Wednesday, May 03, 2006

Three responses

1. Roe vs Wade is terrible constitutional law. It is built on a fictitious “right” not actually found in the constitution, bolstered by phony history and now defended from criticism because it is supposedly “settled” law. We may all desperately want something to be in the constitution, but if it is not there, it is not. Ask the prohibitionists about that.

Take abortion out of the courts, kick it to the state legislatures, and let them do the will of the people. New York and Maryland craves abortion, they will have it. South Dakota and Alabama see it as murder, they will prohibit it. Every other state will exercise their freedom of choice to select some policy in the middle.

2. Abortion is grisly and wrong. Peter Singer, ghoul that he is, nonetheless makes the inarguable point that birth is just another tick of the clock. If we are willing to shove scissors into the head of a baby still in the birth canal and suck out her brains at 40 weeks, why can’t we do the same to a 3 month old who was born 3 months premature? It would probably be a better idea even. Give that troubled girl you mentioned 3 months to really try out being a mother, sort of as a test run. If she says, “I can’t get any sleep, and my grades are suffering, and I really wanted to go to college,” planned parenthood can have drop offs in the back where the baby can be euthanized. Or she could just do it herself.

Watch a baby being aborted on 3D ultrasound. It’s hard to complain about the nihilistic beheading Islamists when we allow that same kind of thing in our own midst.

3. What is the difference between 1) creating an embryo to harvest its parts, 2) creating a clone for its parts to be harvested, 3) conceiving a baby for the express purpose of harvesting its parts in utero prior to abortion, 4) birthing the unwanted baby to whom you have given a lobotomy so that she has the same mental abilities of Terri Shiavo to allow it to grow for a period in order to harvest her now larger parts, so that you can starve her to death later? I’ll tell you. 1) is now, 4) is later. If you don’t think that loosening the rules a little leads to the unthinkable later, you have not watched prime-time TV lately or noticed that since gays started getting married, polygamists are agitating for their “rights.”