Letter To A Friend

As you know the abortion discussion has been going hot and heavy here in the last few days. I have written a fair number of posts on the subject lately. Abortion Prohibition is a good example of the discussion. And of course the subject spills over into my e-mail box. So I wrote a letter to a friend.

===

I am positive you and those of similar opinions (lots of them in my inbox) mean well. But you are a one level thinker.

"If the government with my party in power did xxx we would have a much better country."

You fail to take it to the second level. What could be done when a party not in power gets control and that party did not have the best interests of the country at heart. Like the current soon to be partly replaced regime. What could an evil party do with the precedent? We see that already with Raich. Wickard was on the way to being overturned (Lopez - gun free school zones case) and then Scalia let his social conservatism overcome his reason. And now Raich will be used to justify the Health Care Abomination. Be very careful what you wish for.

Why are engineers mostly libertarians? Because they take second and third order effects into account as a matter of course. "I designed this for a household environment. What happens when it is used in a leaky garage. Or a steamy bathroom?"

You are thinking optimum environment. A mistake made by rookie engineers. It takes seasoning to get an engineer think at all times about what could go wrong.

So yeah. Banning abortion sounds like a good thing. But humans are involved. American humans. A notoriously obstreperous species. They are famous for circumventing laws they don't like. One of the reasons Alcohol Prohibition failed.

Look up Ron Paul on abortion. He is as prolife as it gets. And yet he thinks that at least the Feds ought to stay out of it. And if the Feds stay out of it you can only affect it at the margins because people will travel. And groups (above ground or below ground) will come in to provide funds to the indigent.

Once you allow government into women's vaginas how could that precedent be used for mischief? I can think of lots of ways. Even on the State level. TSA cavity screening for instance. Or something that will come up when 200+ million are thinking of the subject. It only takes one - and then it goes viral.

Why not contact Rockford Pro Life and tell them the Simon family sent you. My mate and I are friends with some of the members. Find out their program. Repeat it where you live. And get a secular version going too for those who are not religiously affiliated. So much to be done while you waste your time fighting with me. Why do I fight back? I worry about unintended consequences.

And think of it. Do you really want women who don't want children reproducing? Darwin in action. In a generation or three and certainly ten we will have women with very strong reproductive urges. Micro evolution in action. Cold? Yes. But the problem is self solving over time if you avoid meddling. We see it already when it comes to lefties. Those are the folks (mostly) having abortions. They have no children to "teach". You want them reproducing? Why?

Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake.

You are not my enemy. Thus my intervention.

===

Kathy Kinsley responded to the letter which I also posted in the comments of Abortion Prohibition.

Here is what she had to say:

===

"Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake."

Indeed.

Thing is, even if they succeed in outlawing abortion, it's still going to go on. Except among the poor, who won't be able to afford them easily. (I speak as someone who was a teenager - middle class - BEFORE Roe v Wade - no, I never needed one, but I knew a number who did. And they all got one - and not back in alleys, either.) All that Roe v. Wade really did was make them more affordable for the poor. The rich got 'd&c for polyps' from their own doctors - they never had any problems at all with 'legal' abortions. The middle class found sympathetic (and quite sterile) doctors to do much the same.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

posted by Simon on 11.18.10 at 08:19 PM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/10328






Comments

Someday there will be a last abortion. (Nearly everything becomes obsolete sooner or later.) Fifty years after that, there will be a belated and unnecessary ban. Fifty years after the ban, the sort of person who regards the U.S. as illegitimate because some of the Founding Fathers owned slaves will use the defense of legal abortion by some libertarians as an excuse to bash capitalism.

Joseph Hertzlinger   ·  November 19, 2010 03:12 PM

Once you allow government into women's vaginas how could that precedent be used for mischief?


Those are some big vaginas! You might want to introduce the women in your life to Kegel exercises.


Look up Ron Paul on abortion. He is as prolife as it gets. And yet he thinks that at least the Feds ought to stay out of it.

The Feds are already involved in abortion up to their eyeballs. You just happen to like the current Fed involvement. If the Feds are going to "stay out of it" the first thing they will need to do is scrap Roe and return the issue to the state legislatures where it belongs.

What's the chance that a super-duper libertarian like you will support such a thing?

flenser   ·  November 19, 2010 03:37 PM

Probably about the same chance there is that someone like me would support the idea that it would have been better to get rid of the sodomy laws state by state than have the Supreme Court do it:

http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2003/08/curtains_for_ga.html

Eric Scheie   ·  November 19, 2010 04:12 PM

Sorry, was that an indirect admission that Roe should be overturned and that you agree with the social cons on that point?

I don't doubt but that if push came to shove, you and Simon would have to agree that you are in significant agreement with social cons on a number of important issues.

Which makes the fondness for this talk about the government clambering inside womens vaginas all the stranger.

flenser   ·  November 19, 2010 04:39 PM

flenser,

The government can hire quite a number fingers especially for the job. Barring that TSA Agents can do double duty.

Yes I do completely agree with socons. The drug question is not in Federal purview. Good to see so many making that point over and over.

M. Simon   ·  November 19, 2010 10:32 PM

Really flenser,

You have to be really smart to be that obtuse. I could never ever be that smart.

M. Simon   ·  November 19, 2010 10:33 PM

Joseph,

I've never heard libertarians bash the founders for being slaver capitalists. I believe the socialists do that.

M. Simon   ·  November 22, 2010 04:07 AM

Post a comment

You may use basic HTML for formatting.





Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)


November 2010
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail



Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives



Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits