I just got an e-mail from Rand Paul. I assume he is angling for the VP slot under Romney (all double entendres intended – you will see why soon). Rand says:
Dear Concerned American,
I’ve prepared a brief but urgent video regarding breaking news in the fight to overturn Roe v. Wade in our nation.
Please take a moment to listen to my urgent message by clicking here.
After you listen, please sign the petition to finally end abortion on demand.
Sincerely,
Rand Paul,
U.S. Senator (R-KY)
I applaud Rand Paul’s efforts to create an abortion black market. Heaven knows we could use a few more of them in these economically troubled times. And having the government watch over the vaginas of America is such a comforting thought. It comforts me as much as having the TSA protecting our airports.
In any case I have discussed this issue with numerous “conservatives” and what I come away with is that they haven’t thought the issue through beyond the slogans.
Just one of my many points for illustration: Abortion is premeditated murder (according to the antis and the definition of murder). About 20 million women +/- have had abortions. Do we round them all up and charge them (there is no statute of limitations on murder)? Or do we grant blanket amnesty for premeditated murder? Or do we call it a government invented crime like using the wrong drugs, thereby cheapening the whole issue to a political fight (which is evidently what the antis want).
The issue as framed is popular among the Republican base. Which is why I think I got the message. He wants to be Romney’s VP.
Comments
25 responses to “Rand Paul Wants The Government To Watch Over The Vaginas Of America”
Abortion is murder, but it is the type of murder that is beyond the ability of civil law to confront, due to the right of people to privacy. Normally, an innocent person could appeal to society for protection under the law, but the law can’t really help you if your mama wants you dead. So what I think needs to change is the ability of people who hate and oppose abortion to resist it within their private milieu, i.e. I need my rights to discriminate against aborters and abortionists but don’t need to get the cops involved. I think in the olde days it was called freedom and responsibility.
Abortion would be private, if performed solo. At present, it is ONLY legal if performed by a licensed medical professional. Professionals that are otherwise quite regulated in what they can and cannot do to another human being. This is not NECESSARILY an argument against abortion. It is an argument against any notion that there is a degree of ‘privacy’ “beyond the ability of civil law to confront.” The very regulation of medical practice entails a certain loss of privacy for both the patient and more so the practitioner.
Libertarianism means recognizing the rights of all individuals. The PERMANENT denial of ALL the liberties of one life in order to avoid the temporary inconveniencing of another life (an inconvenience that that law already mandates for 18 years should the child survive exiting the womb) is hardly a libertarian position. And that IS an argument against abortion.
ThomasD,
Well OK. We can make laws against doctors doing it. That will bring forth pills. What have you accomplished?
I personally prefer creating a culture/environment where it was not necessary. You know. Private action.
Because once you have put the government in charge of vaginas what might they do when the Malthusians get into office as they do from time to time.
I would suffer the abortions of women who want them to avoid the possibility of government making them mandatory. Ever hear of China?
Famous last words – “It can’t happen here.”
I think I’m bugging off. Your comments have become a bit fatuous and self congratulatory. You are welcome to assume that I am a fearful Republican. I AM – fearful of wasting time reading fairly shallow analysis of a given situation. I’ll try back when you might actually examine yourself rather than everyone else.
None of these women could be arrested for murder retroactively. Right now, abortion is not considered legal murder, although it is considered morally repugnant and unnecessary by the frightened conservatives – you know, the ones who speak out in spite of Chick Fil A slapdowns.
Genie,
There is no statute of limitations on murder. It is part and parcel with natural rights.
But your point is the very one I was making.
“abortion is not considered legal murder”
I’m sure if you come back you can explain why it is not murder now and was not considered so in 1790.
To say that they didn’t know then is to say that Hippocrates didn’t know 2,500 years ago. I don’t believe that.
And how do you feel about putting the TSA in charge of your equipment? To become a vassal to the government because you are female. I don’t want that to happen to the First Mate. I do not want it to happen to my daughter.
And Genie – none of the writers here support the Chick Fil A slapdowns even though we might disagree with them on various issues. Eric speaks for us on that issue.
And Genie,
As long as we are at it let me state the Jewish position on abortion. I’m Jewish. I will always be Jewish. By Jewish law. I have a Jewish mother.
Due to the general leniency in matters of abortion, as well as a long standing Jewish insistence of the separation of religion and government in American life all four non-Orthodox Jewish movements – Reform, Reconstructionist, Conservative, and Humanist – are on record as opposing any governmental regulation of abortion. Moreover, many Orthodox authorities take the same position. What ever their opinion of abortion in any given situation, a vast majority of Jewish thinkers agree that decision making with respect to abortion must be left in the hands of the woman involved, her husband, her physician, and her rabbi. Out of this context in consonance with her Jewish heritage she can make a decision as she is permitted to do by the US Constitution.
[snip]
In all cases the fetus is considered the property of the woman and not an independent human being until it has at least partially exited the woman. Let me add that if the life of the woman is imperiled in the judgment of those involved abortion is mandatory. Such cases can include thoughts of suicide by the woman.
http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2008/11/jewish-position-on-abortion.html
Finally, a pro-lifer that puts his money where his mouth is. Thank you Sen. Paul for at least bringing something forward on this issue to the electorate.
