Friday, November 19, 2010

Letter To A Friend

As you know the abortion discussion has been going hot and heavy here in the last few days. I have written a fair number of posts on the subject lately. Abortion Prohibition is a good example of the discussion. And of course the subject spills over into my e-mail box. So I wrote a letter to a friend.


I am positive you and those of similar opinions (lots of them in my inbox) mean well. But you are a one level thinker.

"If the government with my party in power did xxx we would have a much better country."

You fail to take it to the second level. What could be done when a party not in power gets control and that party did not have the best interests of the country at heart. Like the current soon to be partly replaced regime. What could an evil party do with the precedent? We see that already with Raich. Wickard was on the way to being overturned (Lopez - gun free school zones case) and then Scalia let his social conservatism overcome his reason. And now Raich will be used to justify the Health Care Abomination. Be very careful what you wish for.

Why are engineers mostly libertarians? Because they take second and third order effects into account as a matter of course. "I designed this for a household environment. What happens when it is used in a leaky garage. Or a steamy bathroom?"

You are thinking optimum environment. A mistake made by rookie engineers. It takes seasoning to get an engineer think at all times about what could go wrong.

So yeah. Banning abortion sounds like a good thing. But humans are involved. American humans. A notoriously obstreperous species. They are famous for circumventing laws they don't like. One of the reasons Alcohol Prohibition failed.

Look up Ron Paul on abortion. He is as prolife as it gets. And yet he thinks that at least the Feds ought to stay out of it. And if the Feds stay out of it you can only affect it at the margins because people will travel. And groups (above ground or below ground) will come in to provide funds to the indigent.

Once you allow government into women's vaginas how could that precedent be used for mischief? I can think of lots of ways. Even on the State level. TSA cavity screening for instance. Or something that will come up when 200+ million are thinking of the subject. It only takes one - and then it goes viral.

Why not contact Rockford Pro Life and tell them the Simon family sent you. My mate and I are friends with some of the members. Find out their program. Repeat it where you live. And get a secular version going too for those who are not religiously affiliated. So much to be done while you waste your time fighting with me. Why do I fight back? I worry about unintended consequences.

And think of it. Do you really want women who don't want children reproducing? Darwin in action. In a generation or three and certainly ten we will have women with very strong reproductive urges. Micro evolution in action. Cold? Yes. But the problem is self solving over time if you avoid meddling. We see it already when it comes to lefties. Those are the folks (mostly) having abortions. They have no children to "teach". You want them reproducing? Why?

Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake.

You are not my enemy. Thus my intervention.


Kathy Kinsley responded to the letter which I also posted in the comments of Abortion Prohibition.

Here is what she had to say:


"Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake."


Thing is, even if they succeed in outlawing abortion, it's still going to go on. Except among the poor, who won't be able to afford them easily. (I speak as someone who was a teenager - middle class - BEFORE Roe v Wade - no, I never needed one, but I knew a number who did. And they all got one - and not back in alleys, either.) All that Roe v. Wade really did was make them more affordable for the poor. The rich got 'd&c for polyps' from their own doctors - they never had any problems at all with 'legal' abortions. The middle class found sympathetic (and quite sterile) doctors to do much the same.

Cross Posted at Power and Control

No comments: