Reflections From a Murky Pond

As Far As I’m Concerned Abortion Is Murder

That’s right. In my opinion the deliberate killing off of unborn-as-yet children is murder. It should, insofar as I’m concerned, be treated exactly as any other instance of such a crime – homicide, most often 1st Degree Homicide since it’s normally a premeditated act of killing on the parts of both the woman and the abortionist.

And therein is the rub as it were. Abortion is the commission of the crime of homicide and needs to be treated exactly the same in ways as any other instance of the crime.

Justifiable Homicide

If either the mother-to-be or the involved medical professional is of the strongly held and reasonable belief that bringing the child within her to term would be a clear and present threat to her life, then the abortion must be considered a case of justifiable homicide.

The Dead Can’t Be Killed

Rather obviously – but still a recurring point of contention apparently – if the unborn child is already dead, he or she can’t be killed and so, hence, he or she cannot be unlawfully killed, i.e., murdered. If any crime could be assessed in such circumstances it would rightly be assessed upon any who refused to remove the unborn child’s corpse from the woman’s body.

Reasonable Actions

Undertaking reasonable actions that in some statistically insignificant numbers of cases could lead to the death of a viable child in utero is not murder. Hence, the use of chemical contraceptives – including the correct use of Plan B – does not fall within the scope of homicide any more than anyone driving a car, which might result in an accident which might in turn result in the death of an unborn child does so.

Withdrawal of Life Support

While potentially problematical in detail and execution, it is my opinion that ending the life of an unborn child who will not survive in any real and functional manner past their birth is not murder. It is merely the withdrawal of life support, with the mother having given informed consent for such removal.

No Attainder!

And no; I make no exceptions in the cases of rape and/or incest. To kill the child of such unions is an attainder and quite specifically a particularly extreme form of “corruption of the blood,” wherein the child is punished for the crimes of the parent(s).

~*~

And there is my opinion, in some detail, on abortion and on abortion itself only. In this post I’m not venturing my opinions on ancillary issues and laws which surround it and which are often used as arguments in favor of killing off unborn children.

Tags: Abortion | America | Baby Killers | Crime | Ethics and Morality | Homocide | Infanticide | Law | Logic | Murder | Pro-Choice | Pro-Life | Society

This entry was posted on Monday, May 20th, 2019 at 9:35 am and is filed under Ethics & Morality, Politics, Society. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Sometimes you’ve got to wonder about Bernie Sanders – wonder to the point of thinking long and hard about revising one’s opinion of Hillary’s DNC stealing the 2016 Democrat Nomination from him. This is one of those times since Bernie made it clear that he wants the Felon Vote.

The question was stark: Would you support enfranchising incarcerated people like the Boston Marathon bomber or convicted rapists?

The answer Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont gave was starker: Yes.

“I think the right to vote is inherent to our democracy,” Mr. Sanders said during a town hall-style event on CNN this past week. “Yes, even for terrible people.”

It was a response that seemed designed to appeal to criminal justice advocates, to say nothing of people of color, who are disproportionately incarcerated.

It also immediately touched off the latest policy debate of the Democratic primary: Among the candidates asked about the issue recently were Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Senator Kamala Harris of California and Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Ind., all of whom signaled, with varying levels of intensity, that they did not agree with Mr. Sanders.

— Bernie Sanders

Yes, that is Bernie’s Folsom Pledge – to grant convicted murderers, rapists, pedophiles, terrorists, and any all other felons the “right” to vote while they’re imprisoned for their various and sundry heinous crimes.

Then, Bernie has always had a problem with the Black Vote and this is the sort of implicit pandering that might be needed to get him some of it.

What Could Go Wrong?

Let’s forget for the moment that allowing the worst and most vile individuals who have been rightfully cast out of our society to have a say in our society is deeply offensive to America’s normative majority. Let’s also forget for the moment anything and everything about federal elections. While important, the impact of the convict vote on these things is secondary to other, more critical concerns.

No. Focus instead more firmly upon where and when these convicts – overwhelmingly (73%) Democrat – could have a real impact and cause real harm. Focus on the State, County, and Local elections.

Imagine, if you will, the great harm that incarcerated felons could do in those elections, especially ones for: Police Chiefs, Sheriffs, District Attorneys, Prosecutors, and/or Judges. Remember, these are elections with a much smaller electorate and, hence, the population of a prison there could and likely would greatly impact the outcome(s).

Bernie Needs To Stay In His Lane

Voting, be it for offices within each state or for elected federal offices is a matter that is wholly within the purview of each state. The federal government can only step in to prevent certain broad abuses, e.g., denying the “right” to vote based on race (15th Amendment), sex (19th Amendment), or advanced age (26th Amendment). As such, it is grossly inappropriate for any Presidential candidate to weigh in on this matter and to use it as a plank in his campaign’s platform.

Tags: 2020 Elections | America | Bernie | Bernie Sanders | Crime | Criminals | Democratic Primary | Democrats | Felons | Politics | Voting

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 1st, 2019 at 10:33 am and is filed under 2020 Elections, Politics. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

With a large percentage of the mayors, city officials, and some high-profile residents of the major Sanctuary Cities taking serious umbrage at President Trump consideration of releasing detained illegal aliens in those cities and only in those cities, are we at sanctuary’s end?

The short answer is, of course, no. These Left-wing politicians and celebrities are not self-aware enough to even recognize their own hypocrisy. Hence, they will maintain the status quo if at all possible so that they can have it both ways, each whenever it suits them.

Tags: America | Crime | Democrats | Hypocrisy | Illegal Aliens | Illegal Immigrants | Illegal Immigration | Law | Leftists | Liberals | Politics | Progressives | Sanctuary Cities | Trump

This entry was posted on Sunday, April 28th, 2019 at 9:28 am and is filed under Politics. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

It seems that the Dems and their Liberal and Progressive rabble have themselves a runaway slave in the form of Van Jones. It seems that Van Jones went “off script” and “off the plantation” by daring to compliment conservatives at CPAC over their so-far seemingly net successful efforts in Prison Reform.

This, obviously, viciously “triggered” the Left.

What Jones said:

“The conservative movement in this country, unfortunately from my point of view, is now the leader on this issue of reform,” Jones said. He pointed to Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant, Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal and Secretary of Energy and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry as Republicans who were able to “cut the prison population and crime at the same time.”

“What you’re seeing now is Republican governors being tough on the dollars. Tough on crime and shrinking the prison population,” he said.

“This is supposed to be my issue!” Jones exclaimed. “You are stealing my issue!” he told the cheering conservative crowd. 

“I’m going to stay in my party,” he told the audience as some of them indicated he should come over to their side. “But take some dadgum credit for being smart. Take some dadgum credit for getting it right.”

Of course, the Dems – especially their ever-angry minority sharecroppers – were quick to attack Jones over his “race treason,” labeling him a worthless “Sell-Out” and lamenting that he no longer seemed to hate Whites enough to be still considered “Black Enough.”

Tags: America | Black Community | Blacks | Conservatives | CPAC | Crime | Democrats | Hate | Liberals | Orthodoxy | Politics | Prison | Prison Reform | Progressives | Racial Politics | Racism | Slavery | Van Jones

This entry was posted on Sunday, March 3rd, 2019 at 8:35 am and is filed under Politics, Society. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Words can be important, but both actions and the results that really matter. Hence, a POTUS – any POTUS – should be judged upon his record and the records, if any, that he sets. 😉

Tags: #MAGA | 2016 Elections | 2020 Elections | America | Blacks | Clinton | Crime | Employment | Obama | Politicians | Politics | Trump | Welfare

This entry was posted on Thursday, October 18th, 2018 at 6:51 am and is filed under 2016 Election, 2018 Elections, 2020 Elections, Politics. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.