Abortion Remains the Left’s Lodestar

After Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election, the Democrats fashioned themselves into a permanent, readily identifiable, and divisive faction—“#TheResistance”—in an unprecedented attempt to delegitimize a duly elected president and rollback the outcome of a free and fair election. It’s nearly impossible to overstate how radical this was. And yet, the Left offered more proof of how uninterested it is in even sharing power, let alone wielding it responsibly.

Not to be outdone, the party’s abortion arm has geared up to fight in the “War on Women, Part 87,567,” which was sparked by an eminently humane policy meant to offer some reprieve in a real war zone: abortion politics. Ohio Governor John Kasich last month signed a bill that prohibits doctors from performing abortions in cases where tests reveal the fetus has or likely has Down Syndrome. The legislation goes into effect in March.

Abortion zealots immediately sprang into action. Los Angeles Times columnist Jamil Smith scoffed at the notion that Kasich is a “moderate” for barring discrimination in the womb based upon fetal chromosome count because true moderates like Smith know the “decent” and “compassionate” course of action is for the strong to ruthlessly and violently purge their society of the weak—of innocents who look a bit different from them. Take notes, you misogynistic bigots: To be truly enlightened and “woke,” you must allow nothing to stop the march of History—not even piles upon piles of bodies.

NARAL had the audacity to tweet that the law “shames women” and “exploits them”; the mangled corpses of countless, blameless children were unavailable to comment on how “shamed” and “exploited” being aborted made them feel. Even out-of-staters felt the need to chime in. Renato Mariotti tweeted that, when he becomes the Illinois Attorney General, he’ll “build a wall around reproductive rights and fight any attempt to criminalize abortion.” “Walls are evil!” the progressive shouts—except when those walls protect the “right” to fetal mass murder.

And lest one think these are fringe one-offs, recall that in April, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez were blasted by Ilyse Hogue, the president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, for supporting Heath Mello, a candidate for mayor of Omaha, Nebraska. Mello deviated only slightly from the Democrats’ abortion orthodoxy, but that was too much for NARAL. The DNC made it clear that the endorsement was from Sanders alone and not the DNC as a whole. (Mello went on to lose to Republican incumbent Jean Stothert.) And Doug Jones, the newly-sworn-in U.S. senator from Alabama, wouldn’t know what a sensible abortion regulation was if it came dressed as an opportunity to win in a deep red state by a comfortable margin (instead of by barely more than 1 percent) against an accused child molester opponent, Roy Moore.

One wonders if the phrase, “Life unworthy of life”—Lebensunwertes Leben—rings a bell or means anything to these ghouls.

The broader lesson in all this is quite simple: Compromise on abortion isn’t possible. The pro-life and pro-choice positions are mutually exclusive. A country dedicated to the proposition that “all men are created equal” and are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”—one of which is life itself—cannot long abide a regime, ensconced in law, which permits the murder of children in utero with impunity and is regarded by many with utter apathy. Or, shockingly, as a positive good! As Lincoln said in his famous “house divided” speech of 1858, a nation cannot exist half-slave and half-free, or, in this case, half-pro-life and half-pro-choice: “I do not expect the Union to be dissolved—I do not expect the house to fall—but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other.”

This also means that those on the Right who are tempted to think that the Left can be an ally in some way if the question of abortion is simply bracketed and pushed aside need to stop being so delusional. If it weren’t abundantly clear before, one would have to be willfully blind at this point not to realize that abortion is the lodestar of the modern Democratic Party, the locus upon which it turns—its central sacrament. And religious zealots don’t compromise on their beliefs.

Democrats will not budge on the nonsensical idea that abortion is “health care” and that a woman should be free to have a “doctor” exterminate the life within her womb. So committed are they to ensuring the continued existence and expansion of the “right” to abortion, they cannot even concede that the barbaric procedure should have to conform to basic anti-discrimination principles. (Ask yourself: Would Democrats allow any other policy besides abortion to be administered with bias based on some immutable characteristic?) Discrimination, hate, and picking on the little guy are first-order evils to our sophisticated man of the Left—except when the little guy being discriminated against and destroyed with the vilest hate imaginable is a fetus with Down Syndrome.

