Counter-Currents
1,742 words
Elizabeth Dias & Lisa Lerer
The End of Roe: The Rise of a New America
Flatiron Books, 2024
A political and social movement which lives by the Supreme Court of the United States will die by the Supreme Court of the United States. New York Times reporters Elizabeth Dias and Lisa Lerer have written an excellent, page turning book about the abortion rights movement, which lived by Roe v. Wade (1973) and perished by Dobbs v. Jackson (2022).
The narrative of The End of Roe starts in 2013, with Barrack Obama’s re-election. The Republican Party was stunned by the defeat and its demoralized leadership gathered to re-assess its basic talking points and broader platform. Many of the GOP strategists considered a move towards Obama’s positions, such as amnesty for illegal immigrants. Included in this proposed shift was a softening on the so-called Culture War issues which were championed by the Religious Right. One of the conservative notables which opposed softening the Party’s stance on abortion, the central Culture War issue, was Marjorie Dannenfelser. She was the leader of an anti-abortion group called the Susan B. Anthony List.
Dannenfelser’s courageous stand against the wavering GOP strategists was the start of an extraordinary campaign which ultimately overturned Roe v. Wade. The campaign is remarkable because Roe, which ruled that abortion was constitutional, was as cherished a Supreme Court case for liberals as Brown v. Board (1954), which desegregated schools and led to politically sanctioned sub-Saharan violence in learning centers everywhere.
In 2013 it seemed impossible for Roe to be overturned. However, things changed as Obama’s second term drew to its weepy close. The first was that the Republican-controlled Senate decided to not hold hearings to confirm the appointment of the Jew Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court after Justice Anthony Scalia passed away in 2016. Then, DonaldTrump was elected, and he would remake the Supreme Court with the help of members of the wider anti-abortion network.
Donald Trump ascended the presidency without a core of experienced people to fill the unglamorous, but critical administration jobs. Therefore, Trump delegated the hiring duties to his Vice President, Mike Pence of Indiana. Pence had risen in politics by amplifying Culture War issues – especially the abortion issue. Because he supported so many pro-life activists, Pence had connections to a large body of talented activists and administrators. With Pence as VP, pro-life activists with decades of experience and a plan for action were given control of the levers of real power.
During his second term, President Obama, was able to push through Leftist political goals at the federal level, but his heavy-handed tactics caused his party to lose one state government after another to the Republicans. When Trump and Pence were elected in 2016, the anti-abortion activists hired by the Vice President could call on the support of every state government which was controlled by Republicans.
Throughout his presidency, Donald Trump argued with the Deep State – consisting of federal law enforcement officers, neo-conservative State Department Officials, and war profiteers in the Pentagon – he had a Deep State of pro-life activists within his administration. With states under friendly GOP control, Trump’s Deep State of pro-life activists at the federal level could collude with state governments to create legal setups to end Roe via a series of court cases. This trick is called barratry, where a case is brought before a judge who is likely to rule in a particular way which is known in advance. Such a case affirms or strikes down a particular law and creates precedent.
Meanwhile, Trump was in office at a time when he could nominate three SCOTUS Justices. The first opportunity came in 2017. The Jew Merrick Garland’s nomination was dropped, and Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch – raised Catholic but now a Protestant Episcopalian. Then, he nominated Brett Kavanaugh – Catholic. The Democrats attempted, but failed, to defeat Kavanaugh’s senate confirmation with dubious accusations of rape.
Then the Jew Ruth Bader Ginsburg died in 2020. The man who appointed her to the Supreme Court, Bill Clinton, was a moderate Southern Democrat who governed in an increasingly conservative way throughout his two terms. Clinton’s nomination of Ginsburg, and people like her, are the real payoff in the change in a presidential administration. In addition to Ginsburg, Clinton launched what has become the (incompetent) colored woman in high office phenomenon. His initial appointments on this line, such as Joycelyn Elders and Lani Guinier were disasters, but they demonstrated the proof of concept and many more (incompetent) colored women have followed. [1]
Ginsburg was not colored or incompetent, but she was probably a narcissist. President Obama had attempted to persuade her to retire when the Democrats controlled the Senate, but she didn’t take the opportunity. This meant she was taking the risk that she would be replaced by an ideological rival. Ginsburg probably didn’t want to give up the continuous acclaim that she was receiving.
