WATCH: Roe V. Wade Overturned: Should We Care If US Medusas Abort?

Abortion, Law, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Morality, Paleolibertarianism, Political Economy, Private Property, Republicans

“An adult woman, however loathsome, either owns herself and everything inside her or doesn’t. You can’t ‘own’ yourself with the exception of your uterus or in conjunction with other busybodies.”–ilana

NEW on the “Hard Truth” podcast, with David Vance and myself: “Roe V. Wade Overturned: Should We Care If US Medusas Abort?”

As I see it, libertarianism (the conservative kind) offers the fairest position to both sides, who are stuck, peering at one another above the parapets …

An adult woman, however loathsome, either owns herself and everything inside her or doesn’t. You can’t ‘own’ yourself with the exception of your uterus or in conjunction with other busybodies.”  (From the upcoming companion column.) I don’t see how you get away from that reality. David is sympathetic, but worries that Moloch worship has taken hold.

He believes that life is sacred and protecting it is important. David and ilana agree that the conservative movement makes a mistake by overly focusing on abortion.

Please SUBSCRIBE HERE. Subscribing helps us grow. It also alerts you to our new content.

Roe V. Wade Overturned: Should We Care If US Medusas Abort?”

NOT Mother Material: Women Who Behave Worse Than Primates In Estrus

Abortion, Africa, Argument, Constitution, COVID-19, Crime, Democrats, Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Federalism, Law, Republicans, Sex

That the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) finally delivered a decision returning and restoring power to the states on this one issue, abortion, is as it should be. If her state outlaws abortion; a woman can still board a Greyhound bus to get the procedure elsewhere.

The ethical elegance of the libertarian argument has been reiterated before in this space:

“Women have the right to screw and scrape out their insides to their heart’s content.”

Trojans, Trivora or a termination: An Americans woman has the right to purchase contraception, abortifacients and abortions, provided … she pays for them. For like herself, America is packed with many other sovereign individuals. Some of these individuals do not approve of the products and procedures mentioned. Americans who oppose contraception, abortifacients and abortion must be similarly respected in their rights of self-ownership.

Taxpayers who oppose these products and procedures ought to have an equal right to dispense of what is theirs—their property—in accordance with the dictates of their conscience. America’s adult women may terminate their pregnancies (to the exclusion of late-term infanticide).

What America’s manifestly silly sex does not have the right to do is to rope other, presumably free Americans into supplying them with or paying for their reproductive choices. The rights of self-ownership and freedom of conscience apply to all Americans.

Late-term abortion, generally, must always be outlawed (I realize I owe you argument, yet have provided only assertion. My apologies; you’ll have to wait).  One could argue that, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the deciding case brought before the SCOTUS, did concern late-term abortion, with the state of Mississippi banning abortion after 15 weeks:

The Jackson clinic and one of its doctors sued Mississippi officials in federal court, saying the state’s law was unconstitutional.
A federal district court and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the clinic, blocking Mississippi’s law. But the state appealed to the Supreme Court, which put the case on its docket.

Call it real federalism—on this one vexing issue—although, any reluctant state taxpayers will still be on the hook for such services. And , federalism has hardly been revived. Powers have never been more concentrated in the Federal Frankenstein, which has never been more intractable and tyrannical.

Have we not just lived through three years in which the Pharma State has consolidated power as never before? On pain of taking the Covid jab, the state has de facto established license to shutter a subject’s business, deny him freedom of movement, quarantine, fire, and separate him from loved ones. Sorry: Abortion does not rate a mention on a serious country’s scale of priorities.

Law is force. Outlawing abortion, in the midst of a true crime wave, and a systemic breakdown in ordered liberty, implies the creation of a new category of criminal, consisting of the abortion seeking “spiteful mutants” and their healthcare aids, to be jailed for the commission of an abortion.

Another pesky detail: However much one disdains abortion, one can’t get away from self-ownership. You have no right to take custody of another’s body. A woman, however loathsome, either owns herself and everything in her or doesn’t. You can’t “own” yourself in conjunction with other busybodies.