A party that will contort itself so dramatically to keep the machinery of death running smoothly simply cannot be reasoned with, and at the first opportunity, it will betray all “Never Trump” conservatives and squishy right-wing folks who think it can be. Recognizing this, the Right should press the issue, continuing to methodically tighten its legal, cultural, and political vise grips around the Left with the goal of extinguishing abortion—just as we did chattel slavery in the 19th century.

The Democrats make a mockery of the principle of equality even if abortion is left out of the picture—i.e., because they think it most plausibly means “equality of outcome” when the only real and possible equality is formal or procedural equality—but this is beyond shameful and morally retrograde. We cannot allow the Left’s eugenic mindset, a mindset that exists because of the Left’s principles, not in spite of them, to once again take root in modern America.

The Left clearly cannot break this fever, so the Right should do it for them by crushing them at the ballot box, in court, and in the culture. Down syndrome babies and babies everywhere deserve no less.

About Deion A. Kathawa

Deion A. Kathawa holds a J.D. from Notre Dame Law School and a B.A. from the University of Michigan–Ann Arbor. He is a proud Midwesterner and a Mt. Vernon Fellow of the Center for American Greatness.

Want news updates?

Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.

20 responses to “Abortion Remains the Left’s Lodestar

  • “The Left clearly cannot break this fever, so the Right should do it for them by crushing them at the ballot box, in court, and in the culture. ”

    If it were that simple, don’t you think it would’ve been done by now?

    “WASHINGTON, D.C. — Stability remains the name of the game in U.S. abortion attitudes. Half of Americans say abortion should be “legal only under certain circumstances,” identical to a year ago, while 29% still say it should be legal in all circumstances. The smallest proportion — 18% this year vs. 19% in 2016 — say it should be illegal in all circumstances.”


    It’s possible to “crush” with 18 percent of the electorate, but it’s not terribly likely.

    But let’s be fair:

    “Slightly more U.S. adults today believe the procedure is morally wrong (49%) than morally acceptable (43%). This has also been the case in most readings since Gallup started tracking this annually in 2001.

    “In terms of the two abortion labels, 49% of U.S. adults consider themselves pro-choice on the abortion issue, while 46% consider themselves pro-life.”

    It’s a pretty even split. I respect pro-life views. But given the numbers, I doubt that either side can win a lasting “final” victory on this issue anytime soon.

    • Thank you for illustrating the power of controlling the narrative, something the Left has become quite proficient at over the years.

      A 49% plurality consider abortion morally wrong, yet an identical plurality consider themselves to be “pro-choice,” a ridiculous bit of Leftist terminology that actually means pro-abortion. The glaring disconnect between these two statistics demonstrates the effectiveness of the Left’s sales patter.

      But when it comes to judging the likeliness of substantial change when the support for it is small, never forget Obergefell, a fantastic, otherworldly decision that benefits a vanishingly small percentage of the population, and was supported by a fairly small minority throughout.

      • Of course the Left controls the narrative, there are large numbers of “useful idiots” on their side who are ready to mindlessly regurgitate whatever talking points that are crafted. Thought not being their strong point, they are easily led.

    • Of course, Mr. Mathis, all moral issues should be decided by polls. To paraphrase Lincoln: “If abortion is not wrong, nothing is wrong.” What could you possibly mean (and here I am not singling you out, just responding to a statement you make), “I respect pro-life views?”

      • I’m not suggesting moral issues should be decided by polls. It’s tough to make a final moral statement on an issue, though, when as much of the country is against a thing as for it. That’s all I mean to suggest.

  • The only way we’ll truly be able to stop this abortion madness is by both winning presidential and senate elections, and then install reliable conservatives to SCOTUS. That being said, both Bushes didn’t do that hot a job, with Souter & Roberts. Let’s see how long Ruth Buzzi Ginsburg can stay on life support.

    • You will not stop them. You will only endanger women who go down that path.

    • I am an abortion moderate [under 11 weeks – o.k. & rape, etc.], but I am extremely conservative legally with an SJD and female. If we get a court so conservative that it will overrule Roe v. Wade, it will likely also overrule Gonzales v. Raich and also uphold an implied right to interstate travel. The net result is abortion is only completely going away if all three branches of the State government in deep blue States go red. Frankly, it is never happening.

