...now they want to make it normal.

It's not enough that abortion rights activists want to keep abortion legal. Now they want it to be normal. Like going to get a haircut. "What'd I do today? I got my nails done, I had my abortion, then I stopped by Starbucks."

If you're one of the few who have read my last entry from too many months ago. The thesis goes like this:

Government has a specific role, and that role ends somewhere before being the solution to every argument we have. Just because something is legal, that does not make it moral. Inviting the Government into this solution for the Pro-Life crowd only makes things worse, and Hanna Rosin's column from today's Slate shows the most glaring example why.

My liberalism for medical "rights" unfortunately has to encompass the barbarism of abortion. It is an ambiguity that does not have a legal remedy. But, Ms. Rosin, my goodness... is there no room for discretion in this debate?

Not if you need sanctification. 

As a libertarian, I believe every living being has a moral right to the course of its natural life, including a fetus. Just because you can have an abortion, that does not mean you should, even if your pregnancy is inconvenient. 

I had a huge case of writer's block for most of 2014. Nothing really motivated me to write. Until today. 

Rosin's work is vile. I can see why sanctification would bring relief. I posted it because it should be viewed, understood, and scorned. 

We must find peace in this debate.

Are we really this dark?

Not everything has a legislative solution

Very few people know that the medical procedure of aborting an incomplete pregnancy was at least propagated as accepted practice by the Progressives and their Eugenics movement. Andrew Napolitano, in his dissection of the Progressive Movement titled "Theodore and Woodrow" tells us Progressive Era politicians wanted to "control the lesser races.." (p.93). Rooted in the desire for a completely pure race, Eugenicists used abortion and sterilization to limit the populations of races they deemed less worthy. It's pure Aryanism and as a people our lack of understanding of its roots are tragic.

That having been said, abortion procedures are sometimes necessary. Even the staunchest social conservative allows for "cases such as rape or incest or when the mother's life is in danger." So we all recognize the legitimacy of this medical procedure. Making it a political argument does much damage that can never be undone. The gravity of the decision to abort a pregnancy demands that it not be political, yet, all too often, it is.

Rooted in the fallacy that we can leverage legislative solutions for every one of our problems is the notion that there must be laws either legalizing or prohibiting the practice of abortion. Without deeper consideration it is easy to seek authoritative solutions either permitting or prohibiting the practice. Either life or liberty hangs in the balance, and the choice seems so black and white. That makes it an easy lever with which the corrupted bureaucrats can pit us against one-another as a means to advance their careers. And, on this debate, there could be no more success.

The battle cries are simple:

"We must PROTECT the unborn!!!!!"

"A WOMAN has the RIGHT to CHOOSE!!!!"

These are seductively simple black and white arguments that lend themselves to cable television shouting matches, accusations of all manner of personal deficiency, and ultimately, stalemate. We tend to focus on emotion, which leaves little room for reason. But seeking to prohibit outright an accepted medical procedure that is rarely yet sometimes a legitimate decision unwittingly abets progressives and enhances public sympathy for their cause.

Ultimately, there is no legislative solution to this problem. Making it a political football motivates people to pursue the practice whether it is needed or not. Given that Abortion is a medical procedure, beyond regulating for the cleanliness and safety of the medical facilities where this and other procedures take place, we need to excuse the government from this decision. With that will go the special interests that seek the government out for funding of this brutal, barbaric practice. (And also, please understand that brain surgery and setting broken bones is also brutal and barbaric, yet, sometimes necessary.) Getting both political sides out of this argument is unlikely in the current political climate because there is simply too much money to be made and political powers to be gained in publicizing the opposing points of view. For the socially conservative, they know not the damage their simplistic, authoritarian approach causes. They have indirectly enriched Planned Parenthood by making its continued funding a matter for vigorous public debate. They have allowed pro-abortion forces to distract women from what matters by focusing the discussion on rights rather than responsibilities. An insane pay structure increasing public funding based on the number of abortions performed has developed. In the reference, Marianne Anderson says in an interview with Natalie Hoefer about her experience working as a nurse at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Indianapolis, "It was a money-grubbing, evil, very sad, sad place to work." Anderson states that on the days abortions are performed, Tuesdays and Fridays, the clinic performed between 25 and 35 abortions. Using 30 as an average, that means 60 children a week are deprived of their lives by a medical procedure that should amount to the merest fraction of those numbers. And that's just one clinic in Indiana, a midwestern state with presumably midwestern values that would at least minimize, if not avoid abortion procedures as much as possible. The question must be asked, no matter how well-intentioned pro-life social conservatives are, how many lives has our predilection for authoritative solutions actually cost? No, clearly, not everything has a legislative solution.