The piss-poor quality of the now-overturned Roe V. Wade jurisprudence has never been in question. Wrote a perspicacious reader: “There were 50 state laws on abortion until the Republican-appointed Harry Blackmun decided to merge the musings of his Mayo Clinic physician buddies and the vaguely written 14th Amendment into a stream-of-consciousness halachic decision known as Roe v. Wade. Since then, 55% of black pregnancies get aborted compared to a third of Hispanics and 11% of white.”

These statistics are significant in the context of crime. John J. Donohue and Steven D. Levitt (2001) had established that “the legalization of abortion, in the early 1970s, played an important role in the crime drop of the 1990s.” Ceteris paribus, “legalized abortion will account for persistent declines of 1% a year in crime over the next two decades.”

Reversal of the trend is inevitable.

Myself, I don’t have sticky fingers and have no desire to control another’s uterus. Let progressive women—especially the fulminating fiends rioting across the country—suction their wombs for all I care. As evolutionary psychologist Ed Dutton has suggested, “Some people voluntarily resigning from the gene pool is a good thing.”

The consequences of similar efforts against family planning in the undeveloped world have been described less daintily by Kevin Myers, an Irish columnist who was banished from the ossified, idiotic media:

The wide-eyed boy-child we saved, 20 years or so ago, is now a low IQ, AK 47-bearing moron, siring children whenever the whim takes him, and blaming the world because he is uneducated, poor and left behind. … Somalia [is] another fine land of violent, AK 47-toting, khat-chewing, girl-circumcising, permanently tumescent layabouts, and housing pirates of the ocean. Indeed [in Africa], we now have almost an entire continent of sexually hyperactive, illiterate indigents, with tens of millions of people who only survive because of help from the outside world …

American Woman: A reminder to conservatives who want these medusas to be mamas: Babies begotten by such hos will likely be a lot like their feral mothers, who are NOT in God’s image. These gorgons are howling at the gods for being so in-and-out ugly. A medal to the man who gets on top of such putrid flesh for his jollies. Women who behave worse than primates in estrus are not mother material.

Lousy Lithuania Blockading Kaliningrad Could Be A Catalyst For World War Three

EU, Europe, Foreign Policy, Russia, The West, War

Russia will have to intrude into NATO territory to feed its people in Kaliningrad. NATO, doing Uncle Sam’s bidding, could then invoke its Article 5 obligation to, one and all, galvanize against Russia.

On July 28, 1914, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia pursuant to the killing of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria and his wife by a Serbian nationalist in Sarajevo, thus effectively starting the First World War.

Americans, aside some asses who may rot in Russian jails as prisoners of war, have not gotten as worked up about Ukraine as the neoconservative, neoliberal and the ConOink laptop bombardiers have wanted them to.

But Lithuania’s partial blockade of Kaliningrad—“a Russian sovereign territory on the Baltic Sea, sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland,” and thus reliant on these EU neighbors, also NATO members, for overland shipping of essential supplies—might just constitute a provocation like the one that ignited WWI.

This is the case because Russia will have to intrude into NATO territory to feed its people in Kaliningrad. NATO members, doing Uncle Sam’s bidding, could then invoke their Article 5 obligation to, one and all, galvanize against Russia.

Via ZeroHedge:

Ahead of the new Lithuanian transit ban taking effect, the state railways service was reportedly awaiting final word from the European Commission on enforcing it:

The cargo unit of Lithuania’s state railways service set out details of the ban in a letter to clients following “clarification” from the European Commission on the mechanism for applying the sanctions.

Previously, Lithuanian Deputy Foreign Minister Mantas Adomenas said the ministry was waiting for “clarification from the European Commission on applying European sanctions to Kaliningrad cargo transit.”

Brussels then ruled that “sanctioned goods and cargo should still be prohibited even if they travel from one part of Russia to another but through EU territory,” according to Rueters/Rferl.

