Friday, May 6, 2022

Whose body again? Whose choice?

 

Regular readers will know that I'm unashamedly pro-life, while acknowledging that there are certain (very limited, very few) cases where abortion might possibly be unavoidable.  Nevertheless, the outrage on the pro-choice side over the potential overturning of Roe v. Wade has been an eye-opener.  I've seldom seen such an absence of logic and reason, accompanied by a veritable flood of emotion and "muh feelz!!!"

It's ironic how many of those supporting Roe v. Wade were also all-out in favor of COVID-19 restrictions and vaccination over the past couple of years.  This meme says it all.



I couldn't agree more.

There's also the logical disconnect between supporting abortion rights, and supporting the black community.  Courtesy of a link at Francis Porretto's place, a minute-long video on Twitter highlights the dichotomy.  It's worth clicking over there to watch it.  Recommended viewing.

I can't help a cynical shake of the head at those screaming the loudest about Roe v. Wade.  They're not arguing about abortion as such.  It's all about control - just as the whole COVID-19 brouhaha was ultimately about control.  They want to keep Roe v. Wade because it allows them to control those opposed to abortion, to prevent them putting their views democratically to the voters of the USA.  That's why they're horrified at the prospect that each state's voters can decide for themselves whether or not they want to permit abortion.  It would result in their loss of national control.

Can't happen soon enough, sez I.

Peter


18 comments:

Unknown said...

I'm a cold blooded male supporter of abortion on demand, from conception to birth. Not because of the muh feewings manure, but eugenics. I'll go along with the 64 million figure that's bandied about, and note that most abortions were/are performed among minorities, with large numbers also done on those with severe physical mental defects.
When these are born instead of aborted, my tax dollars have to go toward taking care of them instead of their families. Uh, no thanks. I'd rather my tax dollars go to other places, such as astrophysics or space flight, or best of all, kept in my pocket.
As an aside, I really love seeing churches urging support of the anti-abortion movement despite the costs, when on the other hand they want all kinds of tax deductions.
I'm coming around to the idea of supporting infanticide. In a novel I'm writing, a hard science fiction/political thriller about an unusual but feasible approach to getting into space, the lead character supports such measures and lobbies for all infants to be examined soon after birth and annually for the first few years. Those that fail will be humanly euthanized and the parents permanently sterilized.

Trailer For Sale Or Rent said...

I don't think abortion should be illegal, but a woman should be so horrified at the thought of it that she would consider having the procedure done only in certain extremely rare circumstances.

pigpen51 said...

As a Christian, I also think that there is a limited circumstance where abortion is regrettably needed. In order to save or protect the life of the mother, it might be the only or best option. Since I believe in self defense, that would be the only reason that I could think of for abortion.
I am going to attempt to post this meme on my facebook page, but I doubt that they will allow it. If they don't, so be it. But it is spot on.

Unknown said...

Interesting what's happened to both gun rights and abortion over the last 20 years. Opposite trajectories although each community reacts pretty similarly to what they see as assaults on their preferred position.

Of course, gun rights are explicitly enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

- Borepatch

Tilcut Hassayampa said...

In reply to Unknown:
Not all abortions are eugenically performed on minorities and dimwits.

There are lots of middle class white parents who do not support abortion but, "Dammit my daughter's going to college!".

It would be better for the birth rate (and my Social Security) if these middle class white girls gave birth, committed to marry the father, and then have more subsequent children.

Amahl_Shukup said...

I believe that was Margaret Sanger's original intent when she founded Planned Parenthood. She intended to keep down the number of black births,and they seem to be doing a good job of that.

Rick in NY said...

The abortion promoters harp on "My body, my choice" but I feel led to bring up two salient, but often overlooked points.

One, the baby is the result of two people's activities... yet I can't remember hearing anything about the rights of the father to be asked about the future of his progeny. Because 50% of this was part of HIS body.

Second point... doesn't the child rate a vote? They're demeaning human beings by calling them "a cluster of cells" while at the same time people are horrified at gow inhumanely people treat other people.

It's two sides of the same coin, and it's called the devaluation of human life. Because at what point do you stop considering it an abortion and start calling it murder? So many weeks? Anytime before birth? California is pushing for post-birth abortion... they call it abortion during the perinatal phase, which was recently revised to 24 months after delivery. Yep... two year old kids! Now they don't say that out loud, but it can be pushed that far... and if it can be pushed, they will... Go look up California Bill 2223...

MNW said...

Between the abortions and murder rate the black population would be about double

Rick T said...

BLM should be protesting outside Planned Parenthood offices, not police departments.. That is, if they actually cared about protecting black lives.

The demographic that kills the most blacks is black women via abortion.

Will said...

The number of abortions since Roe is about equal to the amount of illegal immigration that has flooded across the border since then. So, we have swapped those who would have been raised in our culture, for those from some 3rd world culture. That's a really valuable trade, there! It looks deliberate, too.

Old NFO said...

As always, it is about control and MONEY!!!

boron said...

@ pigpen51
As a not-very-religious Jew, I consider abortion a definite violation of the 6th Commandment. You can explain your reasoning at The Gate; I have no such option.

JL said...

I did a rant on this the other day.

I, too, am very pro-life and also stauchly anti vaccine mandate. To me, the 'my body my choice' argument does not equate nor extend to abortion the way it does to being forced to submit to a medical procedures.

Why? Because when I decide not to submit to a forced vaccination campaign, especially when it's a vaccine that has harmful side effects and limited to no efficacy, I am not denying life to another human being. When a woman gets an abortion, they are directly making the that decision.

In the case of Kung Flu, there's certainly no evidence that unvaccinated people are the cause of deaths from the virus, despite the media's lies.

Quartz said...

I am pragmatic about my support for abortion. Women are going to get abortions and I would rather they got them in hospitals rather than from backstreet abortionists.

The Lab Manager said...

I'm with the poster Unknown at the very top.

For me, abortion should not be the first choice for birth control, but most of these people using these services are going to be a burden to taxpayers and social services which are already problematic. I'm all for a two parent heterosexual family when it comes to children. This is the best for society. We don't need more fatherless children from any race or ethnic group.

As an agnostic, I understand the religious argument, but you are asking the irreligious to comply with something.

Here in South Texas, it amazes me how many Mexican Americans vote left yet profess Catholicism.

The Lab Manager said...

To me, the left is rather short sighted on this issue. They have to know more minorities use this healthcare option if you can call it that, so by breeding more dysfunctional families, would that provide a pool of future voters to institute their utopian dream?

Noveske's Rock said...

I believe that the soul enters the body at conception. Apparently the Catholics believe(d) “ensoulment” occurred 40 days after conception - no clue how they parsed this. If you deliberately kill a being with a soul that is murder in the terms of the Bible. People who chose to do so must accept the consequences of their actions - not now perhaps but later certainly. We all have free will which includes the opportunity to sin. Murder is not “the” unforgivable sin but it certainly calls for contrite repentance to be forgiven. The mundane world has its laws as does the spiritual. Both apply to all circumstances. Killing a being with a soul may sometimes be justified - killing for personal convenience doesn’t seem to be appropriate to me.

James said...

Regardless of position there are several things. 1-You cannot legislate morality. 2-We did not give the Federal Government authority explicitly in the Constitution to legislate on the subject. 3-My perspective of Christianity is Freedom of Choice. The purpose of existence is for us to be free to choose. So it is an individual (or couples) choice.
However, Planned Parenthood and taxes going to any of this is wrong. None of us should bear the burden of someone else's choices. Paying for abortions or for raising the child. Unless you voluntarily contribute it is not charity.