"Après nous, l'apocalypse."
Law exists to justify retribution.
All laws end with a death penalty.
If you refuse to pay a parking ticket, and resist efforts to impound your vehicle or arrest you, eventually you will be killed by the authorities.
The state can't afford to let you ignore their authority and walk away scot free.
Laws exist to codify behavior, including retribution.
Most people take a normal risk assessment re law: In communities where parking enforcement is strict, they're less likely to run the risk of a parking ticket. In communities where it is lax, they're more likely to risk violations.
For 99% of human behavior, laws are sensible means of setting public boundaries re a whole host of behaviors: Parking, health codes, zoning, property rights, violent offenses, etc. It lets people know the limits to their behavior and, even when a law is trivial, people tend to obey them because at least they know where the boundaries are.
A determined person will violate the law, whether through selfish criminal intent or principled ethical stand. A just society constantly examines itself and its principles and questions whether its laws are adequately serving the people.
If they're not, the laws should be changed.
In the specifics of abortion, we know the recent laws are not being passed from any concern over the fetus because they are not accompanied by laws expanding health and social protections to mothers and children.
Rather, they are passed in order to appease certain voters who seek to exert dominance and control over the majority of the population. They are doing this now because it is literally their last chance: Changing population demographics are about to permanently wrest control from them and distribute it more justly among the population at large.
"Apres moi, le deluge" has become "Après nous, l'apocalypse."
No sane person is pro-abortion.
Every pro-choice person is delighted for the woman who chooses of her own free will and consent to bear a child.
We simply refuse to pass judgment, much less mete out retribution, against the woman who chooses to terminate her pregnancy.
Most pro-choice progressives are happy to work with genuine pro-life advocates.
Like progressives, genuine pro-lifers want every pregnancy to be a desired one, and for women to be assured that their health and the health of their child, as well as their food and shelter and the child’s education, will be covered.
Intelligent governments recognize it is far more cost effective to take care of those basic needs now rather than pay ten times their cost or more in the future when they become full blown problems affecting society at large.
But by and large, the people today fighting against a woman’s right to choose are not pro-life but rather are forced-birthers.
They want to codify their behavior so that they can dominate and penalized those whom they deem inferior.
They don’t care at all for a woman’s health or her child’s life; all they want is the legal authority to pass judgment and retribution.
© Buzz Dixon