I brought up the question of abortion and as usual the usual pointless discussion ensued. A couple of my conservative friends chimed in and all they could talk about is philosophy and morality. I, being a more practical sort due to my engineering training, would prefer to talk policing. Or if you will: what can government really do (besides being a criminal organization I mean)?
I’m going to start here with my own bit of philosophy. Political Philosophy.
There are two parties in America today. Those that trust government and those that don’t. The trusters are all the Ds and half the Rs.
And then there are the rest of us.
Yeah. The R trusters are different. “We only trust government for some things. Far fewer things than the Ds – that is for sure.” Forgetting the problem of mission creep. How did fighting drugs morph into peeing into a bottle for a job? One of those unexpected mysteries of life to be sure.
Back to the morality question.
The morality is obvious. (In rich countries with plenty of food anyway).
What is also obvious is that policing such a ban will get very ugly.
I can’t wait to see what the Pregnancy Enforcement Administration (PEA) will look like. It will be staffed with PEA brains to be sure. But will they require women to pee in a bottle weekly for the PEA? The Drug War precedent says yes. I’m not totally against such a move. It will be a great libertarian recruiting tool.
There is only one (so far) Pro-Life Organization I have found that says it is not the business of government to change hearts and minds on this subject. It is theirs:
I’m hoping this attitude will catch on.
Addressed to my pro life friends:
The government is barely able to keep order on the streets. And you want them to police the most intimate (available) part’s of your or your mate’s and daughter’s anatomy?
Are you nuts?
Well not nuts exactly. It is a mental illness though. Faith in Government.
Again to my Pro-Government friends:
I worry about fellers like you. You have the best of intentions. And then the Democrats get in and use every power you have given government against you.
Idiots.
Or perhaps I should rephrase that. Government lovers. There is some evidence it is a genetic defect. Currently uncurable. My condolences.
And a parting thought. But first a little background. I had been discussing with one of my pro life friends the escalation of the Drug War to the point that SWAT Teams are going after defaulters on student loans. My friend said it was not about vaginas and vagina police (people who believe in government seem to have very limited imaginations).
Of course you are right my friend. It is not about vaginas. But if you get your way it will be.
The scene of the crime will need to be searched extensively by those forensically trained and if not the trained then who ever is available. Murder is a very serious crime and the evidence in this case is the body of the perpetrator. Police will at least need to watch the evidence being gathered to insure the chain of custody. This is some serious s***. You don’t stint on murder investigations. Especially with 100 million potential criminals to keep an eye on.
And what happens when police go into the crime prevention mode?
What happens if the woman decides not to eat right and there is nothing where there was once something. There will need to be a law. And watchers. Perhaps a special badge for pregnant women so we can all be our sister’s and children’s keepers.
===
Are you forgetting what the Drug War has done for SWAT teams? Watch those student loans buddy. You don’t want the 3 AM knock followed by the flash bang grenades and possible accidental discharge of automatic weapons just because your student loans are not up to date.
The Government starts with a mission and then the mission creeps. And pretty soon the power you gave to government to protect you is being used against you. Best to give them as little power as possible. The same attitude you would have towards any Criminal Enterprise.
Cross Posted at Power and Control
Comments
6 responses to “Two Parties”
“the usual pointless discussion ensued”
Amen.
I have asked this question of fellow conservatives many times and received nothing in return but charges of “hieratic” and such, but can someone who is pro-life please explain this to me? Why, if life truly begins at the very moment of conception, as is the basis of much pro-life argument, when you consider that something like 25% of conceptions (and the number is likely higher since many “late periods” never get counted) fail, would this not constitute the most serious threat to our well-being? If those zygotes and such are real people, how do we sleep at night without pouring every last resource into a problem that is wiping out 25% of the human population?
I understand the opposite side in the sense that if life doesn’t begin at the moment of conception, there are also significant philosophical considerations. But in the conservative sphere, those arguments have been beaten to death (pardon the phrase). I’m serious. This is not a flippant question and I’d like to hear a reasoned answer. I do appreciate the other point of view and I don’t pretend to know God’s will. I’m looking for a rational response to this question that would justify the sort of draconian actions that would need to be implemented to outlaw this procedure. It is one thing to say, “I believe X is immoral”, but IMO you need considerably more justification before you force such a perception onto everyone else.
We have reached a fragile consensus about when a persons life ends based on brain function. The parties who fight over abortion are not interested in seeking a similar consensus about when an individual’s life as a person begins. The division is a path to influence and power; not something to be resolved. I would be relieved to see reasoned arguments, but there are none on the national stage. Only one on one.
To deliberately stop the beat of a human heart should require great cause and much deliberation.
“I brought up the question of abortion and as usual the usual pointless discussion ensued. ”
i want to see roe v wade overturned so that the tenth amendment means something more than a penumbra distilled from the entrails of a dessicated constitution. if you believe in the 10th then 9 fed clowns in black robes shouldn’t have any say in the matter of abortion.
“if you
believe in the 10thread the 10th to say that all that’s not listed in the constitution for the feds to do is left up to the statesOne reason for the War on Some Drugs is that my fellow blue noses actually took the other side seriously when they claimed that, in the absence of desperate actions by the government, the drug “culture” would take over society. On the contrary, by now it’s clear routine drug use is nowhere near universal acceptance. I also note that legal drugs such as alcohol and nicotine are getting less acceptable even without much of a ban, which means it’s not the illegality of some drugs that makes them disreputable.
If we apply this to abortion, I suspect it won’t be banned until several decades after its use has become infinitesimal.