Ginsburg died in 2020 and she was replaced by Amy Coney Barrett – Catholic, and partially of Old-StockFrench lineage. Barrett was also part of a conservative religious group called the Community of Praise, which is influenced by the Protestant Charismatic Movement.
The Rest of the Story
The definitive book about the abortion fight which lasted between its start with Roe and end with Dobbs has not been written. The End of Roe doesn’t describe much of the strenuous pro-life activism that started in the 1970s, became fully mature in the 1990s, suffered media hostility and blackouts, for a time attracted violent men, and then finally became dominant by 2013. It also misses the ecumenical nature of the pro-life activists.
Barrett’s religious background, which was both Catholic and Charismatic, is part of a broader trend in American Christianity, the spread of Catholic theological ideas to Protestants and vice versa. It is possible the trend of theological cross-politization started in the 1920s among anti-Bolshevik activists. Gerald L.K. Smith – Protestant – had his metapolitical content translated into Polish in the 1930s. Poles are usually Catholic. Smith also worked with the Catholic radio priest Father Caughlin.
In the late 1970s, Paul Weyrich – Catholic – politically organized Evangelical Protestants and shifted their support from Jimmy Carter to Ronald Reagan. The Catholic anti-abortion activist John C. Willke’s ideas also crossed the denominational divide. Another important Catholic institution was the law schools in the Catholic universities. These institutions produced talented lawyers who eventually became judges and none of those lawyers or judges lost sight of the anti-abortion goal along the way.
Ultimately, people who focus on the Big Ideas, that of the Truth laid out by Divine Providence, have an advantage over simple political ideologues. The pro-life activists were reading the Bible and thinking over moral issues every day. The study of theology and philosophy is critical for any activist.
When I read this book, I thought of one activist I knew – a conservative Catholic woman. We worked together on an organic cleaning products project many years ago. She worked on pro-life projects every day and convinced her husband – who didn’t agree with her extreme anti-abortion views – to collect signatures for candidates to get on the ballot and pass out broadsides. She passed away before Roe was overturned, and although she didn’t cross over Jordan, she did look upon the Promised Land.
Progressivism in One Race
Critics of abortion often pointed out that it was “racist.” To put it frankly, this critique is accurate. The main promoter of abortion, Margaret Sanger, can easily be accused of Nordicism. She was indeed a Nordic. She was of Irish heritage and from a prominent family. One of her cousins, William Edward Purcell, was the Democratic US Senator representing North Dakota. Senator Purcell was a Democrat when that party was dismantling the remaining Reconstruction Era laws and supporting white supremacy.
Sanger published her sex education and abortion material in English (the lingua franca), plus, tellingly, Italian, and Hebrew. She also reached out to the Klan and pointed out – correctly – that birth control and abortion services to sub-Saharans would reduce racial problems. She also had support from the eugenics movement and prominent white advocates like Henry Fairfield Osborn.
Once a progressive movement ceases to be by a specific people and for a specific people the progressivism comes apart. By the 1990s, abortion rights were tangled up with “civil rights,” globalism, and sub-Saharan uplift, so the negatives contained in those policies covered abortion. Additionally, abortion advocates were not helped by their leadership consisting of sneering liberal women like the former Governor of Texas, Ann Richards (1933 – 2006). Ann Richards was good at cutting, one-line insults, but the insults were coupled with the sub-Saharan crime and pathologies which came from the “civil rights” policies she supported. This was, obviously, an unsustainable way to carry on abortion-rights advocacy in the face of dedicated resistance.
The Women Made it Happen
The anti-abortion, pro-life movement in its extreme form is a luxury belief. A luxury belief demonstrates the believer is of a high social status since the belief is disconnected from reality. A person with a luxury belief who opposes all abortion simply cannot put him or herself into the position of a twelve-year-old illegal immigrant who headed north after being impregnated by her mother’s drug-dealing brother in Guatemala.
It is also insane that the South would be a region which is hostile to abortion. Southerners once understood that abortion can save America from a George Floyd situation later. Abortion activists have also been used against white advocates. Congressman Steve King, a dedicated white advocate, was defeated by the pro-life network in the 2020 election. The pro-life activists don’t always recognize the logic of white advocacy.
What is striking of the pro-life movement’s success is that its most effective advocates and organizers were women. The men who supported anti-abortion measures frequently bumbled and stumbled. The female anti-abortion activists fed their allied male elected representatives simple, two sentence soundbites and kept those officials on message. Regardless of what one thinks of the abortion issue, the pro-life women were and are simply magnificent. White advocates should emulate them.
