going to get a much larger, percent of support from black voters than, in fact, he ended up getting.

Is that and and with Hispanic voters, is 2024 going to be a repeat of 2020 and that Biden will win and he will carry people, voters of color, abortion issue or not, or will that not happen?

Well, Democrats usually, I mean, constituents in, in, in this country usually vote, Democratic and in matters like this.

And I expect that while Biden has been losing, some Democrats.

And that's very worrisome.

I'm expecting that before November.

He will pick them back up again when they see what's at stake.

Losing them for what reason?

Both candidates are unpopular.

So, and the Democratic candidate, the Republican candidate is a popular.

And that means that, that, Joe Biden is going to have to work very hard to get back to where he was when, black Democrats supported him wholeheartedly because he has lost a great number of them.

The I don't know what in the world they're going to do.

I can't expect them to vote Republican, but staying at home is enough to hurt Joe Biden.

All right.

Thank you so much.

From the upcoming election to the debate over charter schools, no taxpayers, public funds for religious charter schools, back to the ruling from the Oklahoma Supreme Court this week as it stopped what would have been the first publicly funded religious charter school in the U.S., the court rejected a proposed, state financed Catholic charter school approved by a state education board, saying it violated the state and U.S. constitutions.

The case is bound for the Supreme Court, which has expanded the use of tax dollars to support religious education.

All right, Lara Brown, do you see, some similarities between this, issue and what and Stone has discussed in terms of abortion rights?

In other words, a few zealots within the Republican Party who want public money, you know, who have been trying for decades and decades and decades to break down the wall between church and state.

Do you see them eventually winning before the Supreme Court and then creating a counter movement, as they have with abortion rights?

Well, I don't think that this is quite as, catalyzing or as, sort of, something to build as strong of a movement we've seen over the last 20 years, more and more Americans becoming secular.

So I think it's harder to actually even engage more than the traditionally religiously observant, in this issue.

And those individuals who are pushing the court, have largely failed before the court.

So I think it is important that the First Amendment is very clear that the government has no role in establishing a religious, religiously affiliated institution.

And, that was really what was at issue here.

It wasn't just about, say, voucher money or something that I have long wondered about, which is federal student loan dollars going to support, religious colleges.

We have sort of a tradition in some way of faith based initiatives support and that, you know, has been around for decades.

But I think the active kind of encouragement and establishment of religion, so deeply into the public school system is being rejected by the court.

And I, I imagine it will continue to be rejected because, as many people know, this is not simply about Christianity.

It is about all of, you know, the potential religions or, purported cults that may decide that they are a religion.

well, and also, quite frankly, an influx of I'm just curious.

I have no idea how they would react if they would react at all.

But there's been a large amount of Islamic immigration in the last, 10 or 15 years to the United States.

How would Americans react if there were a, taxpayer dollars financed, Islamic Academy set up or a series of them?

That's a point that's often brought up in their school choice or education freedom debates.

And as an education freedom advocate for the last quarter of a century, I'd say it's it's not the like, gotcha kind of argument that people think that it is.

There are plenty of Islamic private schools, education, freedom to report the the flow of scholarship programs, education, savings accounts, other mechanisms that give parents the right to choose a school that's the best fit for their child.

We are talking about a different mechanism with this state charter school.

It's a virtual school, actually, that has a Catholic affiliation.

And I want to share good news for Oklahoma families who wanted to send their kids to this charter school.

In the process of this school getting set up, Oklahoma passed, Universal School Choice Program, a tax credit where families can get I think it's like $7,500 tax credit for educational expenses.

So there are other ways for families to access educational options if they're residentially assigned.

Public school isn't a good fit for them.

I think direct subsidies of any religious school, whether it's, Islamic, it's, Catholic, Lutheran, Wiccan, any of those things.

Wrong, bad, slippery slope.

And if I were the Catholic Church, I wouldn't want the government involved because, you know, you open that door, there's other regulations that'll come along.

It's just a really, really, really bad idea.

But a couple of things I want to follow up with you on that.

First and foremost, I presume it's state money you were referring to about the $7,500 tax credit.

That's a large chunk of change, and it's something the state has the power to do.

But what if they tried to get one on the federal level?

There are efforts underway to have a federal tax credit.

but let's look at the successes at the state level and, and know that there are 12 states now with universal school choice programs, sometimes tax credit, sometimes education savings account program, close to 30 states that have some kind of private scholarship program.

The Supreme Court has ruled three times to protect these programs.

So this is settled if the if the state has established an education, freedom or a school choice program, they award scholarships to to families, not they don't directly fund the schools.

They direct it to the families.

The state can't discriminate.

The state doesn't have to establish a program.

But if it does, the Supreme Court has said repeatedly the state can't discriminate against religious institutions because they are religious.

Ginny, do you know what Bill Clinton's position was?

You know, Bill Clinton was one of the biggest proponents of school choice, one of the earliest on the national level.

And, do you know what his position was on scholarships?

I think he was okay with them.

He was, more outspoken on on charter schools.

Scholarships were at the beginning of their, of their growth and his era.

But school choice used to be very bipartisan.

Cory Booker in the Senate, was an example of of a supporter, Joe Lieberman, huge supporter of school choice.

So there were there were there was plenty of bipartisan support, among national, politicians.

And there still is, at the state level, which is encouraging to see one.

Of the most fundamental propositions in our Constitution is, the, separation of church and state.

That's why I was shocked to see any funding of anything the state, church related.

And that's why the Oklahoma Supreme Court, didn't have any problem, with this, this issue, fundamental in our Constitution is the separation of church and state.

And that goes for schools as for anything else.

But we know, you know, the height of that, the height of the separation was probably in the 60s and 70s.

And there's been a religious backlash against that.

And they've been trying to take down the wall, brick by brick by brick ever since.

Once they pulled the last brick out of the wall and it collapses.

Do you see this, as an issue today that would energize voters to, change that policy?

Is something that will energize, constituents of this, of Oklahoma.

And I think that it will energize Americans throughout the United States when they see something is blatant as this happening so late in, in our country, when I thought this was a settled issue where.

Private schools do receive direct federal funding for, say, the federal, school lunch program, some receive funding for other initiatives.

But by and large, they don't want to because they they want the the freedom from the, from the, the bureaucracy and the and the the paperwork and the just the.

Reporting requirements that come from.

Yeah.

So they don't necessarily want to sign up for for more onerous requirements from the federal government.

I don't think we need to worry about that that too much.

Well, there is another mechanism.

Let's not forget.

Parents can just start paying tuition the way they do for, for, you know, Muslim schools already in existence for, of which there are many more and more and more in this country for Jewish schools, I don't know about for Wiccan schools, but, for, for Catholic schools, so that that is an option, too.

It's just not.

Not everyone can afford it.

Bonnie, you asked whether or not this would be an energizing issue.

Do you know what created the Moral Majority?

It was when, the federal government wanted to go in and forward the tax status of religious schools, so that would energize them.

This one, this is not the same kind of thing.

All right.

Thank you all for very enlightening discussion.

That's it for this edition.

Keep the conversation going on our social media platforms.

Reach out to us at.

To the contrary, visit our website, please.

The address is on the bottom of the screen and whether you agree or think to the contrary, see you next time.