Tag: abortion

California’s Highway to Hell

 

Nancy PelosiNancy Pelosi is the face of evil in our land, and a sign of how far we have fallen as a nation. Nancy Pelosi, the once and present Speaker of the House of Representatives, led her Democrat Party caucus to pass a bill federalizing the left’s abortion absolutism, just as they seek to end our constitutional republic by stealing elections the old-fashioned way with House Resolution 4, passed in August. Commendably, no Republican member of Congress voted for either of these bills. Pelosi’s defiance of her archbiship on House Resolution 3755, the radical abortion bill, is unsurprising and shows the long failure of Roman Catholic leadership to enforce church discipline on this life and death matter.

Archbishop of San Francisco Salvatore Cordileone called the falsely named Women’s Health Protection Act of 2021 “child sacrifice.” [emphasis added]:

HR 3755, the misnamed “Women’s Health Protection Act of 2021,” shows to what radical extremes the supposedly “Pro-Choice” advocates in our country will go to protect what they hold most sacred: the right to kill innocent human beings in the womb.  I support Archbishop Joseph Naumann in his demand to lawmakers to reject this “deceptively-named, extreme bill [that] would impose abortion on demand nationwide at any stage of pregnancy [and] … eliminate modest and widely supported pro-life laws at every level of government,” and, instead, that they “put the energy and resources of our federal government behind policies that recognize and support both mothers and their children.”  Any reasonable person with a basic sense of morality and inkling of decency cannot but shudder in horror at such a heinous evil being codified in law.

Virginia’s Youngkin Wins First Debate

 

Virginia Republicans last May put their faith in a first-time candidate for public office, Glenn Youngkin, as their nominee for Governor in the state’s odd-year general election on November 2nd. They chose him over more experienced political veterans such as former House Speaker Kirk Cox, State Senator Amanda Chase, and long-time GOP supporter and candidate Pete Snyder.

Choosing a novice candidate is risky, especially when running against a long-time political pro and former governor like Terry McAuliffe. But Virginia’s GOP saw in Youngkin what I did when first meeting him in December 2020 – the best natural candidate I’ve ever met. And I’ve worked in over 35 congressional and US Senate campaigns in 25 states over a quarter-century, where I’ve done my share of helping negotiate debates, coach candidates, and conduct mock debates.

So many Republicans were no doubt a little trepidatious of tonight’s gubernatorial debate at Appalachian Law School in Grundy, Virginia in the Commonwealth’s far southwest corner, bordering Kentucky and West Virginia. They need not have been. Youngkin won the contest.

Meanwhile, at Case Western

 

Since spring 2020, pro-life students at Cleveland’s Case Western Reserve University (CWRU) have tried to organize a chapter of Students for Life. Case Western is a university, a land of complimentary flavored condoms and helpful instructional pamphlets about proper masking procedures during sex, so the prospect of an anti-abortion organization receiving either official support or funding did not go over well. Not at all. After the student government approved the nascent group’s petition, the woke on campus complained, demanded a referendum, and voted the new pro-life club out of existence. Its members reorganized, renamed themselves Case for Life, and continued to seek recognition. To its partial credit, CWRU finally approved the group late this spring, albeit narrowly. And two weeks ago, irate student journalists took to the pages of The Observer, Case Western’s campus newspaper, to vent their spleens in a piece destined to become a classic in the annals of SJW-ist rhetoric. It begins:

Here we go again. The fight for reproductive rights and privacy happens consistently throughout the world, and it’s no different at Case Western Reserve University — even though institutions should not infringe upon people’s right to choose what to do with their bodies.

On Covid and Texas, Biden Courts a Constitutional Crisis

 

When Donald Trump was president, we heard a lot about Norms® and Standards. Trump was accused of violating this vague collection of unwritten rules, a convenient tactic when they couldn’t prove actual crimes. The good news was that Biden’s election would restore this Beltway-approved system of etiquette. How refreshing.

Eight months into his administration, Biden has folded, spindled, and mutilated our Norms® and Standards, even those mandated by the Constitution. Trump was erratic but Biden is openly courting a constitutional crisis.

Pressured by far-left backbencher Cori Bush in August, the White House reinstated an eviction ban already declared illegal by the Supreme Court. Biden knew it was a violation but said: “by the time it gets litigated, it will probably give some additional time.”

Member Post

 

After the shameful American surrender and withdrawal in Afghanistan over the past 2 weeks – leaving Americans behind after an armed conflict for the first time in US history – President Biden and Democrats understandably want to change the subject. Source: RasmussenReports.com 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. Get your first month free.

