I have noticed that the conservative response to the SCOTUS leak appears to be more measured than that from the Left. And that is a good thing. First, conservatives have learned not to get too excited about anything in front of the Supreme Court. They have been burned one time too many. Or several times too many. Second, it is after all a draft decision. Third, despite all of the screaming, the decision returns the matter of abortion to the states. If I remember correctly, state sovereignty was a concept that then-President Obama lauded when it came to gay marriage. And if one state outlaws it, I do not doubt that leftists will organize funds and transportation to take mothers to states like California to get an abortion. After all, they need to do something with all of that money and there is only so much real estate available on Martha’s Vineyard.
Recently, conservatives have been popping the Dom Perignon and making dinner rezzies over the prospect of a devastating election for Democrats and Elon Musk taking the Twitter kids out for a ride. They should have known it could never last. As of this writing, the theories are still as thick as flies regarding who did it and why. But one thing is clear: Democrats are using this to reenergize a dispirited base. As Dave Rubin pointed out, the issue may convince people who have had enough of increased crime, inflation, high gas prices, and COVID fatigue to stay true to the blue. The Democrats and their media have been granted an incredible boon and will now have the ability to ride the Trump SCOTUS appointee horse as far as it will take them. And that could be pretty far. Swing voters are just that, and many might be persuaded to swing back after this. Whether the leak was the act of someone who sees themselves as the hero of the rebellion or if it came at the behest of the DNC or whoever is in control of Joe Biden, the timing cannot be ignored. Interesting that the people who were aghast over the “assault” on our government and cherished institutions on January 6 are positively giddy that someone submarined the Supreme Court.
The protests started last night, and the usual celebrities have already been hard at work releasing the expected profanity-laden incendiary objections. The Obamas are urging protests, and Biden is calling on Congress to codify abortion as the “law of the land.” Even Jeffrey Toobin, who should be the poster child for keeping a low profile, has weighed in. I suggest that the GOP eat a big breakfast and keep an eye on its six. The game may just have changed. At the very least, it just got more complicated.
When I had a radio show, I used to ask my guests why abortion was so important to the Left. I at least understand the argument about bodily autonomy on an academic level. But the act of abortion itself is a violent, bloody, and horrific act, which terminates a baby’s life in a barbaric way. So why is this the hill the Left wants to die on, or perhaps more appropriately, the hill they want someone else to die on? No sane, rational human being could find anything positive in the act itself, no matter their stance, right? Why not push for more adoption? They love bureaucracy, so why not find better ways to care for unwanted babies? It may not be a perfect solution since the government makes a hash out of everything it touches, but surely it is preferable to reducing a human being to a mess of bloody tissue and bone. Why the devotion to the act itself? Surely, if someone were dismembered in such a way in an auto or industrial accident or at the hands of a psychopath, everyone would be aghast. So why is this barbaric process important to them? Even in cases of rape or incest, the prospect of this procedure should be treated with sobriety, respect, and a degree of sorrow not just for the impact on the child but on the mother. Even when necessary, it is a horrible thing that hurts everyone involved, Oddly enough, no one has ever been able to answer my question.
I have never been one to worry too much about the question of the biblical account of creation versus a purely scientific view. And to be honest, the idea that I and the orangutan at the local zoo may have a common evolutionary ancestor does not throw me into fits. But at the time Genesis was written, the Israelites were surrounded by cultures that believed that the world was the result of chaos, violence, and, in some cases, cosmic war. Many of these cultures held that humanity was the result of a need for slaves or the accidental infusion of bodily fluids of the gods on the earth. The gods of the pagans did not live and move and think any differently than their worshippers. In fact, things such as anger, lust, and jealousy were magnified in many of the pagan deities. Along comes the writer of Genesis and later Exodus who posits the idea that the earth was not created out of chaos, but as the answer to it. And far from being allowed to give vent to whatever emotions ruled them at the moment, humans were required to maintain a standard of behavior and be more than crude flesh and impulses. They were to strive for more than what they wanted at the moment. Of course, humanity in all its incarnations and faiths continues to fail in that respect.
Flash forward in time to the crucifixion. The Roman Empire did not hand out this form of punishment for just any reason. Certain crimes might have been punishable by death, but crucifixion was reserved for only people whom the Romans wished to make an example of. Often sedition was the reason. Not only was the criminal humiliated, but their family and friends also bore the stigma. Even Roman citizens were not sentenced to this type of execution, which was extraordinarily painful and is incidentally where we get the word “excruciating.” And yet, according to the Christian faith, Christ himself used this style of execution to redeem the world.
The takeaway here is that we as created beings have the capacity to reach beyond ourselves and beyond the moment, even to the point of living sacrificially. That mindset of course cannot be mandated or legislated. It truly is a matter of choice. And no matter your beliefs about our origins, that capacity is one of the things that distances us from the aforementioned orangutan.
But when what should be a solemn act becomes a vehicle for maintaining or gaining power, money, or prestige or fomenting rebellion, at that moment, despite our phones, devices, apps and spacecraft, we slip back down the evolutionary ladder just a little. We forego our potential for personal satiation. And perhaps I have just answered my question.