Let’s examine this by categories….
Warped Concepts of How the System Works: Yet another Women’s March, like all of them, misleadingly labeled to avoid the ugly transparency that “March to be Able to Kill the Unborn at Will” would broadcast, ended up at the steps of the Supreme Court yesterday. Thousands traveled to Washington, D.C. to demand abortion rights, as if the Supreme Court decides complex issues according to who shouts the loudest, is most passionate, or has the coolest signs. Demonstrators surrounded the court,shouting “My body, my choice” and cheering loudly to the beat of drums.
Morons. These assaults on the Curt have driven me mad for decades, as what they demonstrate is that difficult matters of law, precedent and policy can be decided by slogans and the incoherent bellows from a mob. It’s an insult to the Court, the Constitution, and the system. If you have a valid argument, file an amicus brief. These demonstrations, and it doesn’t matter what their goal is our which side of the ideological spectrum they come from, waste time, energy, passion and taxpayer funds. Is the idea intimidation? Good luck with that. Persuasion? Sure, a bunch of screaming and weeping activists are going to persuade anyone but TV talking heads. Narcissistic grandstanding?
There you go.
The Logic of the Masses. Protester Kayla Selsi told the AP she was carrying the same sign she has held in three past Women’s Marches. It stated, “If only my vagina could shoot bullets, it will be less regulated.” She’s actually proud of this nonsensical and hypocritical slogan. Anti-gun zealots want to overturn the Second Amendment because people kill people using guns. Pro-abortion zealots want to make abortion rights absolute so women can kill people before they are born. Guns are still regulated more widely than abortion, and people are arrested for violating gun laws.
It Isn’t What It Is. As usual, the protesters only want to recognize one side of the difficult abortion equation, which is deliberate misrepresentation. Abortion involves the legal taking of a human life, and human lives in this country have rights. Literally none of the rhetoric yesterday acknowledged the tiny victims whose fates have driven the efforts to limit abortion on demand. At a Los Angeles rally in front of City Hall, protesters chanted “Abortion on demand and without apology: only revolution can make women free!” Free to kill the unborn, that is. Why won’t they say it? That’s the whole point. If the pro-abortion advocates have the better case, then that case should prevail with all of the consequences and facts revealed and openly discussed.
A Corrupting Cause. “Without apology” is especially telling. My son escaped being aborted by a hair: his single mother in Russia gave him up to the state, though abortions there are a primary source of birth control. He might have been robbed of his rich and promising life in the U.S. for the convenience of his birth mother, and abortion advocates think taking away such an opportunity doesn’t even warrant a simple, “I’m sorry!”? Abortion extremism apparently extinguishes compassion, kindness, responsibility and respect for life.
Questions You Seldom Hear Being Made. “What about equal rights for unborn women?” tweeted Jeanne Mancini, president of an anti-abortion group called March for Life.
Welcome to Bad Analogy Theater! In Springfield, Illinois, protesters included the Illinois Handmaids, wearing red robes and white bonnets evoking women of Margaret Atwood’s novel “The Handmaid’s Tale.” The women in that dystopian novel are forced by the state to get pregnant, which is not the issue with Roe v. Wade.
Ethics Alarms 
This is a discussion you not only can’t win, it’s one you can’t have. Abortion is one of those five or six topics that make people’s brains liquefy and trickle out of their ears. The others, outside of religion, are probably Donald Trump, homosexuality, Ireland, and whether that red stuff you put on pasta is sauce or gravy.
It’s simply not possible to have a civil discussion of these difficult issues because people substitute passion for reason on them and using passion rather than reason is VERY easy. The impact of the Donald Trump presidency is something that can be discussed in an objective manner, but why do that when it’s easy to call him a racist and say “Orange man BAD?” The question of the rather rapid shift in societal attitudes toward homosexuality and where everything else is going to fit with this change is an issue that has a lot of facets to discuss, but why bother discussing when it’s easier to throw insults, both sides? I’m guilty of the latter, and my attitude toward gay people used to be summarizable as “EEWWWWW! THEY HAVE BUTT SEX! EWWWWWW!” Ireland, its 800 year history as part of the British Empire, its difficult separation therefrom, and the lingering effects should be discussable objectively, but too many people will simply give you a shillelagh upside the head if you dare try. The last is only half a joke, I have seen some ridiculous online arguments about sauce vs. gravy. I’m as in touch with my heritage as any other Italian American, but in America, where only 7-8% of the population overall has Italian heritage, sauce is the thick, tomato-based red liquid you put on pasta or pizza, gravy is the drippings based brown liquid thickened with flour you put on turkey or pot roast.
Abortion is just one of those things where its advocates not only can’t see the other side, as far as concerned there IS no other side. If you are opposed, you might as well say the earth is flat for all the mind they will pay you. If you are a man, as far as they’re concerned you just need to zip it. No uterus, no right to talk about it. As if only blacks could decide on policy for blacks or only whites could decide policy for whites, or only gun owners could decide policy for gun owners. See how ridiculous that sounds? But they don’t care, all they’ll do is scream louder.
Need we say more?
I’d include Israel and “climate change” as well, Steve. And hell, racial relations. And income inequality. And gun control. Income inequality? The wealthy paying “their fair share?” There are so many third rails these days trains have no chance of getting a grip.
All gravies are sauces, but not all sauces are gravies.
Say rather, its 400 year history as part of the British Empire, as the period before that was more a sort of prehistory involving Hiberno-Normans and the like with links to Britain rather than directly involving Britain proper, and there was yet more prehistory even before that, going back at least as far as the sort of raiding that captured St. Patrick.
I’m surprised Sotomayor’s comments did not make it into this section.
https://jonathanturley.org/2021/10/01/they-tell-me-i-shouldnt-but-sotomayor-calls-on-law-students-to-oppose-the-texas-abortion-law/
Did I miss part 3 of the abortion series that was to outline the compromises between the anti-abortion and pro-abortion crowd?
No. Still under construction. It’s tough.
As were Republican compromises with Democrat slave owners.
“What about equal rights for unborn women?”
In the context of another tweet on the topic that went something along the lines of “Ultrasound appointment, I’m finding out of it’s a girl or an abortion.” This tweet perhaps isn’t very redeeming.
As far as gravy goes, the city where I reside has enough German population and not enough Hispanics that they pour brown gravy on burritos and call it good.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Yet it strikes me as more plausible that first something else again led to the beginnings of the second leg of all that, which then opened the door to the first leg, and then that amplified the second leg yet more as a psychological mechanism that prevented cognitive dissonance from building up and getting in the way. But what do I know?
You are a man, after all.