Legislating morality doesn't usually work but giving better options to make a more moral choice can and does. Honor killings are considered the proper moral response in some areas still. Our culture and laws about any killing being basically wrong has changed that through the thought of jail time and social pressure but not for all hearts & minds. The killing of unborn children should only be a tragic act of necessity in a perfect world but we are not perfect. We need to win hearts & minds to make a real change. You do not do that by condemning those who have had to make the choice. I'm pro-life but reality is poverty, choices, poor parenting, youthful indiscretions, adult mistakes, rape/date rape, health, ignorance etc. all contribute and until those areas are addressed, we really have no right to control anyone's choices but ours. I agree with throwing it back to the states as it opens the conversation in a more manageable arena. To put on GOP platform would be a big unforced error. We need to push for adoptions (we keep saying but nothing really done same with taking care of vets) If we can't stop tax dollars going to Planned P we need to have as much or more to help those in need to keep the child at least for adoption. Men need to finally be actually held as responsible as the woman in public opinion as well as actual monetary fact and the legal system needs to make it more affordable to chase whoever needs to be paying down. Sex education needs to be on sexual urges & the results not multiple genders and reinforced with teaching about what an "abortion is and the consequences" as well as detailed cost, job loss, lower paying jobs, etc. Fight for those things. We should err on choice not mandates. As for marriage, that horse left the barn years ago even though very tired of things changing their established meaning to even try to reverse that would just not be the charitable Christian way. They wanted what their parents had, a stable committed partner for life just like we all hopefully do. The word marriage held promise. What good would it do to undo that now? I believe it would hurt too many people, confuse children, etc. The best way to get what we wish is for each of us to be the best example of it.
My Facebook is ablaze this week with my usual "vote blue no matter who" friends scaremongering about P25, including spreading lies about it. It's obvious that a Dem talking point(s) dropped over the weekend, since I hadn't seen any chatter about it before this weekend.
The extreme Left (The Nation, Mother Jones, etc.) have been talking about P25 for months. It even bubbled up on RealClearPolitics. It's not new. Heritage has had it out for months.
Why the hullaballoo now?
My first thought was that it was to distract from the Biden/25A/fitness to run/fitness to serve mess over on the Democrat side. I still think that's partially the case.
The other is much more important.
The GOP platform dropped over the weekend, and it is easily the most socially moderate platform the GOP has ever had, or at least in the last half century.
The Dems are scared sh--well, let's just say they need to swap the Ex-Lax for Kaopectate.
The Dems had one ace in a hand of rags. That was abortion specifically and women's reproductive issues generally. Trump Is A Convicted Felon(TM) has gained no real purchase and has hurt the Dems almost as much as it has helped. Look it up.
That has been removed from the conversation. Maybe not by hardcore Dem standards, but certainly by moderate standards. Early abortion? No position. IVF? Thumbs up. Contraception? Thumbs up.
The Dems needed a new boogeyman. A "shadow platform", if you will.
Heritage had one in convenient bite-size form--well, at least as bite-size as a 900-page document can be.
Now, I am sure MoveOn and every other proggie org has something similar, maybe not in the form of a 900-page tome, and maybe not on its own dedicated website (project2025.org).
I think we need to tell the progs that Publix has Reynolds Wrap on sale for their millinery.
Still voting Trump because I'm taking Biden's advice to 'Don't compare me to the Almighty. Compare me to the alternative.' And right now, the alternative looks REALLY good.
Speaking of 'the Almighty', Biden said if 'God Almighty' came down and told him to step aside, he would.
I'm thinking someone in the White House plays the movies 'Bruce Almighty' and 'Evan Almighty' Back-to-Back, and then have Morgan Freeman come to the White House and tell Joe he needs to step aside.
I don't understand the "mah principles crowd". Why the heck cut off our nose to spite our face? There must be incrementalism. Change the culture. Move toward morality and the family vs the current leftist drive toward hedonism. When that evolution starts to happen, the demand for abortion will drop. People in states will be more willing to put deeper restrictions into place.
People stay home throwing a tantrum is EXACTLY what the dems want.
Now I will say that there needs to be seats at the table to discuss this and get at least a short term consensus on direction and next steps. Diktats from the wizards of smart will lead to catastrophe. Republicans have shown time and again that they can't even get out of their own way.
I'm okay with the platform on abortion. I hate everything about abortion, but I recognize we live in a society where heart are not won by legislation or force.
The whole IVF things baffles me. It's a step too far--- better to find ways to limit destruction (snowflake adoption for example) rather than alienate a whole group of parents who have limited options. And make birth control availability/affordability a priority.
I will still probably vote for Trump, but door-knocking, telephoning, contributing money - not. I understand why he did this, but the party platform is an aspirational goal. If the Republican party, no longer aspires to protect life then it will go the way of its predecessor the Whigs who refused to stand against slavery.
Why not push birth control. You can find it anywhere. If you don't get pregnant there is no need for an abortion. Granted there is always the rape and incest debate which throws my birth control solution right out the window but we need to start somewhere. And Choice could also mean keeping your baby.
Abortion and Biden. Same but different discussion.
For over 50 years the public debate over abortion was suppressed by the Roe decision, yet prolife advocates remained outside clinics, mostly peaceful, mostly in prayer. Finally, Roe drops, and the debate resumes.
For over 10 years the Dems hid the declining mental fitness of Joe Biden. Finally, Biden speaks publicly at the CNN debate and the debate over his fitness resumes.
Speech is a stubborn thing, and hard to suppress. If the abortion debate had continued, I don’t know where it would be today, but it would have had 50 years of countrywide discussion, and the nation would be much more settled on this issue. If Biden had been subject to a real primary, I don’t know how he would have fared but today the DNC would not be divided and in freefall.
The DNC somehow never learned that it wasn’t the Watergate burglary that got Nixon, but the coverup. It’s always the coverup.
Eric, you wrote, "Here’s the reality: Donald Trump knows those upset will still vote for him." And, Eric, you are smart enough to know WHY we will vote for DT. As long as he remains as the only viable candidate who stands in opposition of Biden's methodical destruction of the USA, I have no logical choice but to vote for him. Eric Ericson isn't running for President; I can't vote for him.
As we stand today in the USA, as long as he is the only viable opposing candidate of Biden, DT could come to his future rallies wearing a Wisconsin cheese hat and brandishing a chest painted red and black with a caricature distortion of the Alabama Pachyderm, and I would STILL vote for him. Yes, like my US Rep. MTG, I'm not real proud of him; he clearly knows how to speak and act inappropriately. He needs the reality of Christ in his heart, but my standing upon principles and refusing to vote for him because he doesn't know Jesus and therefore talks and acts like so many other non-Christians (he doesn't have the mind of Christ; why would I get incensed at him for thinking and acting like he is not a believer?) would be, at least for me, an exhibition of self-righteousness and is irresponsible as a citizen of this nation. Donald Trump is very imperfect, but he's still light years ahead of the other choice when it comes to the survival of the United States of America.
This feels like a mixed bag. On the one hand, the removal of language on marriage, a federal abortion ban, and support for IVF feels like Evangelicals are getting marginalized. On the other, booting those issues to the states may be the best option politically because the Republican Party was completely unprepared for the day after Roe. They either assumed the end of Roe would mean the end of abortion or were just simply exploiting the issue to win the votes of evangelicals. I lean far more to the latter but that does raise the question, how do evangelicals move forward in the realm of politics? Erick is right to not put faith in politicians and I'd certainly agree with him our focus should be on our communities, families, and churches but national policies do matter. If our preferred policies don't have a shot of passing, how do we make the case for them in the American public? At the same time, are there things we should be supporting that should take precedent? Namely, how do we push the GOP abd American society to become more faith and family focused? That's not a conversation I see a lot of people having but it sure needs to.