      Let the Democrats keep their death industry issue. Let’s echo Senator Rand Paul – when is a fetus too old to murder? Show pictures. It is a loser for them. It also kills mostly their future voters. Down’s syndrome is a circus side-show. We should leave it be. Would we really be against aborting Stalin and Hitler if they could be DNA identified? Leave it be. Stick with protecting all life with rape and congenital disease exceptions. Let the Democrats propose that homosexuality is not a congenital defect and then just vote it down. Say a woman and her physician can work it out.

      A lot of winning is not “getting into the weeds” that affect only 1% or 2%. Pro-life people should not sacrifice 98% of kids to virtue signaling. We need to win, not demonstrate virtue to baby killers. No one goes to Heaven without God’s grace.

  • The basic premise of the Left is anti-humanism. They have declared your very breath as poison and hold the killing of the unborn as the highest “right”. Human beings are not considered natural. A spiders web is a fantastic creation of nature but skyscrapers are “unnatural” abominations.

    It is no coincidence that when the Left has gained total control, mass murder follows.

  • A party that will contort itself so dramatically to keep the machinery of death running smoothly simply
    cannot be reasoned with, and at the first opportunity, it will betray all “Never Trump” conservatives and squishy right-wing folks who think it can be.

    This is precisely the point I was trying to make in response to a article by the noxious Ben Shapiro in which he actually argued the Left had gained the moral high ground by forcing Fraken out. I commented:

    If you think someone (and the party who supports him) who would kill babies anytime up to birth has any kind of moral high ground over someone who maybe acted atrociously a few times 40 years ago then it just shows how Conservative, Inc has no concern for life as a moral, political, social, cultural, or legal issue until it comes time to drum up some votes for the next Establishment liar.

  • What is there to understand no one is in favor of abortions. The only question is does a woman have control of her body or the government? What happened to Personal responsibility. Keep the Government out of the bedroom.

    • Once a woman participates in the creation of a child, there are two people involved. Different DNA, the legal definition of identity. Different sex 50% of the time. Different fingerprints. A beating heart and EEG at four or five weeks, both legal definitions of life and death.
      I understand that you define the child in the womb as untermensch. Of the many freedoms the Constitution protects, having a personal definition of life is not one of them.

      • I do not define anything. Why would it be my business? I don’t care is she carries a lump of coal, it’s her business. Not yours or mine. Quit looking up girls skirts, Comrade Perv.

      • My child and my family lineage is my business. It’s also my business when the woman decides to keep the baby and uses the law to compel 18 years of financial support from me. That a woman has a right to terminate the right to progeny at a whim is ridiculous.

      • I’m sorry, didn’t realize your progeny business was so wide spread, with so many little devils running down the hall, singing catch that bastard before he screws us all.

  • an unprecedented attempt to delegitimize a duly elected president and rollback the outcome of a free and fair election.
    Have you forgotten Bush v Gore, that went all the way to SCOTUS, with Democrats insisting SCOTUS “stole” the 2000 election from Gore? I haven’t.
    Ohio Governor John Kasich last month signed a bill that prohibits doctors from performing abortions in cases where tests reveal the fetus has or likely has Down Syndrome…Abortion zealots immediately sprang into action.
    Yes, of course. But what if abortions were occurring because the child was of the “wrong” sex, like Asiatics do all the time? Or because a genetic marker for homosexuality was known, and the parents did not want a “queer” child? Then what would abortion zealots do? They would applaud, of course, because their principles are “flexible”, meaning they have no principles at all.
    What is going to happen is this: Ginsberg will go to stand before the Great Judge and answer for her decisions. And/or maybe Breyer. And then President Trump will nominate a man or woman who will, after the most vicious Senate review in the history of these United States, take a seat on the Court and join in the majority in overturning Roe v Wade. And then, abortion will not become illegal everywhere, Abortion will be decided by each of the fifty states, just as it was before Roe v Wade. Some states will have abortion on demand; some states will have severe restrictions; some states will have modest restrictions. But it will be the People who choose, not the Court.
    Choice, for Democrats, is only a good thing when it’s their particular choice. No other choices need be considered.

  • Over 50% of American want legal abortion access, 60% of women are pro-choice, 70% of Millennials are abortion access supporters. Abortion is a right based on the autonomy of a woman over her body. Ir is here to stay.

Comments are closed.