Christine Flowers: After the election losses, Republicans are abandoning their principles
In the wake of the off-year elections across the country this week, it became very clear that abortion was the single most important issue that motivated voters.
More specifically, it motivated voters to choose Democrats. In case after case when abortion was on the table, the pro-life movement lost. In Pennsylvania, abortion advocates ran deceptive and unethical ads against candidates they perceived to be pro-life, including the campaign and supporters of Daniel McCaffery who parlayed that obsession with “reproductive rights” on the part of progressives into a seat on the state Supreme Court. In painting his opponent Carolyn Carluccio as someone who would roll back abortion access in the state, something that is entirely irrelevant to her judicial duties and raised the stale bogeyman of red-clad handmaids, McCaffery and his crew showed that scare tactics, lies and pandering to the narcissism of certain female voters was highly effective.
As a female voter, and a lawyer who understands what the role of a judge is supposed to be, I am incredibly demoralized that a man like McCaffery will be presiding over important cases. After watching the way he operated during his campaign, I have to say that His Honor has none.
But Pennsylvania wasn’t even the worst example of how abortion has become the litmus test for decency in our society. In Ohio, a reliably red state that voted for Trump and just elected a Trump-backed U.S. Senator, voters passed a referendum which now enshrines abortion in the state constitution. The amendment essentially legalizes abortion at every stage of the pregnancy, because of this last paragraph:
“However, abortion may be prohibited after fetal viability. But in no case may such an abortion be prohibited if in the professional judgment of the pregnant patient’s treating physician it is necessary to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health.”
That is chilling. A viable child, one with the ability to live outside of the womb, can be destroyed in utero if it threatens the “health” of the mother. What Ohio has done is resurrect language from the companion case to Roe v. Wade namely, Doe v. Bolton, which allowed abortions at any stage if the health of the mother was threatened. That had been interpreted by lower courts as including the mental health of the mother.
I once hosted a radio debate with a rabbi who argued that he would support abortion for a woman in the ninth month, moments before birth, if the woman said she was suicidal and would kill herself if the baby was born. He was dead serious, and said that all he would need for confirmation about her state of mind was a notarized affidavit, signed off by a therapist. When I asked him if a medical professional was required, he said that he’d be fine with anyone trained in counseling battered women.
The Ohio amendment will give Ohio women the right to abort their babies at any time up to and including the moment of birth because of that last paragraph. Doe is back, with a vengeance. And there are many reasons why the mental health of a woman would be compromised by an unwanted abortion, including the list of reasons I posted on Twitter: a child diagnosed as having Down, a child that is going to be an economic burden, a child that is going to interrupt a career or further studies, and in some societies, a child that is the wrong gender. These are not figments of my imagination. These are already legitimate reasons for women to obtain abortions in other countries, and in some of our own 50 states. So there is very little daylight here between humanity, and inhumanity.
As chilling as that prospect is, something even more chilling occurred on Wednesday morning as the fallout from the Ohio referendum, and other election wins were analyzed: Republicans started retreating on their support for the unborn.
I expected the ghoulish cheers from women who had just staked their flags of victory on a bloody social battlefield. It’s no secret that progressive women are obsessed with having unlimited access to abortion, and have raised it to sacramental status in their secular lives. This was expected, and I was fully prepared to meet their cheers with jeers of my own.
What absolutely killed me, although I can’t feign much surprise, were the calls from conservatives to pull back on our opposition to abortion out of fear that we would never again win an election. Megyn Kelly, whose podcast I devour on a daily basis and who I generally respect, was livid about the GOP losses and basically said on her show that we needed to stop talking about abortion. In other words, we needed to tone down our support for the rights of unborn children. In even fewer words, we needed to shut up about human rights.
The asylum lawyer in me, the one who deals every day with the persecution of the innocent, recoils at that suggestion. Apparently, I’m in the minority, because there are a lot of people out there who think they need to apologize for their pro-life views or even worse, hide them. There was Nikki Haley at the debate, saying that she would never judge a pro-choice woman. And I thought to myself, then why even have an opinion on the sanctity of life to begin with? She lost my vote, right there.
There were lamentations from establishment Republicans saying that abortion was a “personal choice” and that we needed to stop incorporating the life issues into an official platform. There were people of faith saying that they didn’t want to push their religion on other people.
It’s funny, but I never realized that the issue of when life begins was a religious one. Science dictates the creation of human life, not the Gospels.
I realize, now, that I am without a party. If this trend continues, and I see more and more states celebrating the codification of a barbarity so obvious that the only way it can be stomached is if its supporters lie and cheat, I might have to simply give up on politics altogether, and focus my efforts on getting my own soul ready for judgment day. It looks like my efforts here are falling on deaf ears, and stone cold hearts.
