Lion of the Blogosphere

Lion was right about Kavanaugh and abortion!

Remember when I wrote “Ironically, the drunken Yale party shows that Kavanagh is culturally a lot more sympathetic to abortion rights than the hardcore Christian true believer Amy Coney Barrett who will probably be nominated if Kavanaugh has to withdraw.”

And then I explained in the comments the reason being that “that many abortions can be traced back to drunken college parties.” I assure you that even back in the 1980s, unmarried women who got pregnant at Ivy League schools got abortions, regardless of whether they came for Republican or Democratic families.

Today, Brett Kavanaugh votes to deny certiorari to a case about Defunding Planned Parenthood and that is perceived as Kavanaugh not being as anti-abortion as Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

December 10, 2018 at 12:34 PM

Posted in Law

17 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Indeed. Even before Roe v. Wade, girls from affluent, well-educated families could always get abortions if they wanted them. They could afford to travel to another state (or foreign country) to get it done, or they could doctor-shop to find a sympathetic practitioner who would say that the pregnancy posed a significant health threat. Abortion rights primarily benefits poor, low-IQ women, who otherwise would end up having even more kids that they cannot care for. Of course, this also benefits society in general as well.

    Black Death

    December 10, 2018 at 1:06 PM

    • This is well-put. I think abortion rights people could sell their policy better if they framed it this way than their current strategy of ‘women’s choice’ and property rights or whatever. But abortion policy seems to attract the worst arguments on both sides for whatever reason.

      Jokah Macpherson

      December 10, 2018 at 1:29 PM

    • Here’s the thing: the women who really should not become mothers also have the least amount of access to abortions.

      A poor and uneducated young girl from the rural South has almost no access to a legal and safe abortion. Meanwhile, do we really want 31 year old Park Ave housewives to be getting abortions?


      December 10, 2018 at 6:38 PM

      • “do we really want 31 year old Park Ave housewives to be getting abortions?”

        Yes! Or do you really want even more liberals in the world?

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        December 10, 2018 at 7:20 PM

      • @Lion

        I just want more high IQ people in this world. I don’t care about their ideology. If you want to get rid of the secular liberals you’ll also be getting rid of a vast chunk of the high IQ white population.


        December 11, 2018 at 6:21 PM

    • > girls from affluent, well-educated families could always get abortions if they wanted them.

      That’s not what happened, historically. She’d disappear for half a year and the kid would go to a good home.


      December 10, 2018 at 9:18 PM

  2. All that character defamation and they didn’t even need to be worried.

    Jokah Macpherson

    December 10, 2018 at 1:21 PM

    • Liberals aren’t able to think rationally about anything involving Trump. Which is why there won’t be any bipartisan legislation.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      December 10, 2018 at 1:25 PM

  3. I’ve decided that pro-lifers are slightly nuts.

    Makes no sense to force a woman to bear a child that testing shows will be disabled. Makes no sense to force poor/low IQ woman to have even more awful kids that they can’t afford which the taxpayers must bear.

    Abortion is only really ugly if it’s late-term or a high-quality woman decides not to have a perfectly healthy kid because she’s too young and want more college/career/carousel.

    Being pro-life only makes any sense in terms of the slippery slope line of thinking that goes: birth control=>promiscuity=>marriage breakdown=>abortions=>culture of death. This line of thinking is *only* useful in a homogenous and relatively sane and intelligent nation. We are NOT that.

    If pro-lifers were really serious about “life” they would decry Churchians celebrating single-moms and they would attack the welfare state/feminism which lead to all this dysfunction to begin with. But they won’t do that, because they’re stupid cucks.


    December 10, 2018 at 6:22 PM

  4. Kav is a liability. Who knows what else this guy is gonna do? Kav was a bad, bad choice. We are at war and everything is kosher when fight for your existence. In the light of that I’m not against planned parenthood, but Kav is a disaster.


    December 10, 2018 at 9:27 PM

    • Kav was a neocon apparatchik who got where he is by inventing reasons the feds are allowed to torture and drone-incinerate American citizens on a whim. Instead of talking about that we had to talk about democrat rape fantasies. The guy is a disaster.


      December 10, 2018 at 10:44 PM

      • Let’s see how he rules on something that matters before we go all Chicken Little. Affirmative action, say.


        December 10, 2018 at 11:48 PM

  5. Kavanaugh is a rock-solid Bush guy, not a Trumper. This is why the battle lines drawn during his nomination process were ironic. A cynic might say that the Establishment played up some youthful indiscretions to provoke the left in order to rile up Trump and his base to defend a pure swamp creature.

    Peter Akuleyev

    December 11, 2018 at 5:30 AM

  6. Anything New under the Sun????

    Republican presidents say ALL the time that they want abortion outlawed. But they know that, if roe vs wade gets actually overturned, the republicans lose the single issue votes from the religious right. They survive on not carrying out what they say.

    What else does the conservatives have? For the average American, nothing else in the conservative agenda has direct value.

    Bruno Brazil

    December 12, 2018 at 5:31 AM

  7. What about the rest of the religious agenda?

    Ban contraceptives? Return to Comstock? It is completely out of the loop for a modern western society. It will never be taken seriously.

    Bruno Brazil

    December 12, 2018 at 5:35 AM

  8. When republicans nominate judges for the scotus, It is interesting to notice that the president always ignores some ultra Christian nut that they could choose instead of the person that was actually nominate. Like Amy Conney.

    But republicans survive on not executing what they say.

    Bruno Brazil

    December 12, 2018 at 5:50 AM

  9. MEH 0910

    December 25, 2018 at 5:47 PM

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: