http://ethicsalarms.com/2022/05/07/andrew-sullivan-on-the-dobbs-leak-freakout
Andrew Sullivan On The Dobbs Leak Freakout
MAY 7, 2022 / JACK MARSHALL
It has been fascinating to watch Andrew Sullivan, a conservative turned >Trump-deranged progressive during from about 2015 on, express his rising >dismay at his adopted sides drift to totalitarianism as it uses lies
as metaphorical oars in the stream of public opinion.. Sullivan is too >emotional to be a reliable pundit, but hes smart and writes like an
angel. His current essay about how Democrats and progressives have
abandoned even the pretense of rationality is instructive.
He also mounts an impressive list of ridiculous statements by abortion
fans and supposedly trustworthy progressive commentators that are
signature significance. Nobody should trust people who say or write
garbage like this. Ever. Here are some of Andrews gems, only some of
which I had stumbled over earlier (the comments in parentheses are mine,
not Sullivans):
Roxane Gay tweeted:I have typed and deleted a great many comments What
do you say when nine people can dictate what happens to your body? Its >ridiculous and hateful. [That is not, of course, what a reversal of Roe >would mean, but disinformation has always been at the heart of the >pro-choice position.]
The Atlantics Adam Serwer announced that the court had abolished the
entire 20th century. Yep: no more suffrage for women! Jim Crow now!
Jessica Valenti: Stripping women of their humanity and rights isnt a >consequence of the pro-life agenda, its the entire point.
The Washington Posts now thoroughly insane Jennifer Rubin: The
right-wing justices and their supporters appear ready to reject one of
the Founders core principles: that religion shall not be imposed by >government edict. (The smear that opposing Roe constitutes a religious
edict is truly despicable, and a lot of abortion fans are stooping to it.)
Kurt Andersen another one:It really is kind of remarkable that only one
in five Americans call themselves Catholic, but of the Supreme Court
majority apparently about to permit abortion to be outlawed, all but one
are Catholic and that one was raised Catholic.
Kamala Harris (who supports her adversarys position every time she
tries to counter it, whatever the topic) was, predicably, Kamala-like:
Those Republican leaders who are trying to weaponize the use of the law >against women. Well we say, How dare they? How dare they tell a woman
what she can do and cannot do with her own body? How dare they? How dare
they try to stop her from determining her own future? How dare they try
to deny women their rights and their freedoms?
To this and more, Sullivan observes,
The premise here is that all women support abortion rights. But there is
no serious gender gap on this question. In fact, a majority of
pro-lifers are women, not men. So Harris is effectively saying: how
dare women be allowed a voice in this debate?
Within minutes of the SCOTUS leak, moreover, we were told it means that >before long, interracial marriages will be banned in a country where
94 percent support them! Imagine Clarence Thomas divorcing himself by >jurisprudence.What strikes me most in these takes is the underlying
contempt for and suspicion of the democratic process from many of the
same people who insist they want to save it. How dare voters have a say
on abortion rights! The issue which divides the country today as much
as it has for decades is one that apparently cannot ever be put up for
a vote. On this question, Democrats really do seem to believe that seven
men alone should make that decision once, in 1973.
Of course Sullivan, being Sullivan, has to ring the obligatory a pox on
both their houses bell lest he risk being tagged as Republican or a >conservative by his LGBTQ peer group. The emotive hyperbole [is] par
for the course in a country where every discourse is now dialed to
eleven, he writes. In fact, Democrats and progressives have lapped the
other side of the political spectrum and some since November 2016, and
it would be ennobling if Sullivan had the courage and integrity to admit
it. But he doesnt. Too bad.
He also repeats a current bit of spin and misinformation that the Left
has been bellowing this week. If you look at polling, there is very
little support in America for a total ban let alone one that doesnt
make exceptions for rape and incest, he writes. Gallups polling
suggests that a whopping 80 percent of Americans want to keep abortion
legal, either entirely (32 percent) or with some restrictions (48
percent). Only 18 percent want it banned entirely a position many >Republicans are now forced to take. That should be a Democratic dream!
1. Well,you know, polls.
2. Thats one way of looking at it.
3. It buries the real polling revelations.
Over at the Washington Examiner, Tim Carney points out that on both the >issues of , Mississippis abortion law (banning abortions after 15
weeks, contrary to Roe) and the substance of Roe v. Wade itself, the
draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito represents the majority view of
the public:
Begin with the law in question here: Mississippis 15-week abortion ban.
A very recent YouGov poll on abortion found that 21% would ban all
abortions, an additional 20% would ban abortions after a heartbeat is >detected (six weeks), another 13% would ban them after the first
trimester (13 weeks), and an additional 10% would ban abortion after 15
weeks which is what Mississippi does.
Add it together, and it means that 64% of people in the United States
believe Mississippis law is either the right call or too liberal on >abortion. To uphold this law is to side with the opinion of nearly
two-thirds of America on abortion policy.
Would Andrews description give you that impression?
On the matter of abortion itself, Carney writes,
A poll on Roe and the Supreme Court from YouGov asked whether the
federal government or the state governments should set abortion law, and >opinions were fairly split leaning 44% to 36% in favor of the federal >government setting it. Of those who said the federal government should
set abortion policy, only 24% said that within the federal government,
the judicial branch is best suited to deciding on abortions legality. >Combine those last two questions, and thats 24% of 44% (about 11%) of
the country that believes the Supreme Court should be setting abortion >policy. Only that blue slice in the poll below sides with Roe on the >constitutional question.
Carney concludes, So why do so many people tell pollsters they think
Roe shouldnt be overturned? Its because most people dont understand
Roe and dont understand that overturning it returns the issue to
lawmakers and the states.
And Democrats, the news media and abortion fanatics want to keep as many >people confused and furious as possible.
Sullivan concludes,
Leftists, if they could only snap out of their disdain for democracy,
can make a powerful case for moderation on this issue against >right-extremism. To do that, of course, they will have to back some >restrictions on abortion in some states which some seem very reluctant
to do and even allow some diversity of opinion within their own ranks. >There are forces aiming to prevent that forces that Biden could
confront if he hadnt long been beaten into learned helplessness. But
surely someone can take the initiative.
So lets stop the hyperventilation and get back to democracy. Persuade >people, if you can. Get them out to vote. Stop demonizing those you
disagree with and compromise with them in office, however difficult that
may be. What Roe did was kickstart the extreme cultural polarization
that has defined and blighted the last few decades of American politics. >Maybe the end of Roe can mark the beginning of a return to living
together, and negotiating a way to make that bearable.
Michael Ejercito wrote:
http://ethicsalarms.com/2022/05/07/andrew-sullivan-on-the-dobbs-leak-freakout
Andrew Sullivan On The Dobbs Leak Freakout
MAY 7, 2022 / JACK MARSHALL
It has been fascinating to watch Andrew Sullivan, a conservative turned
Trump-deranged progressive during from about 2015 on, express his rising
dismay at his adopted “side’s” drift to totalitarianism as it uses lies
as metaphorical oars in the stream of public opinion.. Sullivan is too
emotional to be a reliable pundit, but he’s smart and writes like an
angel. His current essay about how Democrats and progressives have
abandoned even the pretense of rationality is instructive.
He also mounts an impressive list of ridiculous statements by abortion
fans and supposedly trustworthy progressive commentators that are
signature significance. Nobody should trust people who say or write
garbage like this. Ever. Here are some of Andrew’s gems, only some of
which I had stumbled over earlier (the comments in parentheses are mine,
not Sullivan’s):
Roxane Gay tweeted:“I have typed and deleted a great many comments What
do you say when nine people can dictate what happens to your body? It’s
ridiculous and hateful.” [That is not, of course, what a reversal of Roe >> would mean, but disinformation has always been at the heart of the
“pro-choice” position.]
“The Atlantic’s Adam Serwer announced that the court had abolished the >> entire 20th century. Yep: no more suffrage for women! Jim Crow now!”
Jessica Valenti: “Stripping women of their humanity and rights isn’t a >> consequence of the ‘pro-life’ agenda, it’s the entire point.”
The Washington Post’s now thoroughly insane Jennifer Rubin: “The
right-wing justices and their supporters appear ready to reject one of
the Founders’ core principles: that religion shall not be imposed by
government edict.” (The smear that opposing Roe constitutes a religious
edict is truly despicable, and a lot of abortion fans are stooping to it.) >>
Kurt Andersen another one:“It really is kind of remarkable that only one >> in five Americans call themselves Catholic, but of the Supreme Court
majority apparently about to permit abortion to be outlawed, all but one
are Catholic and that one was raised Catholic.”