Or to put it another way, what profit a man to win Ohio, but lose his soul?
Christine Flowers is an attorney and lifelong Philadelphian. @flowerlady61
Oh no! Christine Flowers might give up politics all together!!
I am not chilled a bit by a woman terminating a pregnancy that is a danger to her health. I’m chilled that in some places that right is in danger. Most people are. You’re in the minority, Flowers. Perhaps give up politics altogether??
The stunning irony when it comes to Flowers is that she’s completely fine with paying for Israel’s abortions with her tax dollars. Conservatives are every bit as “pro abortion” as she calls Democrats. Sean Hannity said “I’m pro life” but we have to be realistic. That’s how MOST Democrats feel. They wouldn’t have an abortion themselves but would not take the option off the table for a someone who chooses that option within the first trimester. Megyn Kelly has said abortion is “killing babies” but to win elections she suddenly wants to “kill babies”. Unless Flowers denounces Israel for the “baby killing” as she calls it, she’s a total hypocrite herself.
Let’s face it – too many Republican politicians mad political capital when Roe was the law of the land by spouting off about what they’d do knowing that the courts would strike their laws down. Now that we have Hobbs they have to walk their talk and they realize that catering to the extremists leaves them exposed. Now most are changing their tune even though they never really agreed with their “stated principles” to begin with.
It’s hard to fathom that someone as bankrupt in morality and critical thinking like Christine can hold a job as an attorney. I can’t imagine what a poor, desperate immigrant would think if they knew the background of Christine when she is assigned to them. Christine is a monster – plain and simple. In her world, ANY woman who chooses abortion – no matter the reason – is a murderer. It doesn’t matter if there is a real danger to the mother’s life. It doesn’t matter if the fetus is non-viable or will live a painful few days after birth. The mother is a murderer. But any amount of children maimed and killed in Gaza is of no concern to Christine and her uber-Catholic mentality. I suppose those of us who embrace rationality and reason should have a small amount of gratitude for cretins like Christine. She is a perfect example of why far right-wing nuts are losing their foothold. Keep up the good work, Christine! Pennsylvania is a swing state and you are sure to be a big help in keeping it blue next year.
I have to say, I am baffled how Flowers calls herself “pro life” by demanding women and girls give birth to a fertilized egg but she also demands Israel mow down Palestine children in their sleep. Anyone who disagrees that perhaps children of Palestine shouldn’t get killed in their sleep because of sins of others – she rages that we “hate Jews”. There’s no DOUBT that killing innocent 10 year old children in their sleep is murder.
Christine Flowers,
PA Senate candidate, Kathy Barnette, born from rape because her then-11-year-old mother was impregnated by a 21-year-old man, said she was ‘grateful’ for a serious national abortion discussion. All of these monsters that mock you and want to keep abortion should have to talk to Kathy Barnette in person. Sean Hannity and Trump are scum.
Barnette, who would have been the first Black female Republican in the Senate, a conservative author and retired military reservist, should be our PA senator but we have Fetterman. Mail-in ballots are corrupt.
Well, Michael… putting aside the fact that Kathy Barnette grew up to be a hateful and religious zealot who embraces islamophobia, homophobia and regularly promotes disproven conspiracy theories, the one essential fact that you are leaving out is that if abortion was legal or not when her mother was pregnant, her mother would not have been forced to have one. She would have had a CHOICE. You are saying that you want to FORCE an 11 year old to carry a rapists offspring to term. Ask yourself again who the monster really is.
Margaret, the “putting aside” part reveals a lot to me about your thoughts regarding human worth for people you may find disagreeable.
No, that is not what I am saying. That is what you think I am saying because you seem to have allowed rage to control you. There is a difference between a despicable and horrible crime where someone did not consent (or was too young to consent) to sex, and intentional abortion. They are two totally separate and different concepts. Those two things are not remotely the same act.
Absolutely nowhere in my comment did I say what you wrote. I still think that anyone who advocates for abortion should have to talk to Kathy Barnette, or someone like her, about it in person. Yes, I do think there are some reasons when an abortion is not murder:
Natural abortion – miscarriage. And this tragedy, and ways to grieve about it, are not discussed enough.
Therapeutic abortion – an effect during various medical procedures taken in an effort to save the life of the mother.
We are talking about what makes a human, a human. Abolitionists were told to sit down and shut up, too. The biology about when you become a human is not really up for debate. The entire conversation is about: when is it ok to kill a human during a pregnancy. Natural abortion means it already happened by fate. Therapeutic abortion as described above is same logic of self-defense. That’s it.