Federalism is real, you can't just pretend the 10th Amendment does not exist.
Marriage is administered by the states.
Row was bad law and rightly returned to the states.
Griswold v. Connecticut seems to me to extend to IVF.
I need Erick to explain the relationship between the National GOP and State GOP entities.
My thought is the National GOP should be focused on what Washington can, should, or should not control while actively supporting what the states can or should control.
I worked on the 1992 platform during GHW Bush's reelection campaign - my boss at the time, Sen. Don Nickles (R-OK), was the Platform chair and presented it at the convention. I wrote his speech. While valuable statements of principle, the fact is that the only people who read them are opposition researchers looking for ammunition to use against other party. It's why I like to remind people that the Democratic platform endorsed slavery for 40 years in the 19th Century.
We must all do/vote as we see fit. However, a ban on abortion will not stop abortions. Certainlly, it's easier on a person's conscience thinking we've made it illigal, but it only drives abortion into the shadows where the mother is at risk...and the child still dies.
At some point, being morally right, but not only not achieving your goal, but also never having political power again, sending the country into the abyss is a bigger killer than abortion.
IMO, find an acceptable initial limit, make adoption much easier and take 1/2 the money we send to Planned (UN)Parenhood and fund pregnancy crisis centers (need a better name) where mother's are helped and persuaded to keep their baby. See Don Wholers comment on these pages. Win the hearts and minds of The People. I am of the opinion, only a few nasty craven women hate their unborn child and can't wait to abort. The overwhelming number have (stupidly) backed themselves into a corner and only need help saving the child.
At this point what we need is not "platform language" or new "laws" that will be struck down by lefty judges at different levels. We need to PERSUADE the public that abortion is a BAD solution to an inhumane problem. Once we do that, conscience will take over. It's going to be a generational effort that starts at home.
Aren't we doing that now with very limited success? What's wrong with streamlining the extremely costly and cumbersome adoption process? Or, for instance, passing a law which states equal monies must be spent on preventing abortion as facilitation on a national level? Yes, there's federalism, but if there is no way to unfund planned pregnancy, equally fund those same real health services but from a provider which makes it much easier to keep the baby ?
totally agree. But all those must be supported by voters who fall easily prey, at this point, to portrayals of the pro-life movement by nonsense like "handmaid" junk and "my body" stuff. It's an education process. As a teacher of teenagers (middle and high school) the battle must be fought with minds first. And having been married to an adoptee and having raised adopted children, I take every opportunity to educate people on how close they came to NOT surviving pregnancy. Dobbs got it back to the state level and opened a new lane for discussion. Let's not hand our enemies easy propaganda wins.
And I agree with you. We must make it easier and more successful to save than abort. Right now, it's an incidious process almost/seemingly planned to make abortion preferable.
The assertion that thousands of women died each year from illegal abortions before Roe is false. No evidence exists to support this spurious claim. Dr. Bernard Nathanson, one of the founders of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), and the former owner of the largest abortion clinic in the world, admitted the figures were made up. pro-abortion propagandist Marian Faux confirms the lie in her recent book Roe v. Wade; "An image of tens of thousands of women being maimed or killed each year by illegal abortion was so persuasive a piece of propaganda that the [pro-abortion] movement could be forgiven its failure to double-check the facts."
According to the United States Bureau of Vital Statistics and the Centers for Disease Control, the last time 1,000 women died of illegal abortions in the United States was in the year before penicillin became widely available to the public in 1942. In the ten years preceding Roe v. Wade, deaths ranged from 90 to 150 per year.
Interesting John. But I was not saying the woman died, the baby did. IE Abortions still happened, just in a "dark" fashion. Furthermore, here are a LOT of long term complications from "legal" sanctioned abortions without increasing their liklihood having them performed in the shadows even as the mother did not die. I very much appreciate your relaying this info, however and I am glad to read it.