Kamala Harris (who supports her adversary’s position every time she
tries to counter it, whatever the topic) was, predicably, Kamala-like:
Those Republican leaders who are trying to weaponize the use of the law
against women. Well we say, ‘How dare they?’ How dare they tell a woman >> what she can do and cannot do with her own body? How dare they? How dare
they try to stop her from determining her own future? How dare they try
to deny women their rights and their freedoms?
To this and more, Sullivan observes,
The premise here is that all women support abortion rights. But there is
no serious gender gap on this question. In fact, a majority of
“pro-lifers” are women, not men. So Harris is effectively saying: how
dare women be allowed a voice in this debate?
Within minutes of the SCOTUS leak, moreover, we were told it means that
before long, interracial marriages will be banned … in a country where
94 percent support them! Imagine Clarence Thomas divorcing himself by
jurisprudence….What strikes me most in these takes is the underlying
contempt for and suspicion of the democratic process — from many of the
same people who insist they want to save it. How dare voters have a say
on abortion rights! The issue — which divides the country today as much
as it has for decades — is one that apparently cannot ever be put up for >> a vote. On this question, Democrats really do seem to believe that seven
men alone should make that decision — once, in 1973.
Of course Sullivan, being Sullivan, has to ring the obligatory “a pox on >> both their houses” bell lest he risk being tagged as Republican or a
conservative by his LGBTQ peer group. “The emotive hyperbole [is] par
for the course in a country where every discourse is now dialed to
eleven,” he writes. In fact, Democrats and progressives have lapped the
other side of the political spectrum and some since November 2016, and
it would be ennobling if Sullivan had the courage and integrity to admit
it. But he doesn’t. Too bad.
He also repeats a current bit of spin and misinformation that the Left
has been bellowing this week. “If you look at polling, there is very
little support in America for a total ban — let alone one that doesn’t >> make exceptions for rape and incest, ” he writes. “Gallup’s polling
suggests that a whopping 80 percent of Americans want to keep abortion
legal, either entirely (32 percent) or with some restrictions (48
percent). Only 18 percent want it banned entirely — a position many
Republicans are now forced to take. That should be a Democratic dream!”
1. Well,you know, polls.
2. That’s one way of looking at it.
3. It buries the real polling revelations.
Over at the Washington Examiner, Tim Carney points out that on both the
issues of , Mississippi’s abortion law (banning abortions after 15
weeks, contrary to Roe) and the substance of Roe v. Wade itself, the
draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito represents the majority view of
the public:
Begin with the law in question here: Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban. >> A very recent YouGov poll on abortion found that 21% would ban all
abortions, an additional 20% would ban abortions after a heartbeat is
detected (six weeks), another 13% would ban them after the first
trimester (13 weeks), and an additional 10% would ban abortion after 15
weeks — which is what Mississippi does.
Add it together, and it means that 64% of people in the United States
believe Mississippi’s law is either the right call or too liberal on
abortion. To uphold this law is to side with the opinion of nearly
two-thirds of America on abortion policy.
Would Andrew’s description give you that impression?
On the matter of abortion itself, Carney writes,
A poll on Roe and the Supreme Court from YouGov… asked whether the
federal government or the state governments should set abortion law, and
opinions were fairly split — leaning 44% to 36% in favor of the federal
government setting it. Of those who said the federal government should
set abortion policy, only 24% said that within the federal government,
the judicial branch “is best suited to deciding on abortion’s legality.”
Combine those last two questions, and that’s 24% of 44% (about 11%) of
the country that believes the Supreme Court should be setting abortion
policy. Only that blue slice in the poll below sides with Roe on the
constitutional question.
Carney concludes, “So why do so many people tell pollsters they think
Roe shouldn’t be overturned? It’s because most people don’t understand >> Roe and don’t understand that overturning it returns the issue to
lawmakers and the states.”
And Democrats, the news media and abortion fanatics want to keep as many
people confused and furious as possible.
Sullivan concludes,
Leftists, if they could only snap out of their disdain for democracy,
can make a powerful case for moderation on this issue against
right-extremism. To do that, of course, they will have to back some
restrictions on abortion in some states — which some seem very reluctant >> to do — and even allow some diversity of opinion within their own ranks. >> There are forces aiming to prevent that — forces that Biden could
confront if he hadn’t long been beaten into learned helplessness. But
surely someone can take the initiative.
