I’m pro-choice. This weekend’s antics didn’t help the cause.
If you wonder why the Democratic brand is so tarnished look no further than this paragraph from a story in yesterday’s Wisconsin State Journal:
The day before the Bans Off Our Bodies march, UW-Madison’s BIPOC Coalition, originally a co-sponsor of the event, published a statement rescinding their co-sponsorship and endorsement. The statement said Indivisible organizers “repeatedly failed to recognize their privilege, be inclusive of all folks with uteri, and understand that BIPOC, queer, disabled and/or low-income folks do not owe cis-gender, middle-class white women their support, nor labor in a movement that white women co-opted.”
The story was about pro-abortion marches that took place Sunday all across the country. As is too often the case, here in Madison the left split with the left. It is in the DNA of the hard-left to be over-sensitive, to seek out offense wherever it might be found, and to compete in a sort of victimhood Olympics. It’s also their way to use language that is befuddling, if not incomprehensible, to the general public. A public which is, after all, both “privileged” and “cisgendered,” though no doubt in denial about the first and oblivious about the second since few average people know what “cisgendered” means.
The Indivisible organizations sprung up after the shock of Donald Trump’s defeat of Hillary Clinton in 2016. They were the project of progressive Democratic staffers on the Hill. But, reading between the lines, somebody at an Indivisible organizing meeting said something on the eve of the Madison march, somebody took offense and, bam, the left looks goofy yet again. This same kind of thing happened around the women’s marches when they started in 2017.
Look, I’m pro-choice. I really am concerned about what might happen at the Supreme Court between now (the first day of the court’s new term is today) and June, when the court wraps up for the summer. It’s possible that Roe v. Wade could be overturned and likely that it will at least be weakened. For lots of reasons I think that would be a bad thing for the country.
But “organizing” (disorganizing might be a better description) on the pro-choice side that splits hairs over who is more victimized among people on the same side of the issue is worse than useless. I mean, how many people who needed to be rallied or persuaded on this issue were inspired or convinced by these kinds of antics? How much good did these protests do?
Instead of focussing on the issue, these groups are obsessing about themselves. This just underscores how identity politics has taken over the left. Identity even overshadows the issue of reproductive rights. It’s come to that.
Indivisible turns out to be divided.
Welcome to the 229th consecutive day of posts here at YSDA. Thanks for reading!
2 thoughts on “Oh, For Cryin’ Out Loud”
Dave wrote, “But “organizing” (disorganizing might be a better description) on the pro-choice side that splits hairs over who is more victimized among people on the same side of the issue is worse than useless. I mean, how many people who needed to be rallied or persuaded on this issue were inspired or convinced by these kinds of antics? How much good did these protests do?”
Those that advocate for abortions have been off the rails of reality in rhetorical arguments for many, many years.
The problem as I see it is that those who are advocating for abortions and personally asking to receive an abortion are almost always completely ignoring the fact that there are responsibilities that have been completely ignored and choices that have already been made that got them to the place where they want an abortion. Ignoring individual responsibilities to give people free will to kill the “unwanted” is illogical and immoral.
Legal or not, abortion is still immoral.
Only immoral if you believe that life begins at some point prior to the procedure. For those that do not believe that there’s no question as to the morality of the procedure.
And deciding that life begins, for instance, at conception raises quite a few interesting issues like investigating women who miscarry for potential murder charges and issuing conception certificates instead of birth certificates.
Please spare us lectures on personal responsibility. Our country is rampant with laws that help the rich and powerful avoid personal responsibility. Our entire legal and economic system sometimes seems to be an exercise in minimizing personal responsibility (risk) while maximizing personal gain. How would you feel about getting rid of corporate personhood in the name of promoting personal responsibility, since this idea is so important? It seems like lectures on the topic are too often reserved for women and the poor. If I could for once witness a consistent platform for the wholesale promotion of personal responsibility in ALL aspects of American life I’d be impressed.