There were a couple of lively debates on the abortion issue yesterday following House Republicans cowardly caving on a ban on aborting babies in the third trimester (a ban supported by wide majorities in the USA* and consistent with the laws of every country in the world except for Communist China and North Korea.)
Supporting the destruction of inconvenient human life is one of the few occasions when leftists are unafraid of being openly racist, as these supporters at AOSHQ cited the “abort babies because they will end up on welfare and in prison” argument.
Millions of unwanted kids will cost me money via welfare, incarceration in prisons, etc.
Posted by: Mr. Moo Moo at January 22, 2015 12:51 PM (0LHZx)
It would be racist for liberals to states that living blacks are disproportionate users of the country’s welfare and prison systems, but it is perfectly fine to say the same thing of unborn black babies (“populations we don’t want to have too many of” to quote left-wing Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg). It also seems like a fallacious argument when you consider how both welfare spending and the prison population have skyrocketed since Roe v. Wade.
The Supreme Court could have saved the country forty years of division and acrimony by ruling that abortion was none of the Federal Government’s business, instead of going through bizarre contortions to create the ‘right’ to an abortion. If Roe v Wade had been decided in that Constitutionally correct manner, the states could set their own laws according their own prerogatives. New York could have 100,000 Kermit Gosnells offering abortion right up to when the labor pains started, and maybe even beyond that as some liberal ‘ethicists’ have suggested that even successfully escaping the birth canal should be no bar to ending the life of an inconvenient child. Meanwhile, Utah might only allow abortion in the case of rape or to protect the life of the mother. And people could choose to live in whatever state suited their personal conviction on the subject.
All of the social strife and division in the United States today is the result of left-wing social progressives using Government to force their morals (or lack thereof) and values on society as a whole.
On the question of “late-term” abortions at least, the public is far more closely aligned with the Republican party’s platform than it is with the Democrats’. While a majority of Americans support legal abortion in the first trimester (around 61 percent are in favor), anything after that stage invites sharp disapproval. Per Gallup, a remarkable 73 percent of Americans believe that abortion should be illegal in the second trimester (that is, a good month and a half before the 20-week threshold that the House was addressing), while 86 percent contend that it should be illegal in the third. In fact, third-term abortions are so remarkably unpopular that 79 percent of those who consider themselves to be “pro-choice” are of the opinion that they should be prohibited. This, I’d venture, should not be surprising. As it stands, more Americans currently identify as “pro-life” than “pro-choice” — and, crucially, the younger generation is not bucking that trend. As of 2010, people aged 18 to 29 were more opposed to abortion than almost every other age group. Unlike same-sex marriage and the legalization of marijuana, this debate is not going away.
Being pro-life, as soon as I finish here, I will go to the Speaker’s site and urge him to get a pair of b*lls. I will remind him of what Obama told Senator McCain when he complained that no suggestion from the Republicans appear in the Affordable Health Care Act; he said, “We won.” Speaker Bohner needs to reread the election results. We won, and his House better start acting like it had. After taking over the House from the Dems many pundits from the right observed that Republicans were acting like they were the losers. You can only get so much mileage out of using Harry Reid as a whipping boy. He’s not even around now. When this new session started I had hoped that Louis Gohmert or Trey Gowdy would become the new speaker. Unfortunately Bohner was reelected. If he thinks inviting Netanyahu, to address a joint session shows he has a pair, he’s mistaken. It will be the tone of the legislation that passes through the House that will determine it. He seems destined to keep on kissing Obama’s ass, by caving in.
The Right is unable to communicate well about the abortion & it’s compounded by differing levels of who wants what. So, the general expression that results is “let’s ban abortion”, whether it’s banning the killing of a fetus at 20 weeks or not.
Meaning, there is no leadership on the issue, on the right. Which is why SCOTUS strikes down random acts by states to rightfully restrict abortion, in order to follow the public opinion as it sees it & in order to not directly challenge other branches of govt, namely the Executive Branch.
