Tag Archives: morality

Abortion “Rights”

Posted on by
1

Senator and Progressive-Democratic Party Presidential candidate Kamala Harris (D, CA) wants to further erode Federalism in our nation’s structure and have the central government pass on certain kinds of State laws before those laws can be…permitted…to take effect.  Harris’ position and proposal is well summarized in the sub-headline of the article at the link:

The Democratic presidential hopeful wants the Justice Department to review state laws restricting abortion before they would take effect

Since a core principle of our nation, acknowledged in our Declaration of Independence, centers on our Creator-endowed right to life, and it is the duty of any government, especially including ours, to protect the lives of those in its care—or even simply within its jurisdiction—I offer an alternative requirement, albeit one that parallels Harris’ attack on our federal structure.

The Justice Department should review state laws permitting abortion, particularly with a view to assessing their impact on life, before they would take effect

This would enable the central government to protect the baby’s life from being aborted in any but the most extreme circumstance.

It should be clear, after all, that abortion has absolutely nothing to do with women’s right to control their own bodies and everything to do with the baby’s—who in any abortion procedure has no one to speak for him—right simply to maintain his body.  Abortion has absolutely nothing to do with women’s “rights” generally and everything to do with the baby’s right to life.

Except in the minds of Progressive-Democrats.

The Supremes, Liberals, and Abortion

Posted on by
Reply

The Liberal, Living Constitution, wing of the Supreme Court is up in arms over losing a case with precedential implications.  The proximate case concerned Franchise Tax Board v Hyatt, in which the Supreme Court overturned a 40-year-old precedent that held that States are not required to grant legal immunity to other States in interstate lawsuits.  I won’t go into that because that’s not the crux of the matter.

Instead, that Liberal wing, led by Justice Stephen Breyer, objected to the precedent reversal not on its merits or on the merits of precedent overturning/preservation, but on the premise that overturning this precedent would lead to overturning the abortion ban restrictions in Roe v Wade.

[L]iberal Justices warn that conservatives by overturning Hall will “encourage litigants to seek to overrule other cases.”

This actually is an unqualified Good. Error should be corrected whenever it’s discovered.

That Liberal wing bellyached further:

It is far more dangerous to overrule a decision only because five members of a later Court come to agree with earlier dissenters on a difficult legal question[.]

This makes no sense, though. It took only five members of the prior Court to make the mistake in the first place, for all that other members might have agreed with it.

And the NLMSM weighed in, showing the Liberal wing’s worries about abortion.

“Clarence Thomas Just Showed How Supreme Court Would Overturn Roe v Wade,” declared one columnist. [Jay Michaelson of the Daily Beast]

This, though, is just another bit of Liberal disingenuosity. Roe is technologically-based. The circumstances under which States are permitted to regulate abortion to the extent of banning them are based on viability of the baby, which the Roe Court suggested began around the third trimester. Modern medical technology makes babies viable much earlier, and so abortions can be restricted much earlier—wholly within Roe.

Though I wouldn’t mind the question coming to court so that the technological aspect can be better emphasized.

Abortion and Busy-ness

Posted on by
Reply

Recall that Georgia has just enacted a law barring abortions once the baby’s heartbeat has been detected.  Busy Philipps, actress and talk show host, objected.

Every woman deserves compassion and care, not judgment and interference when it comes to their own bodies.

Another, more accurate, phrasing might include Every baby deserves compassion and care, not interference or dismissal when it comes to their own bodies.

Philipps went on.

Women and their doctors are in the best position to make informed decisions about what is best for them[.]

How sad. What’s best for the baby doesn’t even enter into it.

More Censorship

Posted on by
Reply

Jack Dorsey has chosen to have his Twitter company censor another conservative account, this time @AOCPress.  Their crime? They mock a Progressive-Democrat (I’ll leave it as an exercise for the student to figure out who).  Dorsey insists the parody account (an obviously parody account—it was labeled “parody”) mislead fellow tweeters.  Because, apparently, Dorsey’s customers are mind-numbingly stupid and can’t recognize parody.

Dorsey seems not to like parody in general, too, at least when it comes from Conservatives.

Twitter has also banned an account parodying former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, D-Texas, and another that mocked Russian president Vladimir Putin.

This is free speech Left-style.

A Politician Demands Doxing Occur

Posted on by
Reply

Doxing is the deliberate exposure of personally identifying information, things like phone numbers and home addresses of individuals—often including family members: wives, husbands, and children—in order for each of those folks to be personally confronted with opprobrium at their homes and schools.

Pennsylvania State Representative Brian Sims, a Progressive-Democrat, called for precisely that when he confronted and harassed a woman and her two teenaged daughters who were praying outside an abortion clinic in Sims’ Philadelphia district. He went far beyond his on-scene harassment, though. He recorded his verbal assault and posted it on line, with this request for doxing:

So, here’s the deal.  I’ve got $100 to anybody who will identify these three, and I will donate to Planned Parenthood.

When he started catching flak for his assault and his call for the dox, Sims posted his follow-on:

I can do better.

He masqueraded that as a sort-of apology.

Here’s one of the results of doxing.  Swatting is a false call to emergency facilities claiming a deadly event—usually a domestic violence claim—in progress and please hurry. This is done while identifying a doxed address as the location of the supposed deadliness.  For example,

a call from a man who said he had shot his wife and then tied up his children inside his house, where he had several pipe bombs.

And this:

A perpetrator was recently sentenced to 20 years in prison for launching a swatting attack in December 2017 in Wichita, KA, against a man who was killed by police responding to the call.

Given the emotional tension and outright violence already extant surrounding the abortion/anti-abortion conflict, it’s ludicrous to the point of insulting our intelligence to consider any premise that Sims didn’t know these risks.

Sims’ subsequent post is, to use the technical term, BS.  He was speaking—shouting, really—from his heart when he engaged in his verbal assault and subsequent call for his targets to be doxed.  His later commentary is nothing more than words mouthed for his personal benefit, politically spoken to dodge his culpability.

Sims needs to go. He can have no value in a State government purporting to represent its constituents.