Tag: abortion

Does She Really Think Death Is Better Than Adoption?

 

Over at Salon (yeah, I know), Joan Walsh weighed in on the leaked Dobbs opinion.  It’s the usual Joan Walsh stuff, but one argument stuck out.  She makes it in response to Justice Barrett’s comment, made during her confirmation hearing, that abortion seems less and less necessary given the option of adoption.  Walsh’s counter-argument goes like this:  Abortion should remain lawful because giving live babies up for adoption can be upsetting to their moms.  

My question (if I were Walsh’s editor) would be: “How about you explain to your readers why giving a live daughter up for adoption is more upsetting than killing her?” Walsh does not bother with that question, and her silence on that point is telling.  Here’s why:  If gestating babies are as inconsequential as pro-choicers like Walsh say they are (not a human; not a life; a clump of cells), then abortion is no more morally consequential than cutting your hair.  But I doubt Walsh would ever make the claim that donating one’s cut hair (to be made into wigs for cancer patients, for example) is more upsetting than throwing it in the garbage.

Member Post

 

I’m no fan of US Senator Bob Casey, Democrat of Pennsylvania. It started before he was elected in 2006 when he unseated my friend and US Senator Rick Santorum in the very Democratic year of 2006. Had Santorum been reelected, he was slated to become the Assistant Republican Leader. Santorum would instead win eleven states […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Member Post

 

05/09/22 Madison, Wisconsin (Molly Beck/USA Today Network via Reuters) The FBI‘s Definition of Domestic Terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature. Preview Open

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Member Post

 

A favorite podcast is “What the Hell is Going On,” featuring the American Enterprise Institute’s Marc Thiessen and Danielle Pletka. Their most recent podcast featured law professor and former Supreme Court law clerk John Yoo on Roe v. Wade. It is the best discussion I’ve heard of Justice Samuel Alito’s leaked draft opinion to overturn […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Join Jim & Greg as they cheer a majority of U.S. senators rejecting the Democrats’ abortion bill that would have ended hundreds of state restrictions and forced pro-life doctors to perform abortions. They’re also glad to see record early voting turnout in Georgia, a vindication of last year’s new election laws that Democrats said was Jim Crow 2.0. And they shudder as the Producer Price Index measure of inflation was still at 11 percent in April.

 

New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu joins Jim and Greg to explain why he turned down persistent GOP efforts to get him to run for U.S. Senate this year and why he strongly prefers to run for governor again. Gov. Sununu also talks about where he sees the Republican Party heading, and what it will take to win in swing states this year and in 2024. In addition, they discuss what the Republican agenda ought to be for fighting inflation and dig into Gov. Sununu’s record on school choice and abortion. Finally, Jim and Greg ask whether New Hampshire should always get to bat leadoff in the presidential primary season.

 

Roe’s Awkward Departure

 

Politico rocked the nation with its recent exclusive and explosive publication of a mysteriously leaked copy of Justice Samuel Alito’s February 10, 2022, draft majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization—the apparent decision by at least five Supreme Court Justices to uphold Mississippi’s law banning elective abortions after the fifteenth week of pregnancy. That opinion makes it likely that the Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade, which crafted a constitutional right to an abortion forty-nine years ago in 1973. The defenders of the Dobbs opinion regard it as a triumph of originalism worthy of “three very enthusiastic cheers.” In sharp contrast, the progressive critics of the decision go to exquisite lengths to express their complete and utter contempt for a decision that according to the League of Women’s Voters “not only strips women and pregnant people of their personal autonomy but opens the door to erode more fundamental rights,” leading “to collective shock and outrage” by pro-choice advocates.

Clearly, with stakes this high it is important to set aside both exultation and despair in order to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the Alito opinion. On the positive side, Alito’s opinion adopts a tone of workmanlike seriousness that is quite circumspect about overruling past precedents, and explicitly disclaims any intention to overrule any other precedent on either women’s or LBGTQ rights. Instead, it treats abortion  as “a unique act” that does not impact “in any way” Lawrence v. Texas (2003), dealing with private consensual sexual behavior, or Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), constitutionally protecting same-sex marriage. Instead, it articulates a two-stage argument that dismantles the establishment in Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Pennsylvania v. Casey of a constitutional right to abortion. The first part notes that abortion is not explicitly protected in the Constitution. The second part contends that Roe cannot be defended on some implied “substantive due process” grounds, because it does not meet the standard set out in the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist’s decision in Washington v. Glucksberg (1997), which refused to recognize any right to assisted suicide, namely that “any such right must be ‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition’ . . . and ‘implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.’ ”

As Alito exhaustively documents, that standard cannot be met given the impressive array of common law and statutory criminal prohibitions of abortion in effect before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, at the time of its adoption in 1868, or at any time thereafter. Yet at no point does Alito find any constitutional prohibition against the decriminalization of abortion. Instead, his chief complaint is that Roe “short-circuited the democratic process” that would otherwise lead to some political resolution in the same state legislatures that controlled the law on abortion before Roe. Recall that at the time of Roe, states had dramatically different abortion laws, from Texas’ very restrictive law (at issue in Roe) to New York’s 1970 law, which legalized abortion up through twenty-four weeks of pregnancy and whenever the mother’s life was in danger. Alito then shows that Roe’s legal reasoning “was exceedingly weak,” especially in light of its internal confusions, including its inability to justify different constitutional rules for each of the three trimesters of a pregnancy. Alito leveled the same criticism at Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey (1992), which affirmed Roe’s establishment of a right to abortion whenever state regulations impose an “undue burden on that right.” Hence, he struck down an opinion that could not be justified by the mere passage of time, and that had never gained political legitimacy during the past forty-nine years.

Join Jim and Greg as they breathe a tad easier after Vladimir Putin does not announce any escalation of the Ukraine war in his Victory Day speech. They also fume as the Biden administration still can’t find the courage to tell protesters to stay away from the homes of Supreme Court justices. And recently uncovered voting records add to their unease about the idea of Sen. Mehmet Oz in Pennsylvania.

 

Left-Wing Groups Planning on Crashing Catholic Churches

 

I have received multiple email warnings about left wing groups, especially one called Ruth Sent Us, planning to crash Catholic Churches this Sunday in the aftermath of the leaked SCOTUS decision to overthrow Roe.  From the Washington Times:

Pro-choice activists are planning protests in churches on Mother’s Day and are preparing visits to Supreme Court justices’ homes next week to express anger over an anticipated ruling overturning legalized abortion.

Phyllis Schlafly: The Mother of Conservatism, on Abortion

 

Called the mother of conservatism by some, what would Phyllis Schlafly, the American writer, political activist, and anti-feminist crusader against the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) have to say about the latest developments in the challenge to Roe v. Wade? In a 1994 speech on “Abortion and the GOP,” Schlafly makes a case that remains as relevant and powerful today as when she spoke nearly 30 years ago.

…the Republican Party has a tradition of standing for certain principles and it has and should have an identity different from the other parties. The Republican Party was born on the principle that no human being should be considered the property of another. That is our heritage as Republicans and it would be tragic mistake to abandon that fundamental precept now. The most famous political debates in American history, the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858, will be re-enacted this year on C-Span. During those seven debates up and down the state of Illinois, Abraham Lincoln enunciated the position of the then new Republican Party that slavery was a moral, a social, and a political wrong. Steven A. Douglas took the position that individual states should have freedom of choice to decide this issue for themselves through the democratic process without dictate from the Federal government. In Quincy, Illinois, Lincoln argued that we should “deal with slavery as with any other wrong insofar as we can prevent its growing larger and deal with with it in that in the run of time there may be some promise of an end of it. We have a do regard for the actual presence of it amongst us and the difficulties of getting rid of it in any satisfactory way, but we must oppose it as an evil.”

Jim Geraghty is back! Today, he and Greg get a kick out of the sleazy Lincoln Project vowing to help Democrat Tim Ryan win the Ohio Senate race and Ryan’s team makes it clear they don’t want the group anywhere near the campaign. Jim sounds off as the Biden administration publicly confirms even more intelligence work directly connected to Ukrainian military operations, including the sinking of the Moskva. And outgoing Press Secretary Jen Psaki refuses to tell abortion protesters to stay away from the private residences of Supreme Court justices.

Member Post

 

I’ve listened to John Yoo on two podcasts here at Ricochet discussing the recent leak of a draft opinion on the Dodd case, the abortion case currently pending before the Supreme Court.  As most of you probably know, the draft opinion overrules Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (Casey is the 1992 SCOTUS decision upholding the “essential […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Join Greg and Emily Jashinsky of The Federalist as they welcome signs from Sen. Susan Collins that she has no intention of ending the filibuster to pass abortion legislation but they also note how abortion could cause tension inside a GOP coalition that now includes a lot of people who don’t consider themselves social conservatives. They also wonder why U.S. officials would publicly confirm that American intelligence has been directly involved in tracking and targeting Russian generals killed by Ukraine. And they fire back as Biden climate adviser Gina McCarthy vows an aggressive green agenda – including more than a hundred regulations on appliances and severe demands for “sustainable airlines.”

 

Member Post

 

This Sunday, we celebrate Mother’s Day.  Mothers will get special treatment with cards, luncheons, flowers, gifts and praise.  It was started by a woman named Anna Jarvis after her mother’s passing, and became a national holiday in 1908. She didn’t want the day to be commercialized, yet it’s popularity spread across the world and is […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Looks Like I Picked a Bad Week to Return to Twitter

 

I thought the meltdown over Musk possibly ending censorship on Twitter was ridiculous, but the response to the prospect of Roe being overturned is truly absurd.

Of course, people on Twitter don’t understand that not everything is mentioned in the Constitution. Some things just aren’t in there, things like “abortion” and “misinformation” and “freedom of speech” —

Join Greg and Ricochet.com Editor-in-Chief Jon Gabriel as they welcome fundraising and polling news that significantly contradicts the idea that overturning Roe v. Wade will move midterm momentum to the Democrats. They also shudder at reports the CDC as tracking our movements through our cell phones to make sure we were complying with lockdown orders. And they take aim at the Lincoln Project and others who pretended to be conservatives for many years but are now supposedly appalled at the idea of Roe being struck down. Of course it’s all just part of their ongoing efforts to fleece liberal donors in the name of opposing the political right.

Join Greg and Ricochet Editor-in-Chief Jon Gabriel as they dissect the leaking of a draft majority opinion that shows a majority of Supreme Court justices prepared to overturn Roe v. Wade. First, they discuss the significant damage the leak may do to the functioning and credibility of the Supreme Court. They also highlight why they hope the draft will be the majority opinion in terms of shifting abortion back to the states and why the pro-life movement clearly has a legal high ground. And they react to some of the most unhinged statements from Democrats in response to the breaking news.

Member Post

 

There seem to be various factors in considering a celebration.  One is to celebrate the beginning or outset of an event or era, e.g., a birth, a wedding, or the signing of the Declaration of Independence.  Another factor to consider in a celebration is the end, or culmination of an event or era, e.g., the […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.