So let’s stop the hyperventilation and get back to democracy. Persuade
people, if you can. Get them out to vote. Stop demonizing those you
disagree with and compromise with them in office, however difficult that
may be. What Roe did was kickstart the extreme cultural polarization
that has defined and blighted the last few decades of American politics.
Maybe the end of Roe can mark the beginning of a return to living
together, and negotiating a way to make that bearable.
Tragically, abortions are the terrible consequence of http://bit.ly/terribly_hungry (Genesis 25:32) people misbehaving
terribly like http://bit.ly/h_angry DJT.
Suggested further reading:
https://tinyurl.com/Psalm0201
The only healthy way to stop abortions is to http://tinyurl.com/ConvinceItForward (John 15:12) to be http://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) instead.
Indeed, I am wonderfully hungry ( http://bit.ly/Philippians4_12 )
) and hope you, Michael, also have a healthy appetite too.
So how are you ?
HeartDoc Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
Michael Ejercito wrote:
http://ethicsalarms.com/2022/05/07/andrew-sullivan-on-the-dobbs-leak-freakout
Andrew Sullivan On The Dobbs Leak Freakout
MAY 7, 2022 / JACK MARSHALL
It has been fascinating to watch Andrew Sullivan, a conservative turned
Trump-deranged progressive during from about 2015 on, express his rising >>> dismay at his adopted sides drift to totalitarianism as it uses lies
as metaphorical oars in the stream of public opinion.. Sullivan is too
emotional to be a reliable pundit, but hes smart and writes like an
angel. His current essay about how Democrats and progressives have
abandoned even the pretense of rationality is instructive.
He also mounts an impressive list of ridiculous statements by abortion
fans and supposedly trustworthy progressive commentators that are
signature significance. Nobody should trust people who say or write
garbage like this. Ever. Here are some of Andrews gems, only some of
which I had stumbled over earlier (the comments in parentheses are mine, >>> not Sullivans):
Roxane Gay tweeted:I have typed and deleted a great many comments What
do you say when nine people can dictate what happens to your body? Its
ridiculous and hateful. [That is not, of course, what a reversal of Roe >>> would mean, but disinformation has always been at the heart of the
pro-choice position.]
The Atlantics Adam Serwer announced that the court had abolished the
entire 20th century. Yep: no more suffrage for women! Jim Crow now!
Jessica Valenti: Stripping women of their humanity and rights isnt a
consequence of the pro-life agenda, its the entire point.
The Washington Posts now thoroughly insane Jennifer Rubin: The
right-wing justices and their supporters appear ready to reject one of
the Founders core principles: that religion shall not be imposed by
government edict. (The smear that opposing Roe constitutes a religious
edict is truly despicable, and a lot of abortion fans are stooping to it.) >>>
Kurt Andersen another one:It really is kind of remarkable that only one >>> in five Americans call themselves Catholic, but of the Supreme Court
majority apparently about to permit abortion to be outlawed, all but one >>> are Catholic and that one was raised Catholic.
Kamala Harris (who supports her adversarys position every time she
tries to counter it, whatever the topic) was, predicably, Kamala-like:
Those Republican leaders who are trying to weaponize the use of the law
against women. Well we say, How dare they? How dare they tell a woman
what she can do and cannot do with her own body? How dare they? How dare >>> they try to stop her from determining her own future? How dare they try
to deny women their rights and their freedoms?
To this and more, Sullivan observes,
The premise here is that all women support abortion rights. But there is >>> no serious gender gap on this question. In fact, a majority of
pro-lifers are women, not men. So Harris is effectively saying: how
dare women be allowed a voice in this debate?
Within minutes of the SCOTUS leak, moreover, we were told it means that
before long, interracial marriages will be banned in a country where
94 percent support them! Imagine Clarence Thomas divorcing himself by
jurisprudence.What strikes me most in these takes is the underlying
contempt for and suspicion of the democratic process from many of the
same people who insist they want to save it. How dare voters have a say
on abortion rights! The issue which divides the country today as much
as it has for decades is one that apparently cannot ever be put up for >>> a vote. On this question, Democrats really do seem to believe that seven >>> men alone should make that decision once, in 1973.
