A growing number of Leftist commentators in the media suggest that the pro-life victory in the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision is nearly the worst thing that could happen to Republicans and Conservatives politically. In other words, the dog caught its own tail and now doesn’t know what do to with it. Are Conservatives that dimwitted? Will Republicans pay the price at the polls?
Zo Rachel makes two episodes of The Virtue Signal with Bill Whittle each week. Scott Ott, sitting in for Bill, is co-host of the long-running news commentary show, Right Angle, with Bill and Stephen Green.
Listen to the Audio Version
31 replies on “Was Reversing Roe v. Wade a Republican Electoral Disaster? (Dog Catches Tail: Now What?)”
One of the most common methods of abortion prior to the pill and planned parenthood was the use of a whalebone of the jaw. The hook at the end was inserted and guided over the baby that was held in place with the other hand. A hard pull hooked the child and the practitioner/ executioner would pull the child out by force. This was an expensive procedure and the skill of certain women were sought after. Other women who refused to pay would attempt the same by themselves, but their ignorance would cause the hook to lodge into their own body, causing terrible bleeding. One woman actually was able to remove the jaw bone, but not without so much injury done that she actually sealed the womb from all the damage she had done. She missed the baby and almost died during the delivery. So much for the history of cesarean deliveries.
These accounts are given by the same people who promote alternative methods of birth control, whether they were the electro galvan machine used after their debauched orgies, or simply pulling out. The pill was a godsend to these people, who always defended their interests with the over population lie. Their desire was ever centered on non committal and child free sex. Secret societies have ever been a scourge to morality and family values and The Church, who is the defender of both.
You find these accounts easily if you follow the literature of the careless offspring of high degree Lodge masters. Or the literature these same fiends leave behind, like Voltaire, who Jefferson fawned over like a schoolgirl.
The lesson will be lost on Zoe, Scott, sadly.
I do, however, agree with his ties to biblical authority on when a life is a life, even while still in the womb. I’ve been pointing such things out for a long while now.
Yet, if Zoe considers himself an old testament expert (which he does) he should have noticed that confession to an anointed priest is a non negotiable requirement prior to any sacrifice being offered be it a burnt, guilt, or sin offering. He should also consider which, of all Christian denominations, is the ONLY group that has kept confession as a mandatory requirement and that it MUST be accepted by an anointed priest? Yes, Catholicism. But he will continue with the blinders on because his aim is disruption, even at the cost of peace — even at the cost of losing a possible convert, had he not missed your correction entirely. But this is what happens to those who put themselves against the Church to oppose it. They stumble on the obstacles they place at their own feet. Like a witch burner in the 17 century he says ridiculous about atheists and burning them with their material possessions, things he doesn’t even bother to make an apology for. His a big boy, Bill shouldn’t have to do it for him.
“Margaret Sanger’s Legacy: While the world would rightly condemn the Nazis for their worldview of eugenics, few people realize that Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, held the same ideas and beliefs as Hitler did. The goal of her organization “The Birth Control League” (later to be named Planned Parenthood) was to help create a superior race, a racially evolved mankind, as we will see.”
https://thecatholictruth.org/margaret-sanger-and-eugenics/
Anyone with pro-abortion friends/family should show them the first five minutes of “Unplanned” (whole movie is excellent; free on http://www.tubitv.com (FOX Entertainment)). Shows the ultrasound of the baby recoiling and backing away from the suction tube before he/she is ripped apart and reduced to a mixture of blood and guts. … Then see how they feel about the 60 million murders which have been committed. Warning: It’s hard to watch, though everyone, even teenagers … especially teenagers … should see it.
There was a movie when I was a young which showed the effects of drug abuse including things like PCP. Not sure of the title. Might have been “Scared Straight” (there is a different movie by the same title about scaring juvenile offenders from going to adult prison). Anyway, it had a distinct deterrent effect. “Unplanned” should do the same for anyone, our youth in particular.
“Unplanned” is really well done. Shows the horrors and lies and the pure profit pursuit of Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry. Told by Abby Johnson who was recruited as a volunteer while in college, had two or three abortions herself, became director of a clinic and a rising star within Planned Parenthood then left abruptly.
When did Abby Johnson quit her long career at Planned Parenthood?
The day after she first saw the abortion procedure performed in the first five minutes of the movie shows.
The other important takeaway from the movie is when they reveal how much the protests outside the clinics matter. They are most definitely effective in saving lives by convincing young mothers to drive by and cancel appointments or leave before entering the facilities.
I’m lovin’ the Zo/Scott team up. Not that I don’t love the Zo/Bill team. What I’m saying is, why can’t we have both?
I wonder why we never hear talk about taking responsibility for our actions. It does take two to tango.
Most people want the right to do want they want with their bodies, but some don’t want to be responsibility of their actions.