Until there’s a Speaker or a President who champions the issue with communication the Left will generalize the issue by saying that the Right wishes to ban abortion completely & by expressing it that way SCOTUS feels obligated to strike down all challenges to Roe vs Wade or any modification whatsoever & the independents are turned off by the Left’s scare tactics.
Also, restrictions by some states are irrational & come across as abusive to those seeking abortions. It’s a no win situation for the right, until there is someone in a position to lead on the issue. Boehner does not & it’s not McConnell’s place to do so.
Let’s all acknowledge the replicable, empirical science as the European 2-3%ers do and limit abortions to coincide with human spontaneous abortion as was the original intent of Roe vs Wade.
I really would be okay with this.
If you or anybody else wants to live in a state with Christian sharia and force women to be second class citizens fine whatever.
I would jump at the opportunity to live in a state in the US where no one civilian was allowed to own a gun. That of course is never going to happen. So I see no reason to the federal government to give reich-wing states the freedom to make themselves a Christian Iran.
You absolutely HATE both human beings AND liberty, don’t you James Edward? You’ll make a fabulous brown shirt some day.
Funny, when conservatives say they want to move to Texas or Utah to escape a lot of the stupid liberal laws states pass, liberals are all for that, but far be it for liberals to leave Utah or Texas to escape laws they don’t like.
Maybe we shouldn’t make a fuss with Liberals murdering their own babies & it would reduce the infestation of socialists & hand-out scum in the country.
Nazis have never had a problem with killing the innocent.
btw, “reich-wing” would refer to the Left if indeed it’s an allusion to the Nazis, who were national :::socialist::: ultra lefties in Germany in the early to mid part of the 20th century.
It’s not about women’s rights & it’s not just about a woman if she’s carrying another life/person.
It’s been scientifically observed that a fetus after a 6-8 weeks experiences pain, dreams & more in the womb. Perhaps the best object lesson would be to get a nice big back hoe & start scooping up & smashing Liberals on the street, so that they understand what a fetus endures before its life is snuffed out by a selfish woman that couldn’t make up her mind about the pregnancy before the fetus became a viable human being.
The ignorance, cruelty & scientific stupidity of the average liberal is nauseating. Single issues decide their vote along with guaranteed diminishment of the individual.
Humorously, they can be compared to the Star Trek Borg. Seriously, they’re just Soviet wannabees that weren’t clued into the eventual & absolute collapse of Russia’s socialism, with empty shelves & people that had to be walled in to stop them from fleeing. Pragmatically, they’re just scum of the earth with hands out expecting one freebee after another. Whining about why everyone can’t do everything they want. Promoting a free-for-all without realizing that the only thing that keeps people like me from shooting people like them in the head, is the Constitution & the Laws of the land.
Liberté, égalité, fraternité and two scoops of social justice to James Edward. But, his little “reich-wing” ultra-leftist statism has one little Hoover Dam sized hole.
Abortions must be regulated to make certain they are proportional to ethnic, socio-economic and religious ratios. Right now, it seems that the atheists and the blacks are way ahead in abortions and the civil rights people aren’t paying proper quota attention. Where is the affirmative action for getting the Mormons and Asian-Americans up to speed? After all, there is no better health care cost containment than a dead baby.
An what about the gays? You know, same-sex lovers who can’t reproduce. How do we equalize the abortion among them? Hey, I have an idea. We can DNA them in the womb and then abort them which would be a twofer for the gays! And, if a lesbian arranges to occupy her womb, she can have the critter tested and if it isn’t same-sex attracted, it is time for the old suction and curette job …. chop, chop, suck, suck and try, try again!
As I posted three threads down @ #33:
James Edward worships the Dred Scott decision. To wit: The unborn child has no standing to sue in court and the federal government has no power to regulate the progress of the unborn child in the United States or its territories. This is the because the unborn child is chattel and the mother is the owner and the owner may do with her chattel whatever she damn well pleases. That includes having it dismembered:
Click here, James Edward, for a scientific illustration.
