Jay Lake: Writer

Don’t forget the death penalty. There’s a correlation between death penalty supporters and the so-called pro-life. Supporting it is not “pro life” and even if you make exceptions for horrible criminals — the system has a non-negligible conviction rate for innocent people. The number of innocent people put to death to ensure “the justice” in the death penalty takes it out.

Agree with the other hypocrisies listed above.

As you might suspect, Jay, we disagree.

If I thought that implementing that entire program would allow us to eliminate abortion on demand — if it would “reduce[ it] to an occasionally necessary medical procedure” — then I’d say it might even be worth it. But we know that progressives don’t make their arguments based on how many unborn children they save: Abortion on demand is a right, they say, because a woman has the right to control her own body, etc. Thus necessity has nothing to do with the abortion argument, except in a tiny percentage of cases of actual life-threatening pregnancies.

I believe that what would really happen if you implemented the agenda you outline is a further degradation of our economy and our freedom, which eventually leads to worse conditions and more despair, not less, which leads to more abortion, not less. I know that when you subsidize something you get more of it, which is why we have more unwed mothers and broken homes than ever. I believe that charity works best when it doesn’t come from a government program — and especially when the poor and the well-off can look each other in the eye.

I know we disagree, and I’m not going to convince you otherwise, but I felt like I needed to point out your blinders on this one. I’m not against your agenda because I’m not pro-life; it’s because I don’t believe that your agenda furthers the cause of life, and is especially detrimental to the cause of preventing abortions.