The Great Texas Abortion Law Freak Out

 

By now, those of you who are paying even a smidgen of attention to the news are aware that legislation titled the Texas Heartbeat Act (S.B. No. 8) went into effect yesterday.  The law prohibits a physician from performing an abortion, absent a medical emergency, “if the physician detected a fetal heartbeat for the unborn child.”  This occurs at about six weeks from conception.   Of most interest is the fact that the law–unlike some other state attempts–does not permit state officers to enforce it.  In a rather unique piece of draftsmanship, it permits a private party to sue in state court against anyone who violates the law or aids and abets in the violation.  If the plaintiff is successful, they are entitled to injunctive relief, attorney’s fees, and at least $10,000 in damages.

There is a somewhat complex procedural history leading up to yesterday’s Supreme Court action which I’m not going to track here.  The bottom line is that, by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court denied abortion providers’ request for an emergency injunction preventing the law from going into effect.  This is not a decision “on the merits”–on the ultimate constitutionality of the law, but only a determination that the defendants in the suit–Texas officials (including the Attorney General) and a citizen activist–were not attempting to enforce the law, so there was (among other things) no “case or controversy” to be resolved.  That is, or should have been, a fairly simple resolution.  But not so fast.  It’s abortion.

Join Jim and Greg as they look at the good, bad, and crazy performances of the media in just the past 24 hours. They cheer Matt Lee of the Associated Press for doggedly asking an important question that the State Department refuses to answer. They also roll their eyes as much of the mainstream media honor the Biden administration’s wishes and push the ongoing crisis in Afghanistan much lower in their coverage. And they blast CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin – for several reasons – over his hysterical evaluation of the Supreme Court refusing to block pro-life legislation in Texas from taking effect.

Byron York is in for Jim Geraghty today.  Byron and Greg cheer Mississippi’s attorney general for telling the Supreme Court there is no constitutional right to an abortion. They also react to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejecting certain Republicans from the January 6th commission by pointing out the radical lefties she has named to the panel. And they have some choice words for the Biden administration after learning that Hunter Biden will be meeting prospective buyers of his ridiculously overpriced art when the transactions are supposed to be anonymous.

Should Roe v. Wade Stand?

 

The United States Supreme Court put abortion on center stage for its 2021–22 term last week when it agreed to review Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. In Dobbs, the Fifth Circuit upheld the Mississippi Gestational Age Act, which prohibits, except in cases of medical emergency or severe fetal abnormalities, abortions after fifteen weeks of gestational age. That statute is commonly understood to be in stark conflict with the 1973 Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, which holds that a women’s right of privacy—itself nowhere explicitly stated in the Constitution—is “broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy” before the fetus is viable, estimated at roughly twenty-four weeks of gestational age. The balancing test of Roe was explicitly affirmed and further developed in the 1992 Supreme Court decision Planned Parenthood of Se. Pa. v. Casey, which concluded that the state’s “profound interest in potential life” is not “strong” enough to block an abortion or to impose an “undue burden” on that right.

Despite constant attacks on its constitutional pedigree, Roe has been affirmed by “an unbroken line” of cases, as the Fifth Circuit noted in Dobbs. Even so, the deep unease about Roe was clearly articulated in Judge James Ho’s concurring opinion, which acknowledged the precedential force of Roe only to sharply attack its methodological underpinnings for giving insufficient weight to the state’s interest. Though the Mississippi law posed three challenges to the current Roe/Casey synthesis, the court granted the state’s petition for certiorari solely on one question: “Whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional.” The court declined to review on the temporizing question of whether, under the Roe/Casey framework, the Mississippi statute posed an “undue burden” on the abortion right.

Defenders of Roe view the case as an all-or-nothing choice. Thus, Emily Cain (of EMILY’s List) lamented that this “consequential” order now reveals the Republican goal “to overturn Roe and take away the right [for women] to make their own health care decisions.” Republicans, for their part, do not deny that charge, but insist that their tireless efforts to elect pro-life legislators has been vindicated by the grant of certiorari.

Justice Clarence Thomas Rips SCOTUS, and No Lives Matter

 

Whenever Justice Thomas calls out his colleagues on the Supreme Court, I am almost always delighted for a number of reasons. For one, his comments are incisive; for another, he usually represents my own views. And finally, in this particular case, he spoke up on the issue of life and death :

When addressing juvenile murderers, this Court has stated that ‘children are different’ and that courts must consider ‘a child’s lesser culpability,’ Thomas wrote. ‘And yet, when assessing the Court-created right of an individual of the same age to seek an abortion, Members of this Court take pains to emphasize a ‘young woman’s’ right to choose.

