I don’t know about you, but I’m getting really tired of the mouth-foaming anti-Supreme Court rants from people who can’t mount any kind of a coherent legal or ethical argument. The absurd attempts to compare the earlier Bruen ruling on gun rights and Dobbs were particularly forced, but then so are the claims that Dobbs is based on Catholic theology [See Seth Tillman’s neat debunking of a Columbia prof on this silly assertion here…] and that the opinion portends the banning of birth control. I found it particularly disheartening that a smart, usually rational lawyer friend echoed back those MSNBC talking points. I know she watches the shameless leftist-propaganda network, but assumed that she had the brains and integrity to know when she was being fed garbage. I guess not. Scary.
Meanwhile, I have been surprised to see how so many of the media defenders of abortion so quickly defaulted to ugly, transparently unethical (and immoral) reasoning. On HLN, for example, a special report cautioned that states ending the wholesale slaughter of the unborn would face serious economic hardships as scores of women had to deal with unwanted pregnancies, keeping them out of the workplace. I am beginning to believe that an unexpected salutary result of Roe’s fall, which I was not expecting or in favor of, may be that a larger proportion of the public will realize just how brutal, callous and unethical the “pro-choice” movement is and has been all along.
Remember, abortion isn’t an ethics conflict, in which there are two strong ethical values pulling in opposite directions. It’s an ethical dilemma, with a powerful, indeed the most powerful, ethical consideration—life—is being opposed by non-ethical considerations like convenience, ambition, avoidance of unpleasant consequences and finance. The pro-abortion movement, some of it anyway, understands that, and also understands that framed as a an ethics dilemma, their position is a loser. Thus it has pretended that the life side of the issue doesn’t exist. It’s amazing that they got away with this deception for so long, but in the desperate efforts to justify their outrage, they are only revealing their lack of respect for human life for all to see.
1. Why does anyone pay attention to this woman? Writer, pundit and progressive activist Saira Rao tweeted, “This country is a racist transphobic homophobic xenophobic ableist classist Islamophobic misogynistic dumpster fire. As such, seeing the American flag makes me want to vomit.” The statement is an expression of hate only, and deliberately insults not only the nation of her birth but also every normal American who is justly proud on the nation, its history and culture. One of the benefits of the U.S. is that you can say or write offensive stuff like that, but if your perception, values and judgment is that poor, I don’t care what you think. You’re untrustworthy and incompetent. Rao has made a lot of money in publishing and has organized various organizations to pursue her warped beliefs—like “giving up” on white people, which she declared after losing a run for Congress—but she seethes with hate for America. She’s a lawyer, she went to elite schools—what made her like this? How many more like her are there, and what is the culture doing wrong?
2. Funny, Donald Trump never was this vulgar… Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot took the stage at a “Pride” event–she is gay, after all—and declared, “Fuck Clarence Thomas!”
Stay classy, Chicago—Democrats—Protectors of Democratic Institutions and foes of inciting violence!
3. The question is, how could the college think this was fair and tolerable? Brown University was offering a “mindfulness” course exclusively to black, Latino and Indigenous students, an online “teacher training class in mindfulness-based stress reduction” that Asian students were also excluded from the New York Post reported. Brown reportedly established the course because…well, hell, it doesn’t matter what its reason was, does it? You can’t do that. It’s against the law. Yet Brown had to be threatened by FAIR, whose lawyer informed Brown President Christina Paxson that “establishing a teacher training program based on skin color or ancestry violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.” Brown gets federal aid, so it must comply with the act.
Dang! said Paxson! How could I have missed that invidious discrimination thingy? And so Brown announced that even those evil whites and achievement-crazed Asians could enroll too.
It’s universities with leadership like Paxson’s that will have hordes of Saira Rao clones swarming over the land before we know what hit us….
4. This is disturbing…Here I am, defending the conservative Justices against accusations that they are tilting toward religious biases, and they issue a suspicious ruling like this one.
Back in April I previewed the case of Former Bremerton (Wash.) High School assistant football coach Joseph Kennedy, who knelt in prayer at midfield after games, and was often joined by members of the team. The school officials fired him from his job in 2015 when he refused to stop his on-field prayers, which his superiors claimed violated the Constitution’s prohibition against government endorsement of religion. Bremerton sued, and the case finally reached the Supreme Court. Was the school illegally suppressing the coach’s religious expression?
I concluded, “The school can’t forbid the coach from praying, but it can forbid him from making praying part of his players’ school activities or doing so in a manner that suggest that the school approves, endorses, or is enabling the practice of religion. Kennedy should have been fired.”
Well, I was right and SCOTUS, which ruled 6-3 that Kennedy’s firing was illegal, was wrong. Read the dissent, which is properly indignant. [Pointer: valkygrrl]