Notes
[1] Presidents are often constrained in office. Foreign policy decisions made three presidential terms before usually tie the hands of the current resident of the White House. However, a President can appoint people to career enhancing jobs and those people shape social policies which last for decades. In Clinton’s case, he started the (incompetent) colored women in high office phenomenon. While Clinton’s appointments were obvious disasters, it paved the way for Republicans to hire (incompetent) colored women in high office, such as Condoleezza Rice.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
15 comments
The Red State crime wave of the 2040’s?
It’s well-known (in our circles, at least) that abortion-as-birth control is practiced the most by the sub-Saharans. They are a reactive, not a proactive species.
Which means that without Planned Parenthood, since 2022 the black percentage of the population has begun to increase, the vast majority being out-of-wedlock births.
This new population of fatherless bastards will start hitting puberty in the mid to late 2030’s… and as it follows, begin using drugs and committing crimes. Because statistically, they are more prone to that stuff, too…
It will be ironic to read news of goodly anti-abortion White Christians who are raped and/or murdered by sub-Saharans in the subsequent Red State crime wave.
But, hey! Only time will tell, I could be wrong. Maybe by 2040 black culture will have totally revamped itself. Just gotta get them the proper education, right?
Not to be a buzzkill but is abortion a moral issue or strictly a political issue?
When I ask if it’s a moral issue, what I mean by that is: was even a SINGLE abortion prevented by the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade?
Certainly the Supreme Court decision had a strong political effect against the “Right.” I thought the timing was suspicious coming just before the midterm elections. I thought this was going to be an article about how the Supreme Court is trying to sabotage Republicans.
The Left is successfully bludgeoning us with this issue. Women who should know that there is absolutely no threat whatsoever to their abortion rights will either believe or pretend to believe that we are on the verge of The Handmaid’s Tale. The Democrats have been hugely successful with this.
So many on the left and right get abortion wrong, at least as it relates to the battles in the Supreme Court. As a policy matter, I am conflicted about abortion. I do not like it for healthy white women. I do like it for dysgenic people and people that should not breed. To the extent that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and that is to be taken seriously, the real issue is that Roe v Wade was preposterous in its legal reasoning. So many who support abortion as a POLICY MATTER either fail to understand that or just do not care.
A lot of people are worried the hysteria over abortion could give the democrats a victory. My position though is if a significant part of the electorate does not understand or does not care about the intended role of SCOTUS, has not read Dobbs or Roe let alone understands these decisions, that alone is a supreme indictment of our democracy. People should not be allowed to exercise political authority over others from a place of ignorance, willful or otherwise.
the real issue is that Roe v Wade was preposterous in its legal reasoning.
No, what is preposterous is the idea that every constitutional right must be spelled out in so many words in the text or it doesn’t exist. Where is my right to homeschool written in the Constitution? My right to make medical decisions for my son who thinks he’s a girl? How about my right to marry a White man and bear White children? This is a very dangerous road we’re going down here. A government that hates us now has more power over our personal lives than ever.
As I have explained before, the Framers specifically ruled out this stingy reading of the Bill of Rights with the Glorious Ninth Amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Just exactly what is “preposterous” about taking this Amendment seriously?
Now, I thank you a great deal, and sincerely, Mr. van de Camp, for recognizing the well-intentioned and highly-effective activism of these women. Can someone please notify Mark Weber of this article? He said on his show with Frodi this week that “any woman” would say that whether or not I have an abortion should be “up to me.” He apparently believes that women are all of one mind about this. There is no excuse for this kind of ignorance. It is unprofessional and it has gone on for too long.
To make matters worse, he said that “women” should be punished if abortion is in fact banned. These sexist old codgers, even the usually-harmless ones like Mr. Weber, just can’t help themselves, can they? Open mouth, insert foot. Sorry guys, but normally, an accessory-before-the-fact is punished as though he were the principal, so any hypothetical criminal liability for abortion wouldn’t be limited to women, and any attempt to make it so would be transparent special pleading and likely a violation of the equal protection clause.
