SOCIAL STUDIES – CONSERVATISM BITTERSWEET

Recently, the Kennedy avatar known as Beto O’Rourke, who is still running for President of the United States was asked a simple question by a man in the audience. “I was born September 8, 1989,” he stated, “and I want to know if you think on September 7, 1989, my life had no value.”

A somewhat befuddled O’Rourke answered that he did think that the young man’s life had value and then proceeded to tell the man that his mother would have had the right to kill him if she had so chosen. While it is true, that left-wing Democrats have no problems with the numerous internal contradictions of their thoughts, this one seemed particularly stark considering the subject of abortion has been around for a long time.

Recently a news story broke concerning the abortionist, Ulrich Klopfer, who stored the remains of 2,246 babies he had killed in utero. Klopfer, deceased on September 3^rd of this year, shocked the conscience of many when it was revealed he had retained the remains of the children he had killed.

One wonders what it is in the barbaric mind of the executioners that allows such carnage. Most of us will never see an abortion, or the tiny body parts torn away and flushed down the toilet, or caste aside as medical waste, or in the case of Klopfer, bagged as a curiosity. Humanity cries out for a better answer to the moral misjudgment that allows abortion to happen.

The religious devotion to this point of view takes on a life of its own for Democrats because it is tied to the left-wing view of the women’s equality debate. Equality is a slippery slope [see September CB]. In order to have equality (with men) you must kill your child. That frees the would-be mother to pursue career goals, personal desires, and a trouble-free life. That little romantic encounter with that fellow, what’s-his-name at the party, shouldn’t hold you back from becoming CEO of Giant Corporation of America. Babies are as disposable in the left-wing world as a tissue. Even more so, if you claim poverty. You can get it paid for by a third party—the tissue costs money.

Here is one of the ironies of this issue: If you talk to the pro-abortion side, they will say that it is wrong to deny women reproductive healthcare. In what sense is it healthcare to kill a child in the womb? Maybe they mean that healthcare will never be a problem if the child is dead. What if they mean it is reproductive healthcare for the mother? It certainly isn’t “reproductive” anything because the abortionist elimination the product reproduction.

In order to advance the pro-abortion argument, you must deny humanity to the unborn, deny human rights, deny equal protection under the Constitution, deny representation by an attorney who might fight for her or his life, and deny paternity rights to the father of the child. That is a lot of denials, both legal and moral, required to sabotage the life of the unborn. Yet, that was the effect of Roe v Wade, the single legal precedent based on “the right to privacy.” Prior to Roe v Wade, a first-year law student using a broadly stated ill-defined, term such as this would have been laughed out of law school. While the Constitution does embody the right to privacy, it does so by enumerating these rights. The right to be secure in our homes and possession is specified in the IV Amendment to the Constitution. Other rights are granted, but they are specified. A “right to privacy’ does not appear anywhere in the Constitution, and for good reason. Any statement of personal preference can be used as a right to privacy. Countries, like individuals, need boundaries, and that is one thing the Constitution provides.

The idea that a mother can conspire with her doctor to kill her unborn baby is bizarre in the first place. No one else has this privilege. It is a medical fact that a mother is attached to her baby. In rare cases a mother may die (i.e. in an automobile accident) and the baby might be saved. The child is an independent actor as well as dependent on her or his mother for life support in the womb. Who would not try to save the baby? Yet, the people who call themselves pro-choice, give no choice to the unborn.

Finally, let us address the issues raised by the abortion side. A recent conversation went something like this:

“Women have the right to do with their bodies, what they want.”

“Why is that.”

“Women are victims of rape, incest, or their lives may be threatened by the birth itself.”

“Alright, join me in a Constitutional amendment in banning abortions, except for those reasons.”

“Oh, no. a woman has the right to do with her body what she wants.”

Thus, it becomes a tautology; a woman has the right to do with her body what she wants because a woman has the right to do with her body what she wants.

Sadly, there is neither logic nor comfort in the answer that allows the most barbaric acts of the current generation to prevail over acts that can only be describe as a crime against humanity. The act of being human contemplates a reverence for life. The death of one person is diminishing to all humanity. The death of millions is more than a statistic, it is a tragedy linked forever to humanity which passes by this issue and says, “I don’t care.”

The following letter-to-the-editor from Debi Baskins, Hood River appeared in The Oregonian (4/28/19):

I was proud when my daughter became a paramedic, a profession that helps others. I had no idea that I would worry about her safety every time she works her shift. She’s been jumped on, pushed, kicked, cursed at, spit on, had things thrown at her, and ducked out of the way when patients take a swing at her. Several months ago, she told me she doesn’t think about “if” she’ll be attacked by a patient, she thinks about “when.” Her number came up last week, and she was beaten and bitten in the back of an ambulance.

A couple of weeks ago, the courts had an opportunity to send a message that paramedics’ lives matter. But the person who pulled open the door of an ambulance and stabbed a paramedic was given 14 days in jail and three years of probation (“Man guilty of bloody attack on ambulance paramedic at Portland stoplight gets 14 days in jail,” April 9). If a police officer had been stabbed, would the sentence have been tougher?

Paramedics in the courtroom that day told Judge Kathleen Dailey they’re tired of being assaulted on the job. Dailey suggested they walk the streets of downtown Portland to understand the mental health crisis. Dailey should go on a ride-along in an ambulance to better understand what medics deal with. They have first-hand knowledge of the mental health and homeless crisis in Portland.

Sentencing a person to significant jail time for assaulting paramedics will not stop the attacks, but it will send a message to paramedics and all first responders that law enforcement, district attorneys and judges have their backs.

Someday if you call for an ambulance, you might not get a prompt response because there won’t be enough paramedics to fill all the shifts because they are tired of being attacked when trying to help people and save lives.

(Debi Baskins)

If judge Dailey was offering a solution to the mental health crisis, there might be some reason to believe that she was offering something of value. It is not inconsistent with the Left’s point of view, that they would let fester a problem in order to radicalize a population of supporters into choosing the wrong solution to the problem—that is, their solution. But the justice and equity crowd does not view justice and equity for those who are not sufficiently lacking in victim status to be the same as that of those who dwell in the social underworld, such as an angry, mentally ill individual. Underworld dwellers are perceived as victims of the privileged and high-born. Thus, the judge is really saying, go out and solve this social problem, and then you won’t have people you are trying to help attack you.

One part of the Ugly side of left-wing violence against the virtuous is its tendency for elites to justify their aloof lifestyle as a natural privilege. These are lifestyle choices not available to the masses. They live well on the bench with sergeant-at-arms, behind walls, gated communities, secure with bodyguards, cameras, and their own armory, as a justified privilege few. Meanwhile, the masses, such as the unnamed medical technician must clean up the mess on the streets for them. Besides, it is societies fault for not saving the felonious victim-class perpetrator. Those who might be struck, stabbed, or shot are collateral damage in left-wing world. It is the job of people like Judge Dailey to keep the pressure on, and one stabbed EMT won’t make a lot of difference compared to the example the Judge must make of her.

Debi Baskins wonders whether the sentence would have been different if the victim had been a police officer, to which might be added, what if the victim were Judge Dailey’s daughter, sister, or mother. The lack of empathy for the victim is not unusual in left-wing culture. Equity and justice are abstractions and everyone is ranked according to their socio-economic, gender status.

In Chicago, echoes of inequity and injustice were heard when Jussie Smollett alleged a hate crime perpetrated by Make America Great hat wearing bullies who put a noose around the poor man’s neck and doused him with a foul liquid. If you have not heard of this it is all true. That is, the allegation was true, but the alleged facts were not. It was a made-up scenario. The left-wing State’s Attorney, Kim Foxx, might have lowered the boom on Jussie who was charged with 16 felonies counts, but instead she ignored the crime, and the well-to-do Smollett walked away clean, except for a $10,000 loss of bail money and public service which he had completed before the incident occurred. It should be noted that there is an investigation into Foxx’s actions prompted by the email she received from Tina Tchen the former chief of staff to Michelle Obama. Mmmmmmmmm. The fix was in? So, what did Jussie Smollett, a wealthy actor, have that aroused the inside political players in Chicago? Smollett is black and gay! Victim Status! Bingo.

Victim status makes the law flexible to the Progressive Left. It is permissible in Left-world to bend the law in the name of equity and justice. After all, black and gay people have been victims for millennia. The old notion of what is legally acceptable—the idea that what is appropriate for one person under the law ought to be the same for another accused of the same wrong doing—is not sufficient in Progressive America. Victim status is the driving force behind justice. The same may be said for large scale mass violations of United States law. One hundred thousand law violators marched over the U.S. southern border in March of this year. But law violators who are poor and Hispanic need not worry once they are in Left-world. They are victims and that is all you need to know.