James Edward, please note: Climate changes. Mark Twain was asked if it were going to rain and he replied: “It always has.” No sentient person denies that the climate changes over the ages. Some almost non-sentient fools on the left have lost their man-caused climate change argument so now they are in full-bore derision claiming that the “deniers” of man-caused climate change are so stupid they claim that climate never changes and blah, blah, blah as they high-five each other in their mom’s basements.
James Edward and his little pal, Baby Tricycle Priya James Lynn Edward, have taken this whole bakery thing to a new level. They demand that all enterprise is public and the proprietors are subject to the whims of the customer. So, apparently, I can order Molly Maids to clean and dust in the nude as I rub peanut butter on them. Oh, I can’t? Why not? They are not allowed to “not take the job” according to Baby Tricycle Priya James Lynn Edward. (I have always wondered what the plural form of Prius was.)
James Edward must hate blacks because he loves the Dred Scott decision. James Edward must love tearing unborn babies apart because he loves abortion over life. James Edward must love controlling the lives of others by beating them with a “civil rights” cudgel. James Edwards hates people who are not on board with same sex attraction and he names names and declares them targets of his hate and wrath. He is a regular gay Kim Jong-il with his Democratic Gay People’s Republic of My Way or the Highway Socialism. As GloZell might say: James Edward puts the “tater” in dictator.”
There, I am finished. I played their silly logic out for rebuttal and replete with absurd accusations. So, goosey, goosey, gander is free to wander upstairs and downstairs and squirt goose juice everywhere.
I agree that if the Supreme Court had been wise, they would have left the decision up to the States. But, we have the system we have and I don’t think we could have come up with a worse one.
Where to start?
The worst aspect is supporters declaring some human life is not really human life. This idea debases and poisons all of humanity. It makes it easier for the unscrupulous to declare others, not just the unborn, not really human. It coarsens all human interaction. It’s nihilism in action.
I have lived in countries that have practiced abortion or infanticide in harsh times for centuries. In no way do they declare the baby not human. The sophistry would shame them. In deep sorrow and remorse they clearly admit they are taking a new human life out of dire necessity so others can live. They ask their gods and each other for forgiveness and pray for the soul of the child. They are honest if desperate people.
It’s a woman’s right….This is a cruel, hard dictum. It isolates the mother and alienates the father and the rest of the family members. Foisting all of the weight of the decision on a worried, alone mother is psychologically and physically crushing, brutal, dehumanizing. Can the best decision be made in these circumstances? What of the long term effects on the mother if she makes a questionable decision? She may always question her lone decision.
In the countries I know that have a long cultural experience with this, abortion is a family decision. Various aspects are thoroughly discussed, reasons given, solutions sought, support given. All interested parties are included in the terrible, but necessary decision. They understand exactly what it is they are doing and why. It helps to ease the pain and keep the family together and sane.
There are other points, but I think you get my drift. We’ve come up with the ugliest, least human, most divisive way to deal with abortion.
I believe the procedure should be legal. The government should have stayed completely out. The shrill nihilists should shut up and go away. Parents and families with the support groups of their choice should make the decision. If they cannot afford it I’m sure Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton would be willing to pay for it out of their untold millions & millions gotten in ‘public service’.
“populations we don’t want to have too many of”
Question: what’s the problem with that?
I just read a news item a few minutes ago about a 1-year old baby whose nose and part of its face was eaten by ferrets. The kid’s in ICU (Pennsylvania, I think). The couple’s other FOUR children were turned over to other relatives and the parents are likely to be charged. The cops said there was more pet food in the house than human food. I don’t want people like that reproducing.
Now, I believe abortion is the killing of a baby for, in the majority of cases, the convenience of the mother.
Abortion isn’t going away but I think that the US should adopt restrictions at least as narrow as found in France, Germany, etc. The idea of abortion up to the moment of birth is right up there with Nazi gas chambers.
But I cannot get on-board with the abortion-is-racism thing. The people who say “well, are *you* going to raise these unwanted kids?” have a point.
I guess what my wondering rant is about is eugenics. The idea that all humans are born with equal talent, equal potential, and all the rest is magical thinking. But given man’s tendency to evil, I cannot think of any system that discourages dysgenic reproduction that doesn’t carry an intolerable risk or turning into a horror show.
Up to a point, the cost of carrying the unproductive and, to be coarse, the useless is a bargain against what eugenics-gone-wrong would cost in the loss of our humanity and decency. At the same time, humanity does have a limited carrying capacity: too many people in the wagon, too few pulling it.
Not all problems have a solution.
I’ve raise three “unwanted” kids, all of whom have horror stories that led them to be put in foster care. Which of them should have been shredded in the womb?
@11: VtK: Plenty of “unwanted” kids turn out just fine (see Kevin Williamson’s piece the other day) – some because they’re adopted, some because their parents get their acts together, some wind up with competent and caring relatives, some wind up in foster care with people who genuinely care, and some just get lucky.
Ideally, all these “unwanted: kids would find caring homes and, at least, get a chance. I don’t know much about adoption law but I’m sure there are reforms that can be made to make it easier so that more kids get a chance.
But there are millions more… and I never said I advocated abortion.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/396944/about-20-week-abortion-bill-kevin-d-williamson
KCRob, you will find no disagreement from me on the fact that “the idea that all humans are born with equal talent, equal potential, and all the rest is magical thinking.”
There are plenty of sociopaths and feral people to go around without having them breed a passel of kids who more than likely will follow in their footsteps. In my darkest moments I can wax ecstatic for sterilization.
You are also right that abortion is not going to go away. Kermit Gosnell of Philadelphia was sought out for his “services” and he so streamlined the process that he had trainees working the production line. His facility was a one way street, so he made little effort to keep it sanitary. Why have a spic and span death machine? There will always be a Gosnell down some dark alley.
But Planned Parenthood is pure misrepresentation cloaked in a distortion to help hedge the truth. If it could get away with it, Planned Parenthood would be at the mall doing pieced ears in the front of the shop while killing babies in the back room.
I also agree that not all problems have a solution. But, partial birth abortion has zero medical necessity behind it. Yet the pro-choice people are adamant that it must be preserved to keep from having an inch ceded to the pro-life people from becoming a mile that outlaws all abortion. So, they are radically opposed to anything which interferes with the holy writ of a woman’s right to choose.
Having worked with offender aid and restoration, I can assure you that plenty of people who serve their terms are released to screw up and swing right back to living behind bars is no time at all. Often times they tell me that they had to speed and shoot at cops because getting caught would revoke their parole. That is how some geniuses calculate. But they are often out long enough to breed and create yet another potential and likely societal problem.
We have become so mired in “social justice” that it seems like every little problem needs to have a government committee come up with recommendations for programs to address it.
Where is the nearest orphanage in your neck of the woods? I bet there isn’t one. In days gone by, orphanages were full of kids with a living parent or two. The orphan was not necessarily parentless, he was a cast off or a ward needing safekeeping. Now we attempt to do that, however reluctantly, with foster parents. Some of this folks are societal treasures. Some are bad news. But we tend not to pay much attention to our modern waifs and minors needing guardianship. Many of them end up getting passed around a lot. As a general rule, those who live with a parent who is a mess fare very poorly. And many of them breed in their early teens and extend the cycle anew. If you are screaming liberal, you yell for more education and pretend that some bureaucratic structure can fix the problem if its funds are increased.
When I hear people say “Every child a wanted child,” I always wonder, “By whom? And what is the cut-off for disposing of an unwanted child?”
The problem with talk of “wanted” and “unwanted” children (and, by extension, adults) basically carries the unspoken implication that a human life is only worth as much value as another human being places on it. And we all know what happens when people become “undesirable.” This attitude has lead to two generations being viewed as a luxury good, something to have and to keep around for Mom and Dad to get warm fuzzies over.
consistent with the laws of every country in the world except for Communist China and North Korea.
You forgot Canada. In Canada it is legal to abort your baby up to the moment of birth, and most Canadians support this. This is why I have a problem with the “Canadians are so polite and mildmannered”-meme. Canadians, in general, are bloodthirsty baby killers in this regard.