So, what to do? We've become so accustomed to leveraging authority, we can not conceive of a world where the government is not the solution. But leveraging force actually made this problem worse. Stop seeking authority to make people do what you want. Minister to them. Beef up the alternative clinics that already exist. Get the word out in the community. There is a better way.

We must end this political debate. Abortion is legal and will never be made illegal, and continuing to battle for it only reinforces the opposite argument. Americans are libertarian in nature, are becoming ever more so as disillusionment with the existing political parties continues to grow. Clearly, the American community seeks a better way to conduct our affairs.

On this and many other socially conservative positions, the arguments have failed and we must pursue another path if we really care about those issues. Otherwise, this stalemate will continue to cost the lives of countless unborn children who's rights to their natural lives have been mercilessly terminated in the name of convenience, racism, political power, and yes, even money. 

Authority is a Dinosaur

Understanding a problem is the first step in solving it. Most of us agree we're not prospering in the post-tech era like we should. And that's where the mutual understanding ends. Unfortunatley, most of us look to authoritarianism for solutions. We think the government will solve our problems for us. They say they will and we trust them, even though we know better. They fortify our faith with trinkets, be them government enforced rights that should evolve from policing ourselves or specific baubles in the form of entitlements that have made us dependent and addicted to authority. Trinkets and Baubles keep us addicted.

Eventually, the faith will run out. The younger we are, the more libertarian we tend to be. So the change is happening. People know instinctively that polticians are loathesome, and I continue to struggle reconciling people giving more power to self-interested, corrupt politicians. The notion that we live in a free country has become absurd, and it seems like most of us don't even realize it. Whenever I hear someone say that, I chuckle because frankly, we live in anything but a free country. We live under Bureaucratic Fascism.

It is this massive level of interference that holds the American economic engine in check. This is the fourth iteration I have attempted of this post, primarily because I have attempted to explain my understanding of the intricacies of that interference to a much greater degree than a blog post would justify. The fact is the concept requires significant effort and should make a great project for legions of political science and law students. But, for now, I think I have a handle on how to make you, the casual reader with a life, understand the problem and perhaps maybe sway you toward a plan to fix it.

Simply natural economic forces would provide better, more substantial, and most importantly more sustainable solutions to all our social problems from racism to health care to security in old age. Hundreds of millions of self-interested participants creating demands for markets fulfilled by equally self-interested individuals with ideas on how to fill them. We don't need a gun to see to each other's well-being simply because self-interest naturally involves promoting the interests of others. This is the fundamental error in the Authoritarian model and the antithesis of the notions of our founding.

Now, I don't sit here an anarchist. Far from it. Individuals tend to organize into groups, and groups tend to accumulate power to the point that imbalances are created. We need dispassionate government to establish and maintain power balances among our many groups, including government itself. Our current economic shortfall are symptoms power imbalance, namely, the partnership between corporations and government, or more specifically, politicians, and the rest of us. We're not creating anything but new computing devices primarily because all the other markets are regulated to the point nobody else can get into them.

Commonly, you hear the term "capitalism" used to identify our economic system, but, our system is far from capitalism. It's corporatism. A bureaucracy created by politicians whose careers were enabled by large corporations who expect rules to be created to benefit them. That is the system we live under, and that is the system you continue to pay for propping up after it nearly collapsed in 2008.

We have to replace the corporatist system and we can not do that if we continue to elect politicians who care not for your freedom so much as they care for their own power and fortune. This is not the system established by our Founders. It is inherently corrupt, and there is nothing "free" about it. Our's is a market of entrenched interests who are unable or unwilling to innovate and create. They seem more interested in making sure nobody else innovates or creates, lest they lose their piece of the action. They partner up with politicians to create rules only they can live by, so, competition is largely impossible. 

For a glimpse into the future, I encourage you to google Hutt River in Australia and the Free Cities Institute in Honduras. Here you can see what free people can do to break free from modern bureaucratic fascim, and what might happen in a decentralized society.