Abortion is the only thing Dems tend to win on because they can distort and obscure it to make it an attack on women. When it’s nothing like that.
But the right correctly advocates for life and against abortion but often goes to far with the rhetoric.
Abortion is bad. Really bad. It’s a disgusting brutal act and shouldn’t be allowed. But so is porn, so is sex change surgery on children. So are allot of things in the world.
The best thing to do is lead by example and express our displeasure at these things. But gov regulations or outright bans isn’t the answer. People can make choices for themselves.
However, what the right chooses is to make abortion a hill to die on. And many a republican candidate has lost trying to do so. The issue with that is, while it may be morally correct. You can’t enact change unless you win elections.
I’m not saying sell your soul to the devil to win. I’m saying stand firm on your position and let it go. Standing on a platform of pro life and anti abortion is not a winning ticket.
What should be done instead is to be pro choice anti abortion. We need to have restrictions and offered counseling. There should be a 48 hour waiting period and for
Minors no abortions without parental consent.
Then we need to focus on the stigma that the dems are the party of women. Which is not true. Not with their embrace of men in women’s sports and calls to mutilate their children. That’s what we need to scream about.
Legislating morality doesn't usually work but giving better options to make a more moral choice can and does. Honor killings are considered the proper moral response in some areas still. Our culture and laws about any killing being basically wrong has changed that through the thought of jail time and social pressure but not for all hearts & minds. The killing of unborn children should only be a tragic act of necessity in a perfect world but we are not perfect. We need to win hearts & minds to make a real change. You do not do that by condemning those who have had to make the choice. I'm pro-life but reality is poverty, choices, poor parenting, youthful indiscretions, adult mistakes, rape/date rape, health, ignorance etc. all contribute and until those areas are addressed, we really have no right to control anyone's choices but ours. I agree with throwing it back to the states as it opens the conversation in a more manageable arena. To put on GOP platform would be a big unforced error. We need to push for adoptions (we keep saying but nothing really done same with taking care of vets) If we can't stop tax dollars going to Planned P we need to have as much or more to help those in need to keep the child at least for adoption. Men need to finally be actually held as responsible as the woman in public opinion as well as actual monetary fact and the legal system needs to make it more affordable to chase whoever needs to be paying down. Sex education needs to be on sexual urges & the results not multiple genders and reinforced with teaching about what an "abortion is and the consequences" as well as detailed cost, job loss, lower paying jobs, etc. Fight for those things. We should err on choice not mandates. As for marriage, that horse left the barn years ago even though very tired of things changing their established meaning to even try to reverse that would just not be the charitable Christian way. They wanted what their parents had, a stable committed partner for life just like we all hopefully do. The word marriage held promise. What good would it do to undo that now? I believe it would hurt too many people, confuse children, etc. The best way to get what we wish is for each of us to be the best example of it.
My Facebook is ablaze this week with my usual "vote blue no matter who" friends scaremongering about P25, including spreading lies about it. It's obvious that a Dem talking point(s) dropped over the weekend, since I hadn't seen any chatter about it before this weekend.
The extreme Left (The Nation, Mother Jones, etc.) have been talking about P25 for months. It even bubbled up on RealClearPolitics. It's not new. Heritage has had it out for months.
Why the hullaballoo now?
My first thought was that it was to distract from the Biden/25A/fitness to run/fitness to serve mess over on the Democrat side. I still think that's partially the case.
The other is much more important.
The GOP platform dropped over the weekend, and it is easily the most socially moderate platform the GOP has ever had, or at least in the last half century.
The Dems are scared sh--well, let's just say they need to swap the Ex-Lax for Kaopectate.
The Dems had one ace in a hand of rags. That was abortion specifically and women's reproductive issues generally. Trump Is A Convicted Felon(TM) has gained no real purchase and has hurt the Dems almost as much as it has helped. Look it up.
That has been removed from the conversation. Maybe not by hardcore Dem standards, but certainly by moderate standards. Early abortion? No position. IVF? Thumbs up. Contraception? Thumbs up.
