This article contains commentary which reflects the author's opinion
Get The Real News Delivered To Your Inbox
Is Conservatism Making a Faux Pas?
Abortion is front and center of most political debates currently. The recent wave of pro-Life legislation in Alabama, Georgia, Ohio, Kentucky, Missouri, and Mississippi have good intentions from good people, but the approach is fundamentally flawed. They are trying to legislate something which essentially does not belong to that domain. The abortion issue is fundamentally not political, and Conservatives should not follow the examples of the totalitarian left who try to legislate toward the erosion of Capitalism on their path to Socialism. These recent pro-Life laws take aim only at the Supreme Court. They are states’ answers to Roe v. Wade and do not have any other purpose except to overturn it.
It has been noticed before that Supreme Court decisions are very often in line with the current popular mood. The Supreme Court should never bow to political pressure. However, plaintiffs have a feeling of moral and ideological support of either the popular president or majority of Congress, as such they make cases destined exclusively for the Supreme Court. In other words, petitioners get a dose of bravery due to a political tailwind. On the surface, it looks like the Supreme Court is sometimes decidedly in favor of the prevailing political ideology of official Washington.
Such was the situation with Roe v. Wade. The case was decided in January 1973, shortly after the election of 1972 in which President Richard Nixon carried 49 states even though Democrats held majorities in both House and Senate. A similar situation occurred in 2012 when the Supreme Court decided in favor of Obamacare. However, after 2016 and the complete exoneration of President Trump of any wrongdoing in 2019 by Special Counsel Mueller, the judicial and political pendulum swung to the other side.
Is Abortion Mentioned in the US Constitution?
Of course, Conservatism must not change their opinions based on Supreme Court decisions. Court decisions are for legal matters, while Conservatism is an ideology. Its followers must consider every aspect of human life thru the prism of politics, not judicial outcomes based on re-evaluation and re-interpretation of law. Such outcomes come and go, while philosophical foundations of the American Conservatism – the US Constitution – remain unchanged. In other words on that basis, Conservatism should not have any constitutional arguments for or against abortion since the issue is so far from the underlying foundations of the Conservatism. So, Conservatism, in most cases, should resort to the old constitutional argument – leave it to the states. It has to be done even if it was an ideology, alien to American values, that inspired Roe v. Wade.
The Weaponization of Genitalia by Leftists
From the very beginning, the left-wingers decided to bring the issue of abortion into the political domain. Initially designed to exterminate blacks, this racist idea by prominent Democrat Margaret Sanger lives to this day. In order to gain the support of white women, the issue got framed as a privacy, a freedom, and a civil liberties issue. It was Margaret Sanger, who was inspired by the pseudo-science of eugenics, who weaponized abortion for political and racist purposes.
Now, in the 21st century, many people consider any discussion and any questioning of Roe v. Wade as an attack on civil liberties. And they are right, but in a wrong sense of the word. They do not understand there is a much bigger stake in this thing called the US Constitution. The Constitution does not mention abortion at all – nor healthcare in general. On the other hand, it does not mean that the non-mentioning of an issue makes it invalid; it just transfers the issue to the States. No wonder Edward Lazarus wrote in 2002, “As a matter of constitutional interpretation and judicial method, Roe borders on the indefensible…” and that “Roe must be ranked among the most damaging of judicial decisions.”
Many conservatives do not like the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision on the federal level. Also there are Conservatives who do not like any abortion legislation, neither on the state nor local level. Some want to expel the issue from the political domain completely. The only option pro-abortion advocates have to make it “legal” and non-controversial is to follow the US Constitution: Remove it from the federal level (i.e. – overturn Roe v. Wade) and allow all 50 States to experiment in this area, as it was conceived by the Founding Fathers. Such an experiment would have a very wide range of legislation – from the total prohibition in some states to total legalization of abortion at any time for any reason in others. However, the wisest States would just remove the question of abortion from politics, and leave it to men, women, and their doctors, where it historically belonged.
Abortion as a Tool of Black Genocide
The removal of the abortion issue from the political domain would probably stop the Democrat-induced infanticide of black babies and correct the disgusting abortion statistics. Most black babies in the USA – about 70% – are aborted, as it was envisioned by Margaret Sanger and other feminists; about 40% of all abortions are performed on black women, even if they constitute just 7% of US population. The political debate has reached the level of absurdity. The Left blames white men for black women’s abortions, as well as for the lack of white women abortions.
It is a typical Democrats’ modus operandi. First, they create a system of black genocide. Second, they legalize it by using a trick of incorporating white woman into the abortuaries. Third, they began blaming the black woman for having a disproportionately large number of abortions. By the way, unwitting women were not told and probably did not realize they were used as accomplices of anti-black crime.
The Marxist Roots of the Abortion Issue
Some of the Democrats’ moves are straight from the Communist Manifesto. Others are from the works of Marxism co-founders Marx and Engels. They pushed for the abolition of the family, dissolution of monogamy, and “unconstrained sexual intercourse.” Unrestricted abortion-on-demand plays a crucial role in achieving these goals. In other words, Planned Parenthood is actually Marxist-Planned Unparenthood.
Many who agree with conservatism ideals engage in heated discussions with the proponents of abortion and are forced to make a stand. However, such discussions, in most cases, are conducted in the medical, religious, or moral domains. In such domains, it is practically impossible to stay calm when leftists claim that the unborn are just a “clump of cells,” and “parasites” supposed to be under total and unconditional control of a pregnant woman. “It is my body, period,” they say. Ordinary people usually lose their temper talking to a person who seems like they missed all biology classes in high school. Those who do not comprehend that a pregnant woman carries a separate person from the mother. Any science-based arguments which states a person has different DNA and different fingerprints are not accepted to pro-Abortionists. All such discussions usually lead to nowhere.
The Abortion Issue Must be Resolved in the Political Arena
If leftists had forced the abortion into the political arena, it must either be resolved in political terms or be expelled from politics. In other words, biological, medical, moral, or religious arguments are no longer valid. These arguments are not applicable in the political domain. Any attempt to do so cannot lead to any rational resolution. Being thrown into the realm of politics, many abortion proponents continue to use flawed (in political terms) arguments. Again, in political terms, sometimes such arguments look funny (recall “sex strike”), sometimes vulgar (recall despicable pussyhats), sometimes silly (recall naked Emily Ratajkovski).
In any case, pro-abortion advocates are continually playing an entirely different game than that required in the political arena. For example, when Leftists talk about “abortion rights” or “reproductive rights,” they are speaking in the political domain, because such “rights” are strictly political constructs (and non-existent in the Constitution). They do not belong to the medical or biological or religious domain. It is like playing baseball in the boxing ring.
Petitioners get a dose of bravery due to a political tailwind.
Abortion does not belong to politics; it does not belong to courts; it does not belong to the legislatures. It is a family and doctor domain. Any attempt to go outside this domain is destined to miscarry. Would leftists be happy to base their lives on some illegal precedent? Don’t they understand that, if they want “undocumented democrats” to stay safely in the so-called sanctuary cities, those who believe in Conservatism, with not less enthusiasm, want “undocumented offspring” also to have some sanctuary somewhere?
“Abortion rights” vs. State Rights
Roe v. Wade is not about abortion or “abortion rights” per se. It is about States’ rights to regulate abortions, if they wanted to. It is not about women’s bodies. It is about the unconstitutional usurpation of power by one by the federal branches of the government. Let us remind everybody that the country commonly known as the USA is, in fact, a federal republic, and human endeavors in areas not explicitly mentioned in the US Constitution must be regulated by States themselves or their citizens if a State does not regulate it.
Politics is not a sport nor a business. There are no weight categories, and there are no separate leagues for men and women in politics. Why don’t feminists demand their own engineering or mathematical societies, or exclusive Women Air Force? They understand the absurdity of such demands, but for some reason, they chose to play their own abortion game in the realm of politics by bringing non-political arguments into it. Understanding the unconstitutionality of the issue would allow abortion proponents to realize that their plans are destined to epic failure. The underlying flaw is sequestering the abortion issue from the medical, moral, and religious domain and injecting it into the political one.
Way to Solve the Conundrum
To make it clear, even to the proponents of infanticide – the abortion issue is unwanted and an alien “clump of cells” on the body of the US Constitution. Abortion proponents will not be heard until they go back to basics: Follow the Constitution, and grievances will be considered. Learn from Norma McCorvey who is known under the alias of Jane Roe of Roe v. Wade. She spoke profoundly later in her life about her involvement in the case which was her biggest regret; she felt she was used by activist lawyers to push a political agenda.
The Left’s support for Roe v. Wade is irrational. They don’t seem to comprehend that in the world where conservative women do not resort to abortion, the Leftist’s population would become eventually extinct. Despite what leftist propaganda screams, Conservatism does not want to make the lives of women in the US miserable. On the contrary, Conservatism offers a solution to correct the decades-old judicial mistake. Overturn Roe v. Wadeto pave the way for the future. Yes, you read it right: To legalize abortion in America, Roe v. Wade must be overturned.
Gary Gindler is a writer for NRN. Gary has a Ph.D. in Physics and is an amateur WWII Historian, Numismatist, and the founder of a new science – Politiphysics. XVIII century Classical Liberal = XXI century Conservative. He blogs at Gary Gindler Chronicles. Follow Gary on Twitter.