Now That Roe is Gone, the Main Task Will be To Defend Women from the Crazy

The basis of a healthy defense of the human person from conception to natural death is what it always was: seeing the dignity of the lives of all human being, made in the image and likeness of God and intended for glory through the risen Christ.

The trouble is that MAGA antichrist religion has no interest in any of that and has always seen the unborn as human shields for their selfish, cruelty, greed, misogyny, and will to lawless and nihilist power.

Consequently, the moment Roe was put to death is not going to be the moment the “prolife” movement suddenly starts caring about the unborn. It already is the moment that crazies and creepy-crawlies are coming out of the woodwork to inflict as much intrusive and stupid cruelty as possible on women. This already includes sentencing a miscarrying woman to prison for four years, as well as debating (with the enthusiastic support of “prolife superstar Abby Johnson (who herself had abortions and assisted in 22,000 more), infliction of punishment for murder on Women Who Are Not Abby Johnson.

Given MAGA “prolife” people are also passionate lovers of the death penalty for murder (in the teeth of the Church’s teaching, because as the Greatest Catholics of All Time they see themselves as sent by God to deliver the Church from Pope Francis) it does not take a math genius to add up the numbers and see that the Cult will soon be calling for the execution of post-abortive women.

In addition, because MAGA antichrist religion has now broken from even the pretense of believing that salvation comes through grace and faith and has definitively plumped for the one thing St. Paul dogmatically taught can never save–law, force, fear and iron–the lunatics are even now beginning their attempt to micromanage the lives of human being to such a degree that even a Communist living under one of Stalin’s Five Year Plans or China’s draconian One Child Policy would be astonished at the attempt at All-Controlling Hubris.

To wit, they are already pushing to require travel papers for women crossing state lines. Think “Gestapo demanding “papers” in old movies” and you have the picture. If you might be pregnant, then you might be seeking an abortion and the Inquisition wants to erect a vast and complex legal system to monitor our movements (for, of course, men might be accomplices).

This will send out ripples to the rest of the health care system and no sacrifice by Other People will be too great as the Inquisition tries to create an absolutely foolproof Prolife Utopian Reich of Heaven on Earth:

The logic of the antichrist cult of salvation by law is that anything, any thought, any human activity at all that may lead to abortion must be treated with suspicion and subjected to minute and detail law and surveillance. And they are batshit crazy enough to try.

Which means, of course, that for the time being at least, Normals will have to stand for common sanity. Things like freedom of movement between states–a basic right of Americans since the founding, will have to be defended from the nuts. Women will need to be protected from the demand to prove their innocence. Freedom of commerce will have to be protected.

This is all common sense. But in the emerging Orwellian world that MAGA wants to create, saying 2+2=4 will be a revolutionary act. The day will come, as it always does, when the fever will break and the madness will pass and people will wonder what the hell came over America. But till it does, in states where the New Confederacy is in charge, this will be the lunacy we can expect as they try to micromanage the universe in pursuit of their monomaniac utopia.

Share

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin

14 Responses

      1. Spain. She’s in Barcelona right now for the company she currently works for in NY.

  1. Well, to all of you Catholics who were supportive of overturning Roe right until ten minutes ago, what did you think was going to happen? I had previously thought about similar draconian policies myself; after all, they are the logical path to follow if you believe in the pro-life movement’s goal of outlawing abortion, and the rhetoric behind it,

    However, I though these proposals would focus primarily on airports and other points of entry, where they required women of child-bearing age to present a negative ultrasound or pregnancy test, alongside their passport and other required documentation. It might still be the case if a nation-wide federal ban is implemented. I figure they would either ban travel for pregnant women outright, or detain them and arrest them if they are no longer pregnant upon re-entry into the country.

    Here’s the truth: if you’re pro-life and you’re in favor of outlawing abortion but you think these measures go to far, then all you’re really enforcing is for the state to be (further) persecuting poor people, while giving a tacit approval for people of means to get abortions. Say what you will about the proposed measures, at least they spread the misery around equatively. Progress?

    The sad truth is that we haven’t even scratched the surface of all the ways in which outlawing abortion can be weaponized against women.

    You want to get back at your ex for leaving you? Accuse her of getting an abortion.
    You want to force her to stay with you? Threaten to accuse her of getting an abortion if she leaves.
    Can’t find a good reason to call 911 on you neighbor so they can get raided by the police and possibly lose their job and custody of their kids? Just call in an abortion. I mean, if the parents willingly murdered one of their children, then you just have to act swiftly and decisively to protect the others, right?

    That’s not even getting into doing things like sabotaging your partner’s birth control as a way to keep her beholden and dependent on you, knowing she will have no recourse afterwards.

    Before you get mad at me for bringing up these possibilities, I can assure you, that just as with the travel restrictions, if I could come up with them, so did many that identify as pro-life. The difference is that all of you pro-lifers thought that any and all societal ramifications that came about as a consequence of the resulting power imbalance, should’ve taken a back seat to the primary goal of banning abortion.

    A word of advice to all the ladies: while the abortion bans are in effect anywhere in the US, you should refrain from posting about your pregnancy on social media. Notifying your significant other and your doctor is already enough of a risk as it is.

    Because these are the new witch hunts; and the pro-life movement has declared it is open season.

  2. @evil striker, I don’t think it’s inconsistent to be pro-life and not want to live in a police state. Abortion is a grave crime against humanity. We SHOULD care about, (no, I don’t cry over my removed appendix.). But the fact remains that there are some innocent people who have them due to “structures of sin”.

    God doesn’t need us to have a messiah complex about his children either. Jesus came for them too. We are not responsible for the innocent blood that is shed if we are working against those structures of sin that promote the taking of innocent life.

    1. @tacoanybody:

      If you weren’t supportive of the main goal of the pro-life movement of overturning Roe and the ensuing bans on abortion, then what I said does not apply to you. If you are supportive of outlawing abortion, then you are advocating for a police state; you can’t have one thing without the other.

  3. @ Striker
    I have this hunch that the pro-lifers are going to take home the defeat of Roe as their participation trophy. As Mark points out, most only care about themselves. They like pictures of cute babies on signs and for upvoting but for the most part, don’t want any real ones anywhere near them, and certainly not around to stay. They definitely don’t want brown babies to come near their bank account.

    This is what I didn’t like about Roe: it enshrined something wrong as something fully acceptable–abortion on demand, anytime, anywhere. My guess is that you aren’t entirely comfortable with some of the horror stories that bubbled up to the surface over the years. There was a major flaw with Roe.

    My guess is that after some posturing and grandstanding, the abortion valves will be fully open, tended to, and managed, with a business as usual attitude, and people will be able to order their lattes with oat milk, stare at their newsfeed and laugh at funny tik tok videos that have gone viral. It will be as if nothing had ever happened. Those who depend on abortion for virtue signaling, and to forget about their own deficits will continue to fight passionately on both sides.

    But what do I know? I never thought sane Americans would vote for a buffoon like Trump. Not in a million years.

    1. @ taco

      That’s almost unavoidable. There simply isn’t a voter slice large enough that would warrant a total ban on abortion, though perhaps there might be a few states who will be successful in doing so, in the long run.

      As for Trump: all nations have their demons, and following a pied piper is usually one of them. I always thought Trump suited America quite well in that respect. A bit of Vegas, a fake businessman veneer, a bought blonde with a vacuus look on his arm. It’s the US version of the moustache macho that often plagues a more southern people.

    2. It is simply not true that Roe enshrined abortion on demand, anytime anywhere. It explicitly outlines the ways in which states can regulate and restrict access to abortion. It does not mandate the implementation of such laws, because that is simply beyond the scope of what the Supreme Court can do.

      It does mean, in practice, that some states could have little to no restrictions on late-term abortions, but that has nothing to do with Roe. Notice, that is still the case, even after being overturned. But what it also meant, was that bans on late term abortions were constitutional under Roe; that’s why a lot of states still had them up to this point. It stands to reason then, that a federal ban on late term, post-viability abortions would’ve also held.

      But now? Its a free for all, where some states are shifting from begrudgingly allowing the minimum when it came to abortion rights, to effectively becoming an police state in order to enforce its absolute ban.

  4. Pro-choicers:
    The majority of you are Left-wing, and many of you are pro-Palestinian, support BDS, oppose Zionism, and dislike the idea of Israel as a state where a new immigrant from Russia or Ethiopia, if they are counted as “Jewish” by a government panel of rabbis, gets more legal rights and state support than do Muslim and Christian Arabs whose families have lived in Gaza and the West Bank for centuries.
    Okay. So, one morning you wake and hear the news: the State of Israel has been dissolved. Like South Vietnam, Czechoslovakia and East Germany, it’s history. It’s been replaced by the new Democratic Republic of Palestine.
    Excellent! you think. All those years of campaigning have born fruit.
    But then you find out the new Democratic Republic of Palestine will be governed by Hezbollah.
    Suddenly it doesn’t sound so good.
    “Jews in Israel will no longer get special privileges” is not gong to translate into “Everyone dwelling in Palestine is going to have maximum equal liberty.”
    Now – question:
    Were you wrong, all those years, to campaign for the Palestinian cause?
    It’s not like plenty of people didn’t earn you that you were heading into dark waters, bumping against anti-semites, that Jews deserve special legal rights and protection because of the persecution they’ve suffered historically, you ask you were doing was helping bring about a repressive theocratic regime, not the liberal social democracy you were hoping for.
    So: Were they right all along about the only way this movie could end? Or is there still hope to redeem the cause you supported?

Leave a Reply

Follow Mark on Twitter and Facebook

NEW BOOK!

Advertisement