Just a couple comments for those that want to curtail abortion rights:
(1) If you think 2-3 year prison sentences* along with large fines are sufficient punishments for those violating abortion laws, please stop calling abortions “murder”.
(2) Please realize you are advocating for injustice as long as you insist on punishing the medical people more harshly than the woman getting the illegal abortion. To punish the medical people severely when the woman deserves at least 50% of the blame and related punishment is unjust and therefore immoral.
* Short prison terms and/or fines seems to be the consensus among pro-lifers should they get their way. They rarely talk about what the punishments s/b at all. I think it’s because they are morally inconsistent and don’t want people to see it.
Rand Paul Wants The Government To Watch Over The Vaginas Of America
Hey!!! That’s my job!!
Randy,
Re: your last comment. Heh.
And re: your previous one. I did a whole series of articles on abortion and what I teased out (similar to your observation) is:
Misdemeanor murder for the doctor and the woman goes free.
Misdemeanor murder for the doctor and the woman goes free.
And what are the implications for the woman who takes an abortifacient pill without assistance?
Eric,
Good question. Maybe we will get another drug war. Since the current one is proving so successful.
I read an exchange at NRO some years back that exposed the inconsistencies on the pro-life side concerning their rhetoric on the issue as compared to the actual laws and punishments pro-lifers would likely enact. It really ticked me off.
The one that gets me the most is using the word “murder” continuously all these years, yet they would press for laws that would let the person most responsible for the “murder” go unpunished for all practicle purposes. Of course I’m referring to the woman who would obtain an illegal abortion. Kind of flies in the face of conservative rhetoric about responsibility.
Jesus said if you hate your brother without a cause He assumes you want your brother dead and holds you morally responsible as if you had killed him.
Jesus is not bound by the limits of the civil law. Jesus can and will hold all of us accountable on that great day of judgement which is to come.
Christians need to get back to spiritual basics and teach the truth of Jesus Christ and get the hell away from worldly concerns which profit nothing in eternity.
A woman can legally get an abortion but since when does Jesus Christ give a flying frigola what man and his stupid laws say? Jesus Christ will judge it all in the end, and that is what people should, oh, what’s the word, O yeah, FEAR!!!!!
I like this blog a lot, but, since the
*FEAR*
of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, I think this blog has a lot of room to grow in wisdom.
Fearing to offend and displease God is an excellent and praiseworthy reason NOT to have an abortion.
Government’s Greatest Trick – Making you a slave to your fears.
What people generally focus on is the Devil’s exploitation of desire. But that is one of his least significant tools. If you want people to be evil to the bone exploit their fears.
What are you afraid of James? – That will tell you where you are weak. It will tell you where you are exploitable.
===
And James the only people that need fear the Maker are those not in conversation with him. In fact when I get pissed off at him I tell him so. He often corrects on my say so. As he should when he is wrong. That omniscient stuff is crapola for the weak and small minded. You wouldn’t be one of those would you?
Do you fear abortion James? Are you planning to have one? If not mind your own business.
As far as I can tell, Jewish law is consistent with the comparison between war and abortion that ’60s liberals used to proclaim. (They dropped it along with most of the other good ideas they had.) In accordance with this, abortion is an unjust war unless the fetus threatens the life of the mother. This also explains why abortion in the case of rape is a legitimate opinion (which I disagree with) and why it is appropriate to protest abortion by sit-ins but not by assasinating abortionists.
I’ve noticed that pro-choicers often accept the war–abortion analogy until I agree with it.
In any case, the claim that a child is not a person a moment before birth and is a person a moment after birth should be taken no more seriously than the claim that the universe is six thousand years old. If we can squeeze 19th-century paleontology into Judaism, we can squeeze 19th-century embryology into Judaism.
Joseph,
The idea that embryology creates a new fact contradicts what Hippocrates knew 2,500 years ago. And the long interaction between the Jews and the Greeks would indicate that the Jews got the message no more than 100 years after Hippocrates proclaimed it.
The Jewish idea stems from the fact that until the baby starts exiting from the mother that it is her property. The alternative is that the mother is the property of the State when she is pregnant. The Jews have a long libertarian tradition (mostly forgotten) but you can read about it in Samuel.
In fact Jesus was in part a reaffirmation of Jewish libertarianism. Which was corrupted by the Council of Nicaea.
The Christians don’t even know their own tradition. I think it is because they are ignorant of the Jewish tradition. It is why I often not so jokingly say. “Time to get back to the old time religion. If it was good enough for Jesus it is good enough for me.”
[…] Joseph Hertzlinger comes up with the standard social conservative objection to my position on abortion. He thinks that […]
None of the women who have burdened me with their abortion stories has ever had a better reason than utter self-centered selfishness. All of the full-time licensed abortionists I have met were consciousless killers for hire (ten years in the insurance business selling exclusively to physicians).
Robert,
I once met a woman who was mentally unprepared for children. She had several abortions. Under Jewish law abortion was a requirement for her.
Later when she was ready she had a number of children. She was married to a friend of mine.
What you consider “selfish reasons” others may see differently.