Your sincere position is I think not representative of that held by at least a major fraction of the political forces exploiting this issue on the Republican side. The last couple of decades' cascade of laws and agitation against abortion is (I think) at most half driven by moral concern for the human life of the fetus (or as perhaps you might prefer, unborn person) and at least half driven by the political benefit of riding the heat and anger of the issue to power. There is at least a powerful core of this group for whom ending abortion is a purely instrumental objective -- merely a horse to ride in order to get and keep power, absolute and permanent power if at all possible. Its effectiveness as a wedge issue leads me to suspect that total victory will not result in the horse being retired to pasture -- I don't see this ending with abortion being "left to the states."
Leaving it to the states is really no different from leaving it alone to the individual woman. (It does have the advantage of leaving abortion as an option for the rich and powerful, and protecting their privilege is of course always one of their goals). This wedge has been far too useful to allow the matter to drop as long as there is the slightest remnant of blood in the turnip. The canny farmer prosecutes the harvest until every last reachable fruit is stripped from the tree. The end of Roe leaves a lot of apples yet to be plucked,
That such efforts will begin the morning after the reversal of Roe seems inevitable. There may even be legal argument that abortion itself is already prohibited by the fourteenth amendment, but at the very least there will be a ginned up campaign for a constitutional amendment, and doubtless also efforts to introduce, and if like dogs unlucky enough to catch the cars they chase, actually enact, Federal legislation to restrict and prohibit abortion everywhere.
It is in the interest of at least part of the pro-life movement to keep the fight alive, because there is much of the larger agenda yet to be implemented.
I fear that the result will not be -- cannot be, given the full purposes of the anti-abortion coalition -- making it easier for us to move forward together. The whole purpose has been to cleave apart everyone in the middle and force them to join one gang or other.
It's unfortunate that those with sincere beliefs get swooped up into the machinations of those just interested in power. The near-term benefits of the deal are too hard to resist, I suppose.
Yes, he has advanced in his political development. At the outset he imagined that politicians must appear to have principles and beliefs about law and policy benefitting the whole citizenry.
In his middle years he thought it was better to keep any principles out of sight, and just display energy in favor of policies that benefitted only his target electorate.
Eventually he came to the full realization that not only was it inadvisable to display principles, it was actually beneficial to show that he had none at all; and further, that hurting people his voters did not like is far more effective than helping any voters, even his own.
70% of Americans do not want Roe overturned. But the GOP has gamed the system to allow themselves to hold minority power over the entire country. 70% agreement on anything today is more than just the middle.
And 90% of Americans have no idea what the holding of Roe is. 70% of the American public doesn't want second term abortion which Roe requires states allow.
Your sincere position is I think not representative of that held by at least a major fraction of the political forces exploiting this issue on the Republican side. The last couple of decades' cascade of laws and agitation against abortion is (I think) at most half driven by moral concern for the human life of the fetus (or as perhaps you might prefer, unborn person) and at least half driven by the political benefit of riding the heat and anger of the issue to power. There is at least a powerful core of this group for whom ending abortion is a purely instrumental objective -- merely a horse to ride in order to get and keep power, absolute and permanent power if at all possible. Its effectiveness as a wedge issue leads me to suspect that total victory will not result in the horse being retired to pasture -- I don't see this ending with abortion being "left to the states."
Leaving it to the states is really no different from leaving it alone to the individual woman. (It does have the advantage of leaving abortion as an option for the rich and powerful, and protecting their privilege is of course always one of their goals). This wedge has been far too useful to allow the matter to drop as long as there is the slightest remnant of blood in the turnip. The canny farmer prosecutes the harvest until every last reachable fruit is stripped from the tree. The end of Roe leaves a lot of apples yet to be plucked,
That such efforts will begin the morning after the reversal of Roe seems inevitable. There may even be legal argument that abortion itself is already prohibited by the fourteenth amendment, but at the very least there will be a ginned up campaign for a constitutional amendment, and doubtless also efforts to introduce, and if like dogs unlucky enough to catch the cars they chase, actually enact, Federal legislation to restrict and prohibit abortion everywhere.
It is in the interest of at least part of the pro-life movement to keep the fight alive, because there is much of the larger agenda yet to be implemented.
I fear that the result will not be -- cannot be, given the full purposes of the anti-abortion coalition -- making it easier for us to move forward together. The whole purpose has been to cleave apart everyone in the middle and force them to join one gang or other.
It's unfortunate that those with sincere beliefs get swooped up into the machinations of those just interested in power. The near-term benefits of the deal are too hard to resist, I suppose.
Fun fact: McConnell used to be pro choice.
Yes, he has advanced in his political development. At the outset he imagined that politicians must appear to have principles and beliefs about law and policy benefitting the whole citizenry.
In his middle years he thought it was better to keep any principles out of sight, and just display energy in favor of policies that benefitted only his target electorate.
Eventually he came to the full realization that not only was it inadvisable to display principles, it was actually beneficial to show that he had none at all; and further, that hurting people his voters did not like is far more effective than helping any voters, even his own.
I'm guessing you've already read Alec MacGillis's book. Looking forward to the upcoming Ira Shapiro one.
70% of Americans do not want Roe overturned. But the GOP has gamed the system to allow themselves to hold minority power over the entire country. 70% agreement on anything today is more than just the middle.
And 90% of Americans have no idea what the holding of Roe is. 70% of the American public doesn't want second term abortion which Roe requires states allow.