Join Jim and Greg as they welcome an appeals court decision upholding an Ohio ban on abortions because the unborn baby has Down Syndrome. They also fume as the intel community admits there is only low to moderate confidence in last year’s reports that Russia was offering bounties to the Taliban and its allies for killing coalition forces in Afghanistan. And they shake their heads at the obvious court-packing hypocrisy of Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey.

Lucy on Abortion

 

NARAL, the National Abortion Rights Action League, has decided to sell abortion using dogs — because people are really comfortable with dogs, but not so comfortable with abortion. (In fact, we’re so uncomfortable with abortion that abortion advocates generally try not to use the word.)

Here’s an example of NARAL’s canine campaign currently making the rounds on the internet.

Bandit doesn’t say he’s pro-abortion, exactly. He’s pro-choice. And he isn’t anti-life, exactly: he just hates anti-choice disinformation, whatever that is.

On this episode of “The Federalist Radio Hour,” Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser joins Federalist Staff Writer Jordan Davidson to discuss President Joe Biden’s Health and Human Services nominee Xavier Becerra’s pro-abortion track record and the direction of the pro-life community under the Democrat-controlled Congress and executive branch.

The Party of Life or the Party of Death

 

Only weeks into the new Biden-Harris Administration, Democrats defeated a bill that would have protected babies that survived an abortion. Called the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, it protected a baby by giving him or her medical care and nourishment coming into the world. In other words, there are actually babies that survive and are left to die, once born! This is coming from the party that supposedly champions “human” rights.

It failed because nearly every Senate Democrat voted against the measure, which requires doctors to provide medical care for newborns who survive abortion attempts. The act received 52 votes, falling 8 short of the 60-vote threshold necessary to break the filibuster. Democratic senators Joe Manchin (W. Va.) and Bob Casey (Pa.) crossed the aisle to vote for the legislation.

Sen. Ben Sasse (R., Neb.), who introduced the legislation, decried the partisan vote. “This legislation isn’t red vs. blue, it is simply about giving every baby a fighting chance. Every baby deserves care. This isn’t about abortion, it’s about human rights,” he said.

Member Post

 

This morning, President Trump issued a Proclamation for National Sanctity of Human Life Day 2021.  It reads in part  Every human life is a gift to the world.  Whether born or unborn, young or old, healthy or sick, every person is made in the holy image of God.  The Almighty Creator gives unique talents, beautiful dreams, and […]

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. Get your first month free.

Member Post

 

According to Quillette: ” …California’s insurance commissioner has ­issued a directive to reclassify double mastectomies of healthy breasts from “cosmetic” procedures to “reconstructive,” necessary to “correct or repair the abnormal structures of the body caused by congenital defects.” The Calicommish is presumably responding, compassionately,  to the experience of transgendered persons like the one who wrote […]

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. Get your first month free.

The Best Articles I Read in 2020

 

Here at the end of 2020, I’m trying to close up a number of tabs I have open on my browser. Many of them are articles, and of that number I’m certain several were suggested or linked to by fellow Ricochet members, mentioned in podcasts, or discovered through searches prompted by Ricochet discussions. I was originally going to say “The 10 Best Articles…”, but the list is more than ten articles and I’m sure I’m forgetting some additional ones that I read months ago…it’s been a long year.

For this post I loosely define “the best” articles as those that challenged my thinking on an issue, were educational, were unexpected or deservedly scandalous, courageously broke with prevailing current narratives, or discussed an important topic otherwise ignored or forgotten. I’m not going to say which characteristic applies to which article as I’m trying to keep this post relatively brief, and each article could form the foundation of a post and become fertile ground for discussion. Some of the articles were written in years prior to 2020, but I just got around to reading them this year and they were either prophetic or remain pertinent to current events. Grouped with some of the articles I have read, I’m also listing what I’m going to read next in regard to that topic. These will have “to be read” in parentheses next to them.

Member Post

 

The following is a summary (not word for word) excerpt I typed out from an interview on the Issues, Etc. podcast with Dr. Tara Sander Lee from the Charlotte Lozier Institute regarding their analysis of whether or not and if so how aborted fetal cell lines have been used in the development, production, and/or testing […]

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. Get your first month free.

Join Jim and Greg, even though there are no good martinis today. They wince as Joe Biden taps radical lefty Xavier Becerra to run the Department of Health and Human Services. They also walk through the thoroughly unsurprising allegations that New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo runs a toxic work environment. And they fume as the Chicago Teachers’ Union says returning to in-person instruction is due to racism, sexism, and misogyny while national unions convince Joe Biden to demand $100 billion to reopen elementary schools.