The Dems needed a new boogeyman. A "shadow platform", if you will.
Heritage had one in convenient bite-size form--well, at least as bite-size as a 900-page document can be.
Now, I am sure MoveOn and every other proggie org has something similar, maybe not in the form of a 900-page tome, and maybe not on its own dedicated website (project2025.org).
I think we need to tell the progs that Publix has Reynolds Wrap on sale for their millinery.
Time to galvanize around Trump. Want Marxism? Don’t galvanize around Trump. It’s that simple. Your choice.
So... the platform is 'much ado about nothing.'
Still voting Trump because I'm taking Biden's advice to 'Don't compare me to the Almighty. Compare me to the alternative.' And right now, the alternative looks REALLY good.
Speaking of 'the Almighty', Biden said if 'God Almighty' came down and told him to step aside, he would.
I'm thinking someone in the White House plays the movies 'Bruce Almighty' and 'Evan Almighty' Back-to-Back, and then have Morgan Freeman come to the White House and tell Joe he needs to step aside.
I don't understand the "mah principles crowd". Why the heck cut off our nose to spite our face? There must be incrementalism. Change the culture. Move toward morality and the family vs the current leftist drive toward hedonism. When that evolution starts to happen, the demand for abortion will drop. People in states will be more willing to put deeper restrictions into place.
People stay home throwing a tantrum is EXACTLY what the dems want.
Now I will say that there needs to be seats at the table to discuss this and get at least a short term consensus on direction and next steps. Diktats from the wizards of smart will lead to catastrophe. Republicans have shown time and again that they can't even get out of their own way.
I'm okay with the platform on abortion. I hate everything about abortion, but I recognize we live in a society where heart are not won by legislation or force.
The whole IVF things baffles me. It's a step too far--- better to find ways to limit destruction (snowflake adoption for example) rather than alienate a whole group of parents who have limited options. And make birth control availability/affordability a priority.
I will still probably vote for Trump, but door-knocking, telephoning, contributing money - not. I understand why he did this, but the party platform is an aspirational goal. If the Republican party, no longer aspires to protect life then it will go the way of its predecessor the Whigs who refused to stand against slavery.
Why not push birth control. You can find it anywhere. If you don't get pregnant there is no need for an abortion. Granted there is always the rape and incest debate which throws my birth control solution right out the window but we need to start somewhere. And Choice could also mean keeping your baby.
There are some folks (like Duggars and others) who believe birth control preventing the creation of life is as bad as terminating life.
you mentioned that he put 3 Justices on the Supreme court. How many do you see retiring in the next 4 years.
I think Thomas would retire if Trump wins.
more than one most likely. How many more Sotomayor's do you want to see in the supreme court?
' I would rather be ruled by a just Turk than by an unjust Christian' Martin Luther
??????????????????
Trump the Turk. Biden the Christian.
Abortion and Biden. Same but different discussion.
For over 50 years the public debate over abortion was suppressed by the Roe decision, yet prolife advocates remained outside clinics, mostly peaceful, mostly in prayer. Finally, Roe drops, and the debate resumes.
For over 10 years the Dems hid the declining mental fitness of Joe Biden. Finally, Biden speaks publicly at the CNN debate and the debate over his fitness resumes.
Speech is a stubborn thing, and hard to suppress. If the abortion debate had continued, I don’t know where it would be today, but it would have had 50 years of countrywide discussion, and the nation would be much more settled on this issue. If Biden had been subject to a real primary, I don’t know how he would have fared but today the DNC would not be divided and in freefall.
The DNC somehow never learned that it wasn’t the Watergate burglary that got Nixon, but the coverup. It’s always the coverup.
Eric, you wrote, "Here’s the reality: Donald Trump knows those upset will still vote for him." And, Eric, you are smart enough to know WHY we will vote for DT. As long as he remains as the only viable candidate who stands in opposition of Biden's methodical destruction of the USA, I have no logical choice but to vote for him. Eric Ericson isn't running for President; I can't vote for him.