James Edwards goes further and tells us that abortion is “murder.” I know women’s feelings don’t matter much around here, but it’s probably not a good idea to go out of your way to alienate the very men you’re trying to persuade to start caring about White survival. Telling a guy who gave his girlfriend a ride to the abortion clinic and/or money to pay the bill that he is an accessory to first-degree premeditated murder on par with Chris Watts the Family Annihilator is probably not going to go over well. Diplomacy, please, people.
Mr. van de Camp, I don’t know what you meant when you said that Roe held that “abortion was constitutional,” but please understand that the purport of Roe was very different. The holding was that the right to privacy, substantive due process, or whatever you want to call it, prevents a state from banning abortion. We now no longer have any such right, regardless of what Dobbs apologists say about the matter. Hence, the concerns I raised in my first paragraph.
There seems to be a pervasive sort of know-it-all culture on the DR. An awful lot of people seem to know everything about everything, from Christian theology to constitutional law to women’s opinions about abortion and even “women’s nature” itself. This is not normal, even for high-IQ people, who usually are not keen on making fools of themselves with false statements easily ruled out by a simple google search. I suspect it has to do with the overrepresentation, evident in the CC poll, of certain personality types in the movement.
I honestly don’t know what you are blathering about. I am discussing Roe and Dobbs from a legal perspective. Yes there is the 9th Amendment, but that does not or should nor give SCOTUS free rein to just make stuff up. I do think one can discern a right to privacy from the 5th–the prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures does involve matters of privacy. Abortion is ultimately a medical procedure, one that takes a life,so the ideas that involves privacy is bizarre.
As for policy preferences you list, I advocate for torture as part of a sensible criminal justice system. I may favor that as a policy, but I would not try and suggest it is something per.isso le.ubdwr the Constitution.
I don’t fetishize the Constitution the way mainstream consrvatives do. Id jettison a lot of it if I somehow had omnipotent power. But it is the law of the land, ostensibly at least, and is here to stay. The fact the left is something out about Dobbs without having read it understand convinces me that, were it possible, I would simply strip them of all political authority.
I don’t fetishize the Constitution the way mainstream consrvatives do.
And yet here you are parrotting their talking points, completely ignoring the utilitarian problems with the Dobbs holding for Whites, because Heaven Forbid the Most High Holy Constitution have any deficiency that needs to be corrected, even though the Framers themselves told us they were mere men who might have forgotten something.
Those aren’t talking points. It’s about process, whether SCOUTS is supposed to interpret the law and constitution or of it just a conduit to do whatever, which will always a benefit the left.
It’s about process, whether SCOUTS is supposed to interpret the law and constitution or of it just a conduit to do whatever, which will always a benefit the left
Indeed. It is the Supreme Court’s job to interpret the Constitution, and that is exactly what they did in Casey, unless you want them to pretend the Ninth Amendment doesn’t exist. I guess you were out with Covid the day they taught the cannons of construction in law school? Otherwise, you would know that interpretations of the law that render bits and pieces of it inoperative are generally disfavored.
It really comes down to this: the Court is going to interpret the Bill of Rights broadly, penumbras and all. If the country doesn’t like it, the Court can be overturned with a Constitutional Amendment. That sounds good to me, especially given that we don’t control the government. Where was the all-powerful “judicial dictatorship” when the 18th Amendment banned liquor and then the 21st unbanned it?
which will always a benefit the left.
Wow. Not only do you know everything that can be learned in the usual ways, you’re a clairvoyant! Maybe I’m paranoid, but my imagination starts to run wild when I think about what would be happening to White Americans right now if Meyer v. Nebraska had been decided the other way. Actually, we don’t have to imagine it. It’s happening to German families right now, who are forced to send their children to schools where they are told just how evil and despicable they are from the age of six.
A successful White culture must be a pro-natal, pro-fertility culture, which implies an anti-abortion culture.
We won’t save ourselves by accepting an anti-fertility, pro-abortion, sterilizing culture in White societies, under the assumption that this will hurt the non-Whites competing with us even worse than us. The non-Whites will make up their numbers with mass immigration from the third world. We can’t do that.
It’s insane that we are in a breeding contest for survival in our own countries, against races that mature faster than we do and that breed more carelessly. That is a genocidal situation. It is part of the White genocide predicament.
We need to make Whites-only space, and breed true within that space, and uphold a pro-family, pro-fertility, anti-abortion culture (or set of cultures) within our space.
As for what non-Whites do, that’s their concern. We’ve done plenty for all mankind. Our altruism has not been reciprocated, and we are being made extinct without any other race in particular standing up to us. We need to look to our own survival from now on.
Ideally, prowhites would want pro-life for whites, pro-choice for POC.
Even Christians should be able to support a mere choice for abortion; at the very least, they should realize that pro-life in some minority of the states is the best they will ever get in a divided, but basically pro-choice (with reservations) nation.
Under pro-choice no woman is forced to have an abortion. But if our enemies (whether racial or progressive-feminist-white) wish to hold down their own population, and this helps save both White America and whatever remnants of civilized existence still obtain, why should any Christian feel bound to interfere? As long as you are not performing, funding, or obtaining abortions yourself, you are sinless wrt this issue.
The pro-life movement has always been, imo, the most sincere and truly liberal movement in American politics. It is based purely on moral righteousness rather than any self-interest. I can admire their moral commitment, but the effect of their policies and advocacy has been bad for Western Civ, as well as the GOP (and thus America overall, given the insanity and evil of today’s Democrats).
The pro-life movement has always been, imo, the most sincere and truly liberal movement in American politics.
I think there is a lot of truth to this statement, Lord Shang. Indeed, I don’t even like the term “pro-life.” It’s not honest. Consider the following two scenarios:
Two relatively intelligent working-class girls get pregnant at 16. One has the baby, the other has an abortion. The girl who had the abortion grows up, goes to college, meets a great guy, and has a bumper crop of children, because it’s fun, her husband’s game, and they can afford it.
OTOH, the girl who had the baby finds that life as a single mother in a diverse society is tough. It’s expensive to get housing, even for rent, in a “good school district.” Unlike in previous generations, there are no cheap Catholic schools staffed by nuns to fall back on. Never able to find her financial footing, by marriage or by career, she never has any more children, and her love child grows up as an only child. According to people who call themselves “pro-life,” the first mother is a selfless heroine, the second a near-demonically selfish “murderess.”
I understand the tendency to conflate pro-natalism with anti-abortion, but they are not the same. Indeed, I suspect that opposition to abortion is, for many, a way to resist liberal individualism without actually coming right out and opposing it. Women and men don’t have a duty to have and raise children, because nobody has any duties, but the human fetus has rights equal to any other individual, so abortion should be banned. Gotcha!
I would much prefer a culture that affirmatively celebrates children and recognizes the normative centrality of parenthood to a culture that merely condemns abortion of an untimely pregnancy.
Currently we have no power to change the anti-natalism around us. But if we win we can do anything we want about it. In the meantime, we can relax because currently our enemies are aborting far more of their future supporters than ours. Abortion just isn’t our fight.
For all intents and purposes, White women are not using Abortion as “birth control.” That is something that Blacks do.
The Feminists say the real problem is MEN ─ as they always do ─ only they won’t specificially call out Black men.
In 1965, when the “Moynihan Report on the Negro Family” came out, the Black illegitimacy rate was 25 percent, much higher than Whites.
Basically Roman Catholic Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-MA) blamed Whitey and slavery for destroying the Negro nuclear family.
That was controversial. Today the Blacktivists are the first to tell you that the nuclear family itself is White colonialism. And today, the Black illegitimacy rate is somewhere North of 75 percent.
President Bill Clinton was going to “end welfare as we know it” by going after “Deadbeat Dads” ─ but that hit a big snag because those Deadbeat Dads with theys Baby Mama welfare queenz, dey be Black.
And these big broods of African Queens were sired by a whole lot of different Kangs too. The Baby Mamas don’t get no check if the guy sleeping in the house be da Baby Daddy.
Anyway, before Roe vs. Wade it was usually legal to get a “therapeutic” abortion if the life or health of the mother was in jeopardy.
But like whether sodomy was really illegal or just illegal and not being enforced, this was a bit of an uneven standard ─ and a lot of ethnic OB-GYNs in Hollywood would happily do some medical “pretending” if some starlet with a nine-month problem paid enough cash.
The reverse was often also the case with overly pious physicians calling the shots. And we could easily go into a Monthy Python Meaning of Life bit here.
Margaret Sanger’s arguments are mostly sound but are outdated. Today women have a bazillion forms of reliable birth control, and it is as safe as any other medical concept.
There are even “morning after” birth control pills which had to be determined by regulators not only to be safe and reliable, but which also faced the gauntlet of the we-know-God-better-than-you-do Lobby.
