Anti-abortion hypocrites only care about themselves

[TexasTowelie]

by Rev. Dr. Roger Ray


There is no single dividing line in American politics as consequential as the subject of abortion rights. Even after all of the egregious lies, self-dealing, affairs and crimes committed by Donald Trump, he still enjoys a 70 percent approval rating among evangelical Christians. Compared to any other modern politician who had been exposed for some moral failing, this would seem to be impossible, but it is possible because Trump has convinced evangelicals, through the appointment of anti-abortion judges, that he actually cares about this central issue.

With the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, and Mitch McConnell’s willingness to ignore everything he had said about Obama appointing a Supreme Court Justice during an election year, it appears to be inevitable that the unwavering women’s rights advocate, the “notorious” RBG, will be replaced with a reliable anti-women’s reproductive rights jurist. I don’t want to wave a flag of surrender prematurely but I do want to remind those who feel the most passionately about this that making abortion illegal in the United States does not mean that women will stop getting abortions, it just means that poor people will be prevented from receiving medically safe abortions.

And, even in the days before the passage of Roe v. Wade, the restriction only applied to women who did not have the financial means to get to Canada, Europe or the Caribbean. I have always thought that it was rather hypocritical for the “celibate” priests and nuns in the Roman Catholic Church to dictate reproductive morality to women who were not celibate (either by choice or as victims), but, as documented in the PBS special on the topic (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/abused-nuns-reveal-stories-of-rape-forced-abortions), when nuns get pregnant, either by choice or as victims, getting an abortion was always on the menu for them.

I hate to pick just one hypocritical politician, but since journalism does require some specifics, consider the case of Tennessee Republican Rep. Scott DesJarlais, who insisted that his mistress get an abortion in spite of his career of campaigning against abortion rights. (https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/anti-abortion-congressman-pressured-mistress-abortion-report-article-1.1179477)

Read more: https://www.news-leader.com/story/opinion/2020/09/25/anti-abortion-hypocrites-only-care-themselves-roger-ray/3531395001/
(Springfield News-Leader)

[raccoon]

1. Thank for posting. Great article. Nt

[TexasTowelie]

3. You're welcome.

The article definitely got my attention.

I've only known one woman who has gotten an abortion. The man who was the father-to-be is also a Republican (one of the few Republican friends I have). At least he isn't a Trump-humper.

[Girard442]

2. After 200,000+ dead from COVID, they still call themseves "pro-life."

[PA Democrat]

5. And the growing death toll related to climate change is fine with them as well.

[Boogiemack]

7. Isn't it telling that most anti-abortionists are also anti-maskers, anti-distances,

anti-science, anti-ACA, anti-most social services, anti-new immigrants?
Oh, yes, and anti-American.

[pansypoo53219]

4. no. JUST the fetus. post birth its on its own. needs to pull up its bootstraps.

[Boogiemack]

6. Don't you mean "bootie straps?" nt

[pansypoo53219]

16. nope. fux gnewz wants boots.

[vercetti2021]

8. Let's call them what they really are

They're anti-choice. It's not because they want a child to live even though a fetus is not even a living being yet and doesn't have a conscious. It's because they don't like the fact that women have control over their own bodies.

Those fuckers are not pro-life they are anti women.

[randr]

9. Whether you are pro-life or pro choice

The most important thing to think about is whether or not the world is a safe place to bring children into.
The reasons women make the choice to abort a child need to addressed by both sides if we want to see this division heal.

[AZizzy]

10. SCOTUS can't declare abortion is illegal

SCOTUS can only declare it is not a right protected under the constitution. That's what the Roe V Wade decision entailed, abortion was a right protected under the right to privacy clause. This court can only reverse Roe v Wade on that basis.

Only congress and/or the states can make abortions (or anything else for that matter) illegal. If memory serves prior to Roe v Wade New York (and several other states?) had already passed laws allowing abortions. A little help from a constitutional lawyer might be needed here but I'm pretty sure this is the correct interpretation of Roe V Wade and supreme court rulings. Don't intend to gloss over what a disaster Judge Barrett would be on the court, Just saying Democracy is an unending battle, with each generation fighting to improve it, if only just a little for the next generation.

[localroger]

12. This is correct

However, should SCOTUS overturn Roe, dozens of zombie anti-abortion laws would snap into effect, effectively making it illegal overnight in much of the country. While abortion would certainly remain legal in some of the bluer states it would put us back in the pre-Roe position of reserving it for people who can take time off of work and travel. Also, a few states have flirted with language which would criminalize abortion even if you left the state to have one where it's legal; it's not certain how those laws would fare if challenged either at the state or federal level. (Of course the same people who think this is a fine and clever idea would scream bloody murder if a state like California tried to make it illegal to possess or operate a type of gun they banned even if you went to another state where it's legal to do it, but I digress.)

[ancianita]

11. Stupid power thinks its candle's light shines brighter by blowing out another's candle.

[niyad]

13. ALL anti-choice arguments have, at their heart, a profound hatred for women. Because all the

arguments boil down to saying that some one, or some thing, whether the z/e/f, the sperm donor, the church, or the state, is more important than the woman. Everything else is window dressing.

[Silent3]

15. I'm strongly pro-choice, but I don't think that's a fair assessment of ALL the arguments

While I strongly doubt is the sincerity of those who argue that they are putting the life of the unborn over the choice of the mother, that is the argument they're making most of the time, not your characterization of the argument.

And when you say "more important than the woman", what does that mean? More important than her life itself? Because that's not always true, since many anti-abortion people are at least willing to make an exception for the life, and further, the general health of the mother.

What tell me that it's a power trip most of the time, and not true concern for life, is that the vast majority of the anti-abortion crowd are happy to kill foreigners in war, are very casual about "collateral damage" in war, show little concern for those unjustly killed by the police, care nothing about babies being ripped from their mother's arms and put in cages, don't care anything about providing health care for those babies, or anyone else who can't afford it, etc.

[mainer]

14. Abortion rates fall under Democratic administrations

In the US, abortion is one of the most divisive partisan issues in politics, and deeply entrenched in party ideology. For many voters, their anti-abortion views are what put them firmly in the Republican Party’s camp. They may want to rethink their political alignment, though: during the last three decades, abortion rates have fallen the most under Democrats, and remained flat or at best decreased marginally under Republican administrations.

https://qz.com/857273/the-sharpest-drops-in-abortion-rates-in-america-have-been-under-democratic-presidents/

The explanation is simple. Democrats work to support mothers, easing the hard work of being working moms, giving them the help they need to keep their pregnancies.

Real Christians would support Democrats.