As we stand today in the USA, as long as he is the only viable opposing candidate of Biden, DT could come to his future rallies wearing a Wisconsin cheese hat and brandishing a chest painted red and black with a caricature distortion of the Alabama Pachyderm, and I would STILL vote for him. Yes, like my US Rep. MTG, I'm not real proud of him; he clearly knows how to speak and act inappropriately. He needs the reality of Christ in his heart, but my standing upon principles and refusing to vote for him because he doesn't know Jesus and therefore talks and acts like so many other non-Christians (he doesn't have the mind of Christ; why would I get incensed at him for thinking and acting like he is not a believer?) would be, at least for me, an exhibition of self-righteousness and is irresponsible as a citizen of this nation. Donald Trump is very imperfect, but he's still light years ahead of the other choice when it comes to the survival of the United States of America.
This feels like a mixed bag. On the one hand, the removal of language on marriage, a federal abortion ban, and support for IVF feels like Evangelicals are getting marginalized. On the other, booting those issues to the states may be the best option politically because the Republican Party was completely unprepared for the day after Roe. They either assumed the end of Roe would mean the end of abortion or were just simply exploiting the issue to win the votes of evangelicals. I lean far more to the latter but that does raise the question, how do evangelicals move forward in the realm of politics? Erick is right to not put faith in politicians and I'd certainly agree with him our focus should be on our communities, families, and churches but national policies do matter. If our preferred policies don't have a shot of passing, how do we make the case for them in the American public? At the same time, are there things we should be supporting that should take precedent? Namely, how do we push the GOP abd American society to become more faith and family focused? That's not a conversation I see a lot of people having but it sure needs to.
Federalism is real, you can't just pretend the 10th Amendment does not exist.
Marriage is administered by the states.
Row was bad law and rightly returned to the states.
Griswold v. Connecticut seems to me to extend to IVF.
I need Erick to explain the relationship between the National GOP and State GOP entities.
My thought is the National GOP should be focused on what Washington can, should, or should not control while actively supporting what the states can or should control.
We need to win elections to enact all of these policies. I don’t think legislating morality is going to be a winning ticket.
Let’s boot out the trash first and then we can start upgrading the security system. Maybe then we can worry about what the daughter is doing at 1am.
I worked on the 1992 platform during GHW Bush's reelection campaign - my boss at the time, Sen. Don Nickles (R-OK), was the Platform chair and presented it at the convention. I wrote his speech. While valuable statements of principle, the fact is that the only people who read them are opposition researchers looking for ammunition to use against other party. It's why I like to remind people that the Democratic platform endorsed slavery for 40 years in the 19th Century.
We must all do/vote as we see fit. However, a ban on abortion will not stop abortions. Certainlly, it's easier on a person's conscience thinking we've made it illigal, but it only drives abortion into the shadows where the mother is at risk...and the child still dies.
At some point, being morally right, but not only not achieving your goal, but also never having political power again, sending the country into the abyss is a bigger killer than abortion.
IMO, find an acceptable initial limit, make adoption much easier and take 1/2 the money we send to Planned (UN)Parenhood and fund pregnancy crisis centers (need a better name) where mother's are helped and persuaded to keep their baby. See Don Wholers comment on these pages. Win the hearts and minds of The People. I am of the opinion, only a few nasty craven women hate their unborn child and can't wait to abort. The overwhelming number have (stupidly) backed themselves into a corner and only need help saving the child.
At this point what we need is not "platform language" or new "laws" that will be struck down by lefty judges at different levels. We need to PERSUADE the public that abortion is a BAD solution to an inhumane problem. Once we do that, conscience will take over. It's going to be a generational effort that starts at home.
Aren't we doing that now with very limited success? What's wrong with streamlining the extremely costly and cumbersome adoption process? Or, for instance, passing a law which states equal monies must be spent on preventing abortion as facilitation on a national level? Yes, there's federalism, but if there is no way to unfund planned pregnancy, equally fund those same real health services but from a provider which makes it much easier to keep the baby ?
totally agree. But all those must be supported by voters who fall easily prey, at this point, to portrayals of the pro-life movement by nonsense like "handmaid" junk and "my body" stuff. It's an education process. As a teacher of teenagers (middle and high school) the battle must be fought with minds first. And having been married to an adoptee and having raised adopted children, I take every opportunity to educate people on how close they came to NOT surviving pregnancy. Dobbs got it back to the state level and opened a new lane for discussion. Let's not hand our enemies easy propaganda wins.
and, GOOD ON YA, Mr. SM for your "actions".
And I agree with you. We must make it easier and more successful to save than abort. Right now, it's an incidious process almost/seemingly planned to make abortion preferable.
That’s not true really.
But I agree it’s not the most important thing right now. If we make abortion one of our platforms we will lose.
We need to gain control and win elections at the state level. Then maybe we can go back and tackle abortion. We can’t do much from the sidelines.
What's not true, Chaz? I madea number of points.. ;-)
That abortions would “go into the shadows..”
that’s a liberal myth and not a reason to keep abortions.
The reason to ban abortions is because it’s reprehensible.
Before we get to banning abortions we need to win elections. That means answering the abortion question but moving on to better topics.
The left will try to keep the message to abortion because that’s all they win on.
But scare tactics and myths is not helpful.
I simply think you're wrong. There will always be abortions. And a ban would create "dark" providers.
Read what I have posted, Chaz. Make it easier to keep babies and successfully put them up for adoption.
The assertion that thousands of women died each year from illegal abortions before Roe is false. No evidence exists to support this spurious claim. Dr. Bernard Nathanson, one of the founders of the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL), and the former owner of the largest abortion clinic in the world, admitted the figures were made up. pro-abortion propagandist Marian Faux confirms the lie in her recent book Roe v. Wade; "An image of tens of thousands of women being maimed or killed each year by illegal abortion was so persuasive a piece of propaganda that the [pro-abortion] movement could be forgiven its failure to double-check the facts."
According to the United States Bureau of Vital Statistics and the Centers for Disease Control, the last time 1,000 women died of illegal abortions in the United States was in the year before penicillin became widely available to the public in 1942. In the ten years preceding Roe v. Wade, deaths ranged from 90 to 150 per year.
Interesting John. But I was not saying the woman died, the baby did. IE Abortions still happened, just in a "dark" fashion. Furthermore, here are a LOT of long term complications from "legal" sanctioned abortions without increasing their liklihood having them performed in the shadows even as the mother did not die. I very much appreciate your relaying this info, however and I am glad to read it.
Abortion is the only thing Dems tend to win on because they can distort and obscure it to make it an attack on women. When it’s nothing like that.
But the right correctly advocates for life and against abortion but often goes to far with the rhetoric.
Abortion is bad. Really bad. It’s a disgusting brutal act and shouldn’t be allowed. But so is porn, so is sex change surgery on children. So are allot of things in the world.
The best thing to do is lead by example and express our displeasure at these things. But gov regulations or outright bans isn’t the answer. People can make choices for themselves.
However, what the right chooses is to make abortion a hill to die on. And many a republican candidate has lost trying to do so. The issue with that is, while it may be morally correct. You can’t enact change unless you win elections.
I’m not saying sell your soul to the devil to win. I’m saying stand firm on your position and let it go. Standing on a platform of pro life and anti abortion is not a winning ticket.
What should be done instead is to be pro choice anti abortion. We need to have restrictions and offered counseling. There should be a 48 hour waiting period and for
Minors no abortions without parental consent.
Then we need to focus on the stigma that the dems are the party of women. Which is not true. Not with their embrace of men in women’s sports and calls to mutilate their children. That’s what we need to scream about.
Focus on facts that win us elections.