Self-interest vs. selfish interests

Some thoughts on the offyear election that was.

I guess I’ll lead off with the prospective good news first. As I talked about the other day, the election in Salisbury was held and at least there was one measure of sanity.

It’s still a very close race, but after the bulk of the mail-in ballots were counted Thursday, Randy Taylor holds a 65-vote lead over Megan Outten with approximately 120 to count next week. So unless the Democrats “find” a trunk full of Outten votes that somehow appears for next Thursday, Taylor will be the next mayor. Unfortunately, it looks like the remaining “gang of idiots” will stay in place, so changes will be muted.

You know, I’m not sure when they changed the rules because there used to be a primary for races where there would be one winner if three or more signed on (such as the mayoral race was) but that must have been done away with. That turned out to be a good thing, since the liberal vote was neatly split between Outten and Jermichael Mitchell. I suspect next time around that will be “fixed” by having a two-person runoff election to get someone to 50% plus one so a conservative can’t win when the two leftists split the vote.

On the other hand, the news was less encouraging elsewhere, most particularly Ohio, where a game effort to stop the tide of baby murder came up short - in no small part thanks to millions of dollars’ worth of blood money from out-of-state liberals.

This is an oldie but goodie, a photo from a March for Life from the bad old pre-Dobbs days of 2015.

While most have couched abortion as a moral issue, my viewpoint is more of fairness: without life, there is no liberty, and both are inalienable God-given rights as enshrined in our founding documents. As far as I’m concerned, the “choice” was made when the woman and man decided to have sex - that’s true in over 99% of the cases. While some debate the number of weeks during which an abortion is allowed as a “compromise” of the issue, I only concede rape, incest, and the life of the mother (and not the social life.) That’s a compromise to me, since the alternatives are essentially no abortions at all or abortion until birth - or beyond, as I’ll get to shortly.

But there was a comment on a social media reaction post that made some sense. If you go down the comments here you’ll see where a woman noted, “I can't wrap my head around the depravity of a society that spends $30 million to secure the ‘right’ to kill human offspring instead of using those funds to help women in crisis pregnancies.”

To me that’s easy: they don’t care about the woman, they care about the power. And abortion is an extension of that: what larger expression of power is there than the control over life and death? There are even radicals out there who don’t think abortion should be confined to the unborn.

Even more to my point, the response to the snarky pro-choice abortion retort, “Don’t want an abortion? Don’t have one” should be “Don’t want an abortion? Don’t have sex.” After all, there’s roughly a 5% chance any one act of unprotected sex will lead to pregnancy, and “protection” doesn’t always work.

The bottom line is that a single act of intercourse between a young couple has on average a one in 20 chance of pregnancy – this assumes the opportunity presented itself on a random day, as these things tend do when you are young.

However, as Rush Limbaugh used to say, abstinence works 100% of the time.

And - by the way - where was “my body, my choice” when they were trying to force the jab on us?

Seriously, we have fallen down the slippery slope. For most of mankind’s existence, the options for preventing pregnancy were very limited, mainly based on the knowledge of the woman’s menstrual cycle. While the invention of the condom began to make a difference, it wasn’t until the advent of birth control pills in the late 20th century that sex became less risky, assuming you saw a pregnancy as unwanted.

Yet I believe the biggest contributor was the regressives’ equation of an unborn baby to “a clump of cells.” If you called an unborn baby a “fetus” I think that somehow dehumanized the child. “I’m not murdering a baby, I’m aborting a fetus,” they rationalized. That’s one of the symptoms of our societal decline, in my opinion.

So what can we do about it? The Dobbs decision left abortion up to the states, and I believe that leeway should also extend to local governments. I would like to see how the state of Delaware would react to a county ordinance returning that part of the state to the pre-2017 abortion law (rape, incest, life of the mother.) I’m sure they would fight it, but we can fight too.

It’s time for the side of right to stop settling for compromise and take control.

And don’t forget: you can also Buy Me a Coffee, since I have a page there now.