Basically, Roe vs. Wade had to decide where the rights of a woman ended and the legal rights of a fetus began. Obviously, a hear-me-roar woman cannot legally just toss her newborn into the dumpster, although that happens from time to time (not usually by White women).
Fathers’ rights were never even a legal consideration, although many husbands have discovered evidence of a cheating spouse when the Abortionary cheekily sends them the bill for the wife’s procedure:
“Honey, what’s this bill from Dr. Lipschitz? I thought you went to brunch with the Bible Studies gals.”
Roe vs. Wade used the Trimester system to mark where “life was viable outside the womb” to determine where Abortion rights ended except in the case of rape or incest or the life and health of the Mother.
This remains problematical in no small part because survival for a fetus outside the womb is far different today than it was in 1973.
The joke is that Catholics and Southern Baptists believe that life begins at Conception, and Episcopalians and Unitarians say that life begins at Birth, while the Jews say it depends on who is paying the bill.
The Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) are not that keen on Abortion and have traditionally said that life begins at the Quickening, i.e., when the fetus starts to kick. But the thing is that a heartbeat can now be detected quite early. Hence Idaho now has one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country.
Back in 1996 when Senator Bob Dole (R-KS) was allowed to run for President as a kind of doddering GOP emeritus ─ he had no realistic chance of beating the Arkansas Elvis ─ and he therefore took an incredibly dumb absolutist stance on Abortion.
I don’t mean to disparage him. An incredibly decent man, Senator Dole strolled right up to me waiting forlornly in the airport circa 1982. He just saw a guy in an Army uniform and came out of nowhere and shook my left hand. I had not previously known that he had a lame right arm from wounds suffered in Italy during WWII that nearly left him a quadriplegic.
If you are still reading, now it is time for some more personal anecdotes. During the Jimmy Carter Administration in the late-1970s, my High School teacher who taught the classes of U.S. Government and World History was also an Idaho State Legislator. Therefore he was able to get all of the major political candidates running in the state (except the Governor himself) to come to our little class and answer questions.
Somebody always asked these pols about Abortion, and the Democrats (who tended to be Roman Catholics) always said that they opposed Abortion “except in cases of rape or incest or the life of the mother.” It was hard to pin them down further. The Democrats never counter-signalled Roe ─ not even the Catholics.
The Republicans tended to be LDS (Mormons) but not always. They were simply opposed to Abortion, and Roe, and vowed to fight something so evil. They were hard to pin down about exceptional cases, however.
And now I’m on a roll. One of my relatives was the first female DNC chair in 1972, a year that the ongoing conflict between the pro-Vietnam Democratic Party establishment torpedoed what was left of the Democratic Party which was split over Civil Rights and the Draft ─ and after riots at the DNC in 1968, and Southern Democrat Wallace getting shot and crippled not long before the 1972 DNC Convention, the Democratic Party was quite rife to be be landslided by President Nixon in 1972.
After the Pentagon Papers leak by a Jewish RAND Corporation analyst, some of Nixon’s rogue amateur spooks had stupidly tried to wiretap the DNC offices at the Watergate Hotel in the District of Columbia on national security grounds earlier in 1972, and the “plumbers” got caught. Nixon foolishly tried to cover it up ─ but that took awhile to fester. Essentially the obsessed corporate media did not like that Nixon had won the election by a landslide. And they tried to Doublethink that Nixon and not their heroes JFK and LBJ were the authors of the Vietnam War.
Anyway, the DNC (sans Senator Thomas Eagleton, who had been revealed to have been a former mental patient) now had Maria Kennedy Shriver’s Dad in the VP slot, and all that was left of the old Democratic Party after the pro-War establishment defection, that were still cool with an anti-War George McGovern/Sargent Shriver ticket were the lunatic Leftist weirdos, Lesbos, space hippies, and the Counter-Culture. And as the earlier McGovern VP candidate Senator Eagleton put it to Jewish journalist Bob Novak ─ the party was now about “Acid, Amnesty, and Abortion.”
Well, my aunt, the 1972 DNC Chair was a fairly culturally-Conservative Mormon who believed in New Deal stimulus and collective bargaining for working people. She and her husband had gotten rich on their mink ranch in Utah, but in those days most Democrats were omnivores who were okay with meat-murder and fur coats.
I knew her mainly when she was a retired populistic Democrat politician in Scottsdale, Arizona in the late-1970s, and she and my Grandmother who was also a Westwood were very close. She mentored the political career of Arizona Gov. Bruce Babbitt and I hated that guy.
Anyway, in her memoirs, the former Madame Chair strongly resented being badgered by Leftist Jewish Lesbians who could not make the most essential political compromises ─ and who certainly did not like that the anti-War first female DNC chair was LDS.
Ms. Westwood explained her stance on Abortion in her memoirs. Basically she only had two children instead of the usual four or six for a Mormon from Price, Utah. For her next pregnancy, however, the baby died during gestation, and in those days the doctors did not do the Bob Dole “late term abortion” bit and just waited until the dead zombie fetus was delivered naturally by God.
And the doctors rarely even told the Mother that the fetus was dead because they didn’t want her to be upset. This situation happened to my Mom with her third child as well, and when my Dad demanded some straight answers and found out that the baby was dead, he didn’t think it was a good idea to wait, so they forced the birth or whatever.
But in the case of the future female DNC Chair, the stone-faced doctors waited until the only way to save the Mother’s life was to take the uterus as well. Long story short, Ms. Westwood was not keen on Abortion but she did, from personal experience, favor Roe vs. Wade.
I think Trump did what he said he would do and got Roe overturned by appointing decent Conservative justices, and so the matter was sent back to the states were it probably belongs.
This was the best policy, and those Bluestocking Pro-Lifers should be grateful. Trump’s Catholic (I mean Conservative) justices struck down Roe and sent it back to the states. They are also decent on other stuff like the 2nd Amendment and Immigration.
Even in restricted states, it is nowadays not that hard to travel from Bumfuque to a city that has a medical center with lots more options.
And the birth control situation ─ or at least the options for women ─ are multivaried and effective. Btw, the LDS do use birth control, and their family sizes are a more-modern four or six rather than the older seven or nine. My Mom had five children, with two others stillborn.
It is stupid for Democrats and Republicans to make this issue a political hill to die on.
Idaho now has a highly-restrictive Abortion law, but that is nothing new. It is only fairly recently that you could even get your Abortions done in the state anyway (i.e., in Boise). Previously you had to travel on the Greyhound to Godless Commie cities like Spokane, WA or Salt Lake City, UT.
This year Arizona will have a plebiscite on the subject. The state courts have struck down a restrictive Aborton law from the 1800s and gone back to the 15 week limitation rule (close to the Roe standard if I remember correctly). The people, themselves, will decide what to do with a Referendum in November. That is the way closest to what the Founding Fathers intended. (A plebiscite is what should have been done with the Gay marriage question as well, but I digress.)
I am not keen on Abortion but there are a lot of extenuating circumstances in life. And I believe that eugenics, i.e., sparing the afflicted fetus from horrific defects, is a legitimate reason for parents to terminate a bad pregnancy.
I personally think that Abortion-on-demand should be banned after the first Trimester except in exceptional cases such as the Mother’s health and whether the fetus is defective or retarded or something. I also think that the parents should be notified in the case of minors, and that the husband (if any) be notified.
I apologize if some of this sounds dumb. I’m just a damn man. And I am not an expert on matters of gestation or childbirth in any case. But sorry, we are all living in the world together, and it does not revolve around “non-penised persons.” Abortion is not just about women.
🙂
When I was on my red-pill journey a couple of years ago, I read an article on Counter-Currents that talked about abortion being good for Whites because it’s a service mostly used by Negroes. The comments were so emotionally detached from the reality of baby murder that as I read I became more and more revolted. I think I actually took a little break from reading the site after that.
But, being a thinker as well as a feeler, I discussed the ideas with avatars in my head and eventually the dust settled.
Strangely, I could never bring myself to care about abortion, despite describing myself as a conservative, until about age 25. I believe this was my maternal instinct developing, as I began to collect pets at the same time.
It’s far more revolting to go into an abortion clinic seasonally and ask for the usual when the ring, the cap, the sponge, the patch, the pill, and the shot are all available. Normal people do not want fifty thousand more problems of color dumped wherever they live so yes, it is in White people’s interest and the safety of their children and animals to encourage a gross procedure for society’s bottom worst. An assembly line of criminal sprogs unleashed like Gorgons is always that black woman’s fault who accepts none of it.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.