I was at the hospital when my grandson was born and there was a young girl (16) who had just given birth. I could hear her being interrogated by the police, about the father.
That made me wonder why the people responsible for creating a life are allowed to walk away and have no responsibility. If I steal a car, I’m not allowed to just give back if I get caught and walk away.
There is a deterrent here to unwanted pregnancy, I think laws could be drafted to hold those responsible to account.
Here’s my idea, if the child is given up to adoption, a payment should be collected by the state from both parties, until the child becomes 18 yrs. old.
Surely if there is a price to pay, more people will think twice about the repercussions. A delay into a law taking effect need only be 9 months, right?
I sadly realize at this moment in time my idea would only increase the number of abortions, unless they are banned.
You gave me a thought that kind of goes the other way and is based upon the following (short) story.
When Ronette was in HS and very involved in dance, one of the mother’s always seemed to pregnant. Always one to mind my own business, I never asked her any personal questions. Driving home one evening, I asked Ronette how many kids this woman had. Ronette rolled her eyes at me in the way teen girls can, and said, Dad – she is a surrogate. She makes $30-$40k carrying someone else’s baby.
Now take that data point and add in that adoption in the US can be $25-$40k, why not have these women put the baby up for adoption while still pregnant. This could be especially beneficial for younger girls. It would ensure some medical care for the girl and a home and maybe influence young girls to not abort by providing something to them.
Who knows, maybe this happens more than I know and it is not a new thought to anyway.
Others have had similar ideas, especially in the “you want women to have kids, but then don’t care afterward” or the “but then we will have all of these kids on the welfare rolls” complaints. We have people adopting from China and Africa (so they are not racist) because the adoption rules are so messed up in the US. We have some that adopt kids with Downs or other deformities that their parents couldn’t deal with so that excuse is off the table.
With people going to such lengths already and spending as much money as they do for international adoptions, I would think that money could just as easily go toward a mother’s hospital bills instead, possibly with extra for her kids she already has, as long as she signs a contract that she will either give up all rights to the child when born or pay back (100? 85%) of what she is given.
Yes, there is a workable solution in here, somewhere. Had no idea how much an adoption costs until a coworker enlightened me on how much it cost to adopt his son.
See my reply to ACTS, which is also half to you.
That is so simple, makes so much sense, and I’d never thought of it. It solves a lot of problems and those it doesn’t solve it mitigates.
The adopting party gets a healthier baby. The pregnant woman knows from the moment her pregnancy is confirmed that she won’t have to try to support a child she’s not prepared for. No one has to die.
The Leftist baby burners will still whine about the dangers of pregnancy but the vast majority of human females carry to term without incident and without particular risk to the mother. If that were not so there would be no human race.
I suspect that for many of those people the “danger of pregnancy” is weight gain and sagging breasts.
By “sponsoring” a pregnant woman people who want to adopt could get in the game at an earlier point and that seems to me to be the solution to the whole problem. The practical, workable solution that doesn’t entail any moral dilemmas or murdering an unborn child. Plus it gives the kid a much brighter future.
That’s a very good idea, I like it a lot.
The one downside to such an idea is the screams of the leftists about the Handmaid’s Tale coming true. Of course, they’ll be wholy wrong in that the girl will get pregnant first, all on her own, and only then have the option to “become a Handmaid” and not be forced into it like they’re thinking.
Of course, the girls who want to shirk responsibility for sleeping around (and the men who are fine with sluts and don’t want a wife, just the strings free sex) won’t want that weight gain or the back aches, sore feet and everything else that comes with pregnancy (but then they shoulda used a condom or pills properly, but they’re not all that good on timing and responsibility and such).
In ADDITION to these thing, believers need to jettison the politically correct spiritual Neville Chamberlainism of the “nicer than God” syndrome. By today’s “enlightened” standards, Jesus was downright “unchristlike” to the Pharisees (as was John the Baptist, and several others). The simpleton’s explanation was that He was only harsh to “church folk.” Scratching a few microns beneath the surface, we see what was really going on.
In first century Israel, the reprobates KNEW they were reprobates because they lived in a culture that told them that every day, while the bullies who formulated that culture didn’t have a clue that they were also sinners. Today, the reprobates are the Pharisee bullies who control the culture and don’t have a clue that they’re sinners. Yes, help, but tell them the WHOLE Truth (like Jesus did/does), not just half of it.
I can hear the question already: How many people do you think will be converted after you’ve informed them that they’re bloodthirsty murderers? Answer: Maybe about as many as the (proportionately) number of Pharisees whom Jesus informed that they were sons of their father, the Devil. Love without truth isn’t love. (1 Cor 13:6 “[love] does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the TRUTH.”
I like the slogan I’ve seen in a few places that follows the “What Would Jesus Do?” meme that says to remember that flipping tables and whipping merchants is an option.