Of course Sullivan, being Sullivan, has to ring the obligatory a pox on >>> both their houses bell lest he risk being tagged as Republican or a
conservative by his LGBTQ peer group. The emotive hyperbole [is] par
for the course in a country where every discourse is now dialed to
eleven, he writes. In fact, Democrats and progressives have lapped the
other side of the political spectrum and some since November 2016, and
it would be ennobling if Sullivan had the courage and integrity to admit >>> it. But he doesnt. Too bad.
He also repeats a current bit of spin and misinformation that the Left
has been bellowing this week. If you look at polling, there is very
little support in America for a total ban let alone one that doesnt
make exceptions for rape and incest, he writes. Gallups polling
suggests that a whopping 80 percent of Americans want to keep abortion
legal, either entirely (32 percent) or with some restrictions (48
percent). Only 18 percent want it banned entirely a position many
Republicans are now forced to take. That should be a Democratic dream!
1. Well,you know, polls.
2. Thats one way of looking at it.
3. It buries the real polling revelations.
Over at the Washington Examiner, Tim Carney points out that on both the
issues of , Mississippis abortion law (banning abortions after 15
weeks, contrary to Roe) and the substance of Roe v. Wade itself, the
draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito represents the majority view of
the public:
Begin with the law in question here: Mississippis 15-week abortion ban. >>> A very recent YouGov poll on abortion found that 21% would ban all
abortions, an additional 20% would ban abortions after a heartbeat is
detected (six weeks), another 13% would ban them after the first
trimester (13 weeks), and an additional 10% would ban abortion after 15
weeks which is what Mississippi does.
Add it together, and it means that 64% of people in the United States
believe Mississippis law is either the right call or too liberal on
abortion. To uphold this law is to side with the opinion of nearly
two-thirds of America on abortion policy.
Would Andrews description give you that impression?
On the matter of abortion itself, Carney writes,
A poll on Roe and the Supreme Court from YouGov asked whether the
federal government or the state governments should set abortion law, and >>> opinions were fairly split leaning 44% to 36% in favor of the federal
government setting it. Of those who said the federal government should
set abortion policy, only 24% said that within the federal government,
the judicial branch is best suited to deciding on abortions legality. >>> Combine those last two questions, and thats 24% of 44% (about 11%) of
the country that believes the Supreme Court should be setting abortion
policy. Only that blue slice in the poll below sides with Roe on the
constitutional question.
Carney concludes, So why do so many people tell pollsters they think
Roe shouldnt be overturned? Its because most people dont understand
Roe and dont understand that overturning it returns the issue to
lawmakers and the states.
And Democrats, the news media and abortion fanatics want to keep as many >>> people confused and furious as possible.
Sullivan concludes,
Leftists, if they could only snap out of their disdain for democracy,
can make a powerful case for moderation on this issue against
right-extremism. To do that, of course, they will have to back some
restrictions on abortion in some states which some seem very reluctant >>> to do and even allow some diversity of opinion within their own ranks. >>> There are forces aiming to prevent that forces that Biden could
confront if he hadnt long been beaten into learned helplessness. But
surely someone can take the initiative.
So lets stop the hyperventilation and get back to democracy. Persuade
people, if you can. Get them out to vote. Stop demonizing those you
disagree with and compromise with them in office, however difficult that >>> may be. What Roe did was kickstart the extreme cultural polarization
that has defined and blighted the last few decades of American politics. >>> Maybe the end of Roe can mark the beginning of a return to living
together, and negotiating a way to make that bearable.
Tragically, abortions are the terrible consequence of
http://bit.ly/terribly_hungry (Genesis 25:32) people misbehaving
terribly like http://bit.ly/h_angry DJT.
Suggested further reading:
https://tinyurl.com/Psalm0201
The only healthy way to stop abortions is to
http://tinyurl.com/ConvinceItForward (John 15:12) to be
http://WonderfullyHungry.org (Philippians 4:12) instead.
Indeed, I am wonderfully hungry ( http://bit.ly/Philippians4_12 )
and hope you, Michael, also have a healthy appetite too.
So how are you ?
I am wonderfully hungry!
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 50:40:06 |
| Calls: | 6,649 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,200 |
| Messages: | 5,330,212 |