Monday, October 04, 2010

My Abortion Politics

Some one asked in a comment if at the very least Social Conservatives and Republican libertarians couldn't agree on no Federal funding for abortion? As a small government guy, I'm absolutely on board with that.

Now my social conservative friends let me ask you a question. Do you see the perniciousness of instituting Vagina Police?

I do like the approach of this anti-abortion group. The short version: "It is none of the government's business. We can solve social problems without government help. Thank you very much." I liked their attitude so much I blogged them. If you click the links you can get to their www site to help with their efforts. And where did I meet these people? At a TEA Party.

The iron rule of government: "Every power you give the government to do good will eventually be used by the government to do evil." A close reading of the Bible (which my social conservative friends claim to be experts on) shows this to be true. Didn't Samuel say that appointing a king would be a BAD idea? Yes He did.

4 Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah,
5 and said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.
6 But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.
7 And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
8 According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.
9 Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and show them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.
10 And Samuel told all the words of the LORD unto the people that asked of him a king.
11 And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.
12 And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.
13 And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.
14 And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.
15 And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.
16 And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.
17 He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.
18 And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.
Now as I understand it the Israelites wanted a strong central government to combat the sons who did not walk in the way of the Lord. And Samuel said: this is a very bad idea - on practical grounds. And the people said: but every one else is doing it.

Well, whether you believe in the Lord or not, I think the advice is quite practical. You make the government bigger and stronger and it will steal you blind. Even if your intent is to apply the rod of correction to errant children.

Now of course reaching errant children one at a time instead of collectively through the force of law is longer and harder. But way more sure. Why? Because they will teach their children, who will teach their children. As time goes on the effort gets easier. With government? Well you know how that works.

One example I like is The Drug War. When Nixon ramped it up it was costing on the Federal level $100 million a year. Now it costs about $25 billion a year. About 250 times as much. Even adjusting for inflation that is a huge increase for not much or no improvement in the situation. Think of it. There are two grow op stores in my town of 150,000. They have been operating for 10 or 15 years. There were none when Nixon started ramping the war. Some progress.

Well, Samuel is still speaking to us. If we have the wit to listen.

Cross Posted at Classical Values

1 comment:

RavingDave said...

In 1973, the States that wanted abortion had it, and the states that didn't want it banned it. After 1973, the Supreme Court ruled in it's famous "Roe vs. Wade" decision, that Abortion is a personal right emanating from the penumbra of the 14th amendment. A decision that is hilariously unsupportable were it not so horrible.

They later decided (when they had to either affirm or denounce their Roe vs. Wade decision) "Stare Decisis." Which means STFU! "Your miserable life is not worth the reversal of a Custer decision."

The Abortion issue was not a national issue till the Liberal Supreme court made it into one. Liberal States allowed it, Conservative states didn't. It was the forcing of the Liberal position onto other states that provoked the backlash.

With that in mind, many if not most pro-lifers would be content to de-federalize the issue, then fight it out on a state by state basis. It is obvious to me that this would mostly defuse the issue, as liberal states would keep it, and conservative states would outlaw it. As it can be presumed that Most of the supporters and detractors reside in their own state, the local mindset would hold sway regardless of what outsiders wanted to impose.