Amen! If most of today’s “Christians” had witnessed the stoning of Stephen, they’d have tucked their kids in with, “Let today be a lesson to you. Don’t be unloving, mean-spirited, and judgmental, like Brother Stephen was today, or God will take YOU home early, too.”
I’m SO tired of Laodiceans proclaiming that THEY’RE the true Philadelphians.
By “kicking this to the states” one of the benefits is that those who want to legalize infanticide, now have to stand up and vote for it.
State legislatures were shielded from even having to discuss the issue, much less vote on it.
Now, if you want abortion to be legal, even if safe and rare, then you need to find a pro-abortion person running for your district seat, get them elected, get legislation proposed and have it pass and be signed by the Governor.
While this will likely happen in a few, very BLUE states; and probably with no limits in some, most will not pass such sweeping laws as politicians like to be re-elected more than they like anything else.
Standing up and voting on a “hot button” issue does not necessarily assist in one’s re-election.
I’ve forgotten now where I read it, but someone made a tangential point in a column on the lines of “State legislatures were shielded from even having to discuss the issue, much less vote on it.”
The point was that pro-abortion people never really had to stake out what their position was and just what they were for since the Court was something of an umbrella over them, shielding them. Now they will have to articulate just what kind of procedures they find acceptable, state that in actual words, and expose their ideas to the voters. Some might find that while polls can be reported as saying “75% [or whatever] of respondents support abortion” the real number is only a few support it past 15-16 weeks and calling for 9 month limits make you seem just a little crazy.
EDIT
Found the paragraph. On Insta’s site: https://instapundit.com/529792/
From the Washington Examiner:
Exactly – thanks for finding that. “Warm Duvet” seems like a shot at limousine liberals, or at least wealthy Karens.
Zo, the reason we want to “kick it to the states” is that the states are where our murder laws are determined and enforced. If I go out and shoot granny in the head, it’s the Commonwealth of Virginia that will strap me to an electric chair, not the feds.
This ruling couldn’t have come at a better time. Thanks to Leftist ideology and demagoguery we have an Administration that is creating all kinds of immediate, serious problems for all Americans not in the Elite Leftist Ruling Class. In other words, the vast majority of Americans.
Now people are worrying about …
“Abortion Rights” don’t even make the list of top ten concerns for the majority of Americans.
Thus the political fallout will be minimal as long as these other, more urgent issues are being forced on the American Voter. The Democrats, by virtue of creating a perfect storm of negatively impacting political policies, have set a stage where anything concerning abortion will take a back seat to the other more serious problems that face everyone.
As Democrats focus on abortion issues and continue to ignore all the other issues that are more important to average Americans they set themselves up for an historical defeat politically.
Please, Democrats. keep your focus firmly on abortion.
Abortion: The arrogance of humans who believe that they know better than God.
To kill a child for convenience is not even animalistic behavior. They are better than humans.
We, as conservatives, actually care more about human life than those who shout that they are better and more compassionate. Those people kill the unborn without thought. Careless, reckless and arrogant. Even if the child being born causes the mother’s, well not a mother yet, the female carrying, death, who are we to second guess God? The child being born was His plan, not yours. The child’s existence may have been a wakeup call to those involved that it’s time to grow up and take responsibility .The death during delivery is God’s plan. A necessary fate for the saving of another’s soul? We have no idea of God’s plan, but we can look back in hindsight and maybe start to figure it out.
As for the political fallout. Who cares? Right is right. Do what is right and let God take control of the outcome. Those who oppose God will lose. It’s only a matter of time.
I have to say that Scott’s perspective on this topic is different than Bill’s and much appreciated. Good timing on your “vacation”, Whittle.
Virginia, the state that became so incensed with what was being taught to their children in public schools that they elected a Republican as their governor, allows abortion with wording in the law that actually condones infanticide. Does anyone else out there find this confusing?
With the way state houses flip from one election to another in purple states, we really could diagnose some states as either split personality or schizophrenic.
We will see, but I seriously doubt abortion is going to mute the red tidal wave that is coming.
It is the leftists their selves that are bringing on the red tidal wave
If we, conservatives/christians, do nothing to make that decision a PERMANENT goal on our daily lives, things will start to go the same way back to what it was before.
If you look at some polls(I know) you get 55% opposing overturn of roe, 49% ban after six weeks and 72% after 15 weeks … people don’t actually realize their contradictions of opinion.
Was reversing Roe v. Wade a Republican Electoral Disaster?
In a word, No.
Yeah, what it really did was it got rid of a bad precedent at the federal level which was being used as a shield to keep us from even talking about the very real moral issues involved.
Now we’re going to have to have that conversation.
Never sell yourself short, Scott. You’re the steady, thoughtful one, and you bring a valuable rudder to the trio … well, now quartet, I guess.