So a woman is 16 weeks pregnant. She finds out during a routine check up that the baby has severe deformities and will likely not live more than a few minutes / hours after birth. Should she be allowed to have an abortion? Or would you choose to force her to carry the fetus to term and deal with all of the grief and sadness that comes from the remainder of the term and then watching her newborn die?
Margaret,
My youngest sister was adopted by my parents and was born 4 months premature in the 1980s. Catholic Social Services asked my parents to foster her with the expectation they would bury her in a few weeks. She had a heart monitor that went off all the time. Everyone thought she would die, or at best be blind, deaf, and mentally challenged (whatever the term is these days.) She lived, the hole in her heart healed itself, she has perfect eyesight, perfect hearing, was a good athlete, she graduated college, and she is a successful businesswoman and runs her own business. Your hypothetical questions all have real life examples showing often actual outcomes do not align with the expectations. And I’m not writing to convince you of anything in these posts. I’m writing for the people out there who feel like me, but feel they aren’t in a position to say what they think. That’s why I gave money to some of my former work colleagues during Covid, so they could afford the international company’s mandatory bi-weekly Covid tests while they were trying to build their young families, because they didn’t want to experiment with the mandatory experimental mRNA alternative. Lots of tyranny out there. Fight it wherever you can. All evil requires to spread is for good people to do nothing. My answer to your question is: Instead of being convinced to end her baby’s human life, she should be able to get another opinion along with counseling. And that opens another can of worms about our healthcare. We can send 100 billion dollars to Ukrainians without any audits or accountability, but we can’t find the funding to help poor mothers. A very easy fix would be mandatory custody – mandatory – goes to the fathers, with rare exceptions as needed. There would be a lot less guys running around treating women poorly. Understand the incentives (and consequences) and you understand the results. Our government leaders would hate that because there would be far less people dependent on them. There is hardly any difference in expected outcome for prison for children raised in a family with one father and one mother vs those with just one FATHER. The expected outcome for prison for children raised in a family with just one mother is significant.
Thanks for going off on a ridiculous tangent and not answering a very direct question.
Within my other reply was indeed a direct answer to your hypothetical question: “Instead of being convinced to end her baby’s human life, she should be able to get another opinion along with counseling.” Again, every one of these hypothetical questions about “deformed” growing baby humans each has a real-life example where things turned out differently than what the doctors thought. No matter how deformed they are, they are humans. That’s the part pro-abortion people somehow rationalize away. “If we can just win an election” or “what if there was an outrageous tragedy” etc. They want to forget or pretend away one cold fact: Baby human being. The root problem is if we just rationalize away that someone isn’t a human being, we have endless problems.
Next thing we know there will be “sex education” (indoctrination), and radio songs glorifying murder, and drugs legalized for tax revenue. The rate of infection for gonorrhea, declined every year from 1950 through 1959, and the rate of syphilis infection was, by 1960, less than half of what it had been in 1950. Both trends reversed and skyrocketed after “sex education” became pervasive. Godless communists are tyrants to humanity..
Now you’re just a liar. Give me one example where a woman who is told her fetus is severely deformed and won’t survive was told she can’t get another opinion or “counseling.” And to say that every time a terminal deformity is diagnosed that it is incorrect or “turned out differently than what doctors thought”… Well that’s not only a lie but plainly stupid as well. Good luck with trying to be a rational, reasonable human for whatever years you have left.
>>>“Instead of being convinced to end her baby’s human life, she should be able to get another opinion along with counseling.” Again, every one of these hypothetical questions about “deformed” growing baby humans each has a real-life example where things turned out differently than what the doctors thought. <<<
Margaret:
The actual percentages of misdiagnoses and missed diagnoses vs correct, accurate diagnoses… experts put the rate at around 5%.
Do you advocate (recommend or support) murdering 5% of baby human pregnancies? That sounds… looking for the word… monstrous.
That rate of 5% is remarkable and frightening. Think about it this way: Of your last 20 healthcare provider visits that resulted in a diagnosis, no matter what that diagnosis, it’s possible that one of them was wrong.
Guess what? You hate men so much, Misandry, that you advocate killing babies despite slightly more than half of them being female. People lied to you. They were Godless fools, otherwise known as communists. Muslims are waiting to subject you… but there will be a Judeo-Christian to protect you. Maybe. Kindness is a luxury.
You do realize that Kathy Barnette’s mother was impregnated by rape when she was eleven or twelve? I could seriously vomit at men like you using that as a feel-good story. Her family pressured their child to keep a child from rape. It’s just as disgusting as your comment.
Pot, meet Kettle.
Do you often direct your vomit at men?