In Moscow’s eyes, this is tantamount to laying economic siege to part of Russia’s sovereign territory and one million of its citizens. When the EU first proposed the blockage of goods as part of the last major sanctions package in early April, Kremlin officials warned of war given Moscow would have to “break the blockade” for the sake if its citizens.

MORE.

 

Matriarchy In The Sky–And In All Manner Of In-Your-Face Grotesquery

Affirmative Action, Business, COVID-19, Etiquette, Feminism, Free Markets, Gender, Ilana Mercer, Private Property, Race

Commenting on ‘The End of the All-Male, All-White Cockpit,’ Fox News personality Tucker Carlson beseeched, June 3, 2022: “What’s color to do with competence?” Sir, do check the aggregate accident statistics as to who are the best, safest pilots, sir! Correlation’s not causation, BUT:

Via ScienceDirect: “… female pilots employed by major airlines had a significantly greater likelihood of pilot-error incidents than their male colleagues.” Then the excuse-making weasel words begin—concealing with bafflegab that if you fly with a female you’re more risk. Female pilots yield a higher error/accident rate but, say the Fake Science propagators, this is only because they are younger and less experienced. What you the passenger MUST DO is not be such a bigot and forget about these confounding variables when you fly. Ya hear me, sexist? SEE? The desired outcome is that you fly with a less able pilot, ceteris paribus. Noble cause.

Or, as our reader put it:

“It states in the beginning that females had a higher accident rate, then it states they are about the same as males. SO WHICH IS IT??? Pretty much.”

I wonder. Does anyone get the life-and-death difference between a “pilot” trained at an affirmative-action, feel-good girlie flight school and a veteran of the Air Force? Remember Capt. Chesley B. “Sully” Sullenberger, III of the famed “Unable; we’ll be in the Hudson”? That was “Manliness (Not A Miracle) On The Hudson.”

Patronize the private airline industry nascent. Viva the free market and all the magnificent military trained man pilots ousted from the cartel of the commercial industry to fly private jets. This is what I’ll be exploring, as I think my life is worth it: “Flying private is cheaper than you think — here are 6 airlines to consider for your next flight.”  As illustrated in this 2002 tract—“Whose Property Is It Anyway?”—too many aspects of the airline industry, airports included, have been federalized (by The Shrub, aka Bush). Covid, and the cartel that has attached to it, has completed the demise of the industry.

In the vain of in-your-face female awfulness, Lena Dunham err, DungHam, resurfaced, “posing poolside in a bikini.” Says she, I “forgot how important it is to wear a bikini.

To be or not to bikini. I never thought of it this way. But if you say so, Lena. So, I posed in my bathroom, with my 30-year-old swimsuit, bought in Cape Town. But that’s as far as I’ll go with this outfit and this particular existential search for meaning.

And, thank you, role model Lena. I feel like a woman, now. At least I’ll say it: It is utter peacockery that moves women to pose, not authenticity, said here in “hedonism, not heroism:

To get naked for the world to see is immodest, not heroic. Displaying “saggy tummies” and “stretch marks” does not a hero make. Narcissism, self-adoration, bad taste, or just being comfortable in your own skin: these are not heroic, although they’ve been cast as such.

And here, in “Skanks in the Sky“:

Women are generally far more narcissistic and exhibitionistic than males are and habitually ho-up for travel and work. There is sexy and there is skanky.

We are nature’s worst peacocks, moved by vanity, not by the need to attract a mate, which is what moves the Real Peacock.

The celeb world responded to Lena Dunham with, “Just stunning.”  The old man said (about Lena, not ilana), “More like breathtaking.”

The lead image on this post comes via Max Denken of Gab. No need for words, but in case you mince yours or use euphemisms; I offer the correct crawler—as in the apt chyron beneath an image: Polina Gagarina, Russia’s most famous singer, chaste, gorgeous, natural; vs America’s  slumdog culture’s offering: Lizzo. This mountain of flesh is seen mounting a jet. Let’s hope Lizzo will not be piloting the thing.