The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewRon Paul Archive
Pro-Life, Pro-Liberty
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Abortion has returned to the headlines thanks to Texas’ “heartbeat law.” As the name suggests, this law outlaws abortions performed after doctors can detect a fetal heartbeat. This is one of several recently passed state laws restricting abortion.

The US Supreme Court will soon consider a challenge to a Mississippi law banning abortions after 15 weeks. A court majority may use this case as a vehicle to limit or even overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision in which the court declared a federal abortion right.

All who support limited, constitutional government should support overturning Roe. The Constitution does not give any branch of the federal government authority to decide what does, and does not, constitute murder. Therefore, federal courts — including the Supreme Court — have no jurisdiction to decide what the penalty should be for performing an abortion.

Overturning Roe would not create a nationwide abortion ban. Instead, it would return to the individual states responsibility for deciding what, if any, restrictions to place on abortion.

If supporters of abortion “followed the science,” they would have to admit that abortion is the taking of human life. A fetus with a heartbeat is developing, but is also still a human with a right to life.

The Biden Justice Department is supporting efforts to overturn the Texas heartbeat law in federal court. President Biden is also supporting the repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of federal funds for abortions. If Biden and Congress are going to use tax dollars to support abortions, then they should allow anti-abortion taxpayers to withhold the percentage of their taxes that would be used to support abortion. The same should go for those with moral objections to America’s militaristic foreign policy that forces US taxpayers to subsidize the killing of innocent men, women, and even children.

The Hyde Amendment does not completely protect pro-life taxpayers from subsidizing abortions. The amendment does not forbid organizations that promote or perform abortions from receiving federal money; it just forbids them from using for abortions the funds received from the federal government. Since money is fungible, a federal dollar going to a group that performs abortions to spend on their non-abortion-related activities frees up another dollar that can be used for abortions.

To ensure pro-life Americans are not forced to subsidize abortions — either directly or indirectly, it could be forbidden for organizations that promote or perform abortions to receive any federal funds. Denying federal funds to international organizations that promote or perform abortions might help reduce resentment of the US in other countries.

It is no coincidence that Roe v. Wade came at a time when respect for natural rights of life, liberty, and property was on the decline. Roe contributed to the decline in respect for rights and the rise in public and private immorality. These changes have led to violent crimes, people believing they have a moral claim — that must be enforced by the government — to the property of their neighbors, and acceptance of torture and “preemptive” war. The way to reverse these developments is to restore respect for the inalienable right to life, liberty, and property of all human beings, both born and unborn. The cause of life is inseparable from the cause of liberty.

(Republished from The Ron Paul Institute by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Abortion 
Hide 23 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Making abortion illegal does not stop it.

    Money does.

    But you cheapskates will never part with one filthy spondulic.

  2. Making abortion illegal does not stop it.

    True but irrelevant. Making murder, robbery and rape illegal hasn’t stopped any of those, either.

    This essay ignores one question: does the right to life include the right to live inside another person’s body without her consent? In my opinion, no. Once the pregnancy has advanced to the point where it’s medically possible for the fetus to be removed alive, it’s reasonable to insist that the mother have that done if she doesn’t want to carry it to term. Before that, if the only way to evict the fetus ends up killing it, she has the right to do so.

    (It wouldn’t surprise me if medical science figures out how to perform live removal from day 1, which would render the question moot.)

    Of course, the government shouldn’t be paying for anyone’s abortion. But withholding the portion of your taxes used for that is kind of pointless, since it’s a miniscule part of the Federal budget. Now if we all withheld the portion that pays for invade the world/invite the world. . .

  3. Weaver says:
    @Rex Little

    Scenario: a scientist raids saved eggs, fertilizes a billion of them. What do you do with them all if on “day 1” you can bring them to term?

    The topic isn’t so easy.

    Or for a real example, https://www.nbcnews.com/health/features/nation-s-fertility-clinics-struggle-growing-number-abandoned-embryos-n1040806

  4. @Rex Little

    Thanks Rex, great comment.
    I’d just add a couple points.
    Anti abortion laws are inherently antagonistic to middle/lower class women — the wealthy can travel anywhere for such a procedure (with holiday thrown in).
    Also — prior to the opening up of legal abortion there was a healthy trade in illegal abortion… which wasn’t so healthy. The thought of illegal abortions make me feel physically I’ll (to be fair the legal variety don’t make me feel much better — but at least a legal abortion usually sees the woman survive….)

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
  5. Dumbo says:

    Considering that the fertility rate, at least for whites, it’s at its lowest point ever, then the push for abortion has other reasons than population control, namely, that they actually like the concept of killing babies and probably see it as a form of child sacrifice.

    Also, fetus cells are very useful for Big Pharma (especially vaccines) and for a lot of other industries, so there is a financial incentive as well.

    Then there is the racial aspect. I wonder, how many of those fetal stem cells used for vaccines and so many other projects com from aborted black babies?

  6. @Rex Little

    Typical stupid liar.

    You skipped the second part of my statement.

    Making it illegal does not stop abortion AND money does.

    The number one reason for abortion is lack of money. Pay women (not that much) not to have abortions, and pay them to raise their children, and they will have the children. Abortion gone forever.

    Your bullshit talking-point answer just proves anti-abortionists do not want to stop abortion. They want to blablablah talking points in order to get certain politicians into office so they can steal more money and give it to rich people. This scam really has nothing to do with abortion. It has to do with manipulation of poor, naive, well-meaning suckers in order to, wait for it . . . rake in more loot.

    You fucking idiot. I just had to add that inarguable fact in there.

    • Replies: @Rex Little
    , @John Johnson
  7. @animalogic

    For instance, the wealthy can fly to Catholic countries and get an inexpensive, legal abortion.

    This abortion thing is just a scam. It’s been documented. A wedge issue, a club to beat the liberals with, a great milch-cow, just pouring the money-milk down the gullets of the scammers suckering the bucks out of the poor dumb American fundamentalists and Catholics.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
    , @animalogic
  8. @obwandiyag

    The number one reason for abortion is lack of money.

    Not saying this is false, but do you have a source? The women I know personally who’ve had abortions had other reasons (one of them would have been much better off financially if she’d kept the baby), but that’s a small sample size.

    You fucking idiot.

    Coming from you, ob, I’ll take that as a compliment.

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
  9. Rosette says:

    Too many men have too many opinions on too many issues concerning women. If the life of an unborn pre-human concerns someone more than the life of an adult and the consequences that pursuing a pregnancy could have on her own right to life and her own pursuit of happiness then they should stfu, there are two lives concerned here and that’s what most men forget, objectivity matters.

    Now, this is Rev. Randall Balmer who knows everyone who is someone in the politically inclined religious movements explaining how abortion became an issue on the religious right agenda… it was to defeat Jimmy Carter in the 1980 election, nothing to do with morality, they bamboozled the American people once again, claiming high moral grounds when in fact their real intention was totally political and who ended up paying the bill? Women, mostly disadvantaged poor girls who had no other option, here:

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  10. @Rex Little

    So I give you the overwhelmingly true fact and you give me anecdotes.

    I don’t care if you know crazy people.

    The primary reason almost every–not every, but almost every–woman who gets an abortion gets an abortion is because they can’t afford either the hospital nor the hundreds of thousands (probably up to a million by now considering the stagflation) to raise and educate their child. This is from the horse’s mouth. This is what the women themselves say.

    And anyhow, before the 1970s, most intelligent people knew this. But then a bunch of opportunist political advisers noticed that they could whip up the troops with the abortion canard like no other canard. THAT is the important fact. The anti-abortion politicians and their backers and advisers could not care less about whether abortion is legal or not. They can fly their daughters to Italy to get an abortion in the shadow of the Vatican. What they want is a sure-fire election tactic. And nothing is as sure-fire as abortion. Because dumb people, who can’t keep more than one thing in their minds at a time, think “abortion bad make illegal.” The End. And thus they will vote for any politician who says, note I said, says, he will make abortion illegal. They do not care if he steals the kitchen sink. Thinking about stealing would mean thinking about a second thing. Way too much.

    Mexico, by the way, a Catholic country, just decriminalized abortion. They know on which side their bread is buttered: on the abortion maquilladora side, all ready for the Texas deluge to come pouring across the border.

    Abortion is such a bullshit political football, it makes welfare mothers look like abolishing capital gains.

    • Replies: @Rex Little
  11. @obwandiyag

    The number one reason for abortion is lack of money. Pay women (not that much) not to have abortions, and pay them to raise their children, and they will have the children. Abortion gone forever.

    Boneheaded liberal thinking.

    So women that don’t want to work can earn a government living by having children.

    Ever heard of dysgenics?

    Do responsible people also get money if they pretend to not want the pregnancy?

    How would you know the difference?

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
  12. @Rosette

    I really don’t care about what some pastor has to say.

    Some liberal states have made birth control free and they didn’t see a decline in abortions.

    Society is in denial that women can be lazy and irresponsible.

    The liberal establishment *wants to believe* that men and especially White men are always the problem.

    Liberal arguments for abortion are rooted in gender/race denial as is their entire ideology.

  13. @John Johnson

    Shithead.

    You are exactly the kind of shithead I’m talking about.

    You stupid shithead, you are the official window dummy for the kind of braindeadedness I’m talking about.

    I knew there would be one of you chirping out on here. Like kneejerk clockwork. Inevitable.

    Shitheads like you are between a rock and a hard place. Either pay women to have kids or they will get abortions. That’s it. You cannot get out of the dilemma. Calling it liberal will not release you. Call it green with hairy pustules. It is still absolutely, inarguable true. Either pay them to have kids, or they will get abortions, whether abortions are legal or not. That’s it. No other alternatives. Period. End of sentence.

    Grow up. You lose.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  14. @obwandiyag

    So I give you the overwhelmingly true fact and you give me anecdotes.

    You gave me an assertion. I ask again, do you have a source? Is there a study you can refer to, or did you talk to a bunch of women yourself, or do you “just know”?

    (Not that I’m disagreeing with you; I think you’re probably right for the majority of cases. I just don’t claim to know it for a fact.)

    • Replies: @obwandiyag
  15. @obwandiyag

    Boy you really get emotional over a forum post. You must not be married.

    For the record I never actually stated my position on abortion.

    But with that said I think it is ridiculous to suggest that we should pay women to have kids in order to reduce abortions.

    We already tried that. Ever heard of the war on poverty?

    When you hand out money for having kids it becomes a profession of the irresponsible and amoral.

    Of course you can’t admit that to yourself nor can you discuss the issue of dysgenics because it is too much of a reality burden for you.

    I don’t really care if abortion remains legal. Though I find it crass it is liberals that are more likely to get abortions than other Whites as they deny the soul yet embrace blank slate. There is undoubtedly a combination of liberal genes (overwhelming empathy that overrides rationalism) and liberals insist upon killing their offspring. Abortion most likely works against them politically so I’m not going to fight to stand in their way if they insist upon aborting their egalitarian genes.

    It is still absolutely, inarguable true. Either pay them to have kids, or they will get abortions, whether abortions are legal or not. That’s it. No other alternatives. Period. End of sentence.

    Well you could pay single women to be on an IUD. Would probably be a lot cheaper than offering cash for babies. We already do that to some degree and it didn’t solve poverty.

  16. @obwandiyag

    This abortion thing is just a scam. It’s been documented. A wedge issue, a club to beat the liberals with, a great milch-cow, just pouring the money-milk down the gullets of the scammers suckering the bucks out of the poor dumb American fundamentalists and Catholics.

    Poor dumb fundamentalists?

    It’s the left that has stormed the streets over 9.5 month abortion bans. That is no exaggeration, they have actually mobbed DC over late term abortion.

    Who is leading them? I kind of thought the left was supposed to be supporting the proletariat.

    Oh right they became a zombie cult that only cares about making sure Whites are in population decline. Today’s leftist has never heard of Engels but is certain that 9.5 month abortions are a right that should be taken to the streets. These leftists also seem to think it is fine to work 10 hour days at Amazon packing Chinese slave goods into boxes but abortion is THE ISSUE that is supposed to anger them. Cause conservatives. Hmmph.

  17. Jokem says:
    @Rex Little

    ‘does the right to life include the right to live inside another person’s body without her consent?’

    If the person had unprotected sex then consent has already been given.

    I used to know a gal who would let herself get pregnant by some guy, then used that as leverage to get him to marry her. If he did not, then she would abort it and try again with someone else.

    • Replies: @Rex Little
  18. @obwandiyag

    Agreed. Scam & wedge issue. But, that it’s exploited by the cynical & deluded, doesn’t mean it’s not important to individuals.

  19. @Jokem

    If the person had unprotected sex then consent has already been given.

    Valid point. However. . .

    – Once given, can consent be withdrawn? I think yes, but I recognize that it’s not a simple question.

    – If a woman claims that she never had unprotected sex–the condom must have failed–how do you prove she’s lying?

    – Obviously, consent was never given if she was raped. Do you want a situation where a woman has to claim she was raped to get a legal abortion? False rape claims are enough of a problem as it is.

    • Replies: @Jokem
  20. Jokem says:
    @Rex Little

    ‘– Once given, can consent be withdrawn? I think yes, but I recognize that it’s not a simple question.’

    I think no. Based upon what you say, there would be no difference between having a child aborted, or disposed of after the child was born? True, after a child is born, there are alternatives, but that begs the question.

    ‘– If a woman claims that she never had unprotected sex–the condom must have failed–how do you prove she’s lying?’

    I would claim she must prove beyond reasonable doubt she had taken reliable precautions. What those precautions are would have to be defined by law.

    -False rape claims are enough of a problem as it is.-
    True, it is a complex question, but when an innocent life is at stake expediency has to take a back seat.

  21. @Rex Little

    I ain’t yo google monkey. Let your fingers do the walking.

    • Replies: @Jokem
  22. Jokem says:
    @obwandiyag

    You really want Rex to try to find your source?

    What? Is he supposed to read your mind and find where you read this?

  23. Even though I’ve always thought abortions should be allowed, at least in the first few months, I can see that the major abortion threat these days is the forced death shots. Holding these laws legal may restrict abortions, but it will be state by state. The fact that the death shots are abortifacents will eliminate the covid coercion, so in the end, it will have a positive effect, since if the death shots then become illegal in the US it will influence the vassal states.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ron Paul Comments via RSS