Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny

What?

That's what alaskabob said in comments to a post on Legal Insurrection about Democrats upping the abortion ante when they defended murdering a baby born alive.

The title says "murdering" and not aborting as the proponents of these laws do.

Ontogeny means the development of an organism.

Recapitulates means to review by a brief summary.

Phylogney is the evolutionary history of a group of organisms.

So then, to observe the development of a human baby is to watch the evolution of humans.

The entire conversation is like this. Completely off the rails. They're talking about abortion laws extended to murdering children after they're born and they use legal language that shows how lost they've become in their own intellectual weeds. Their metaphors and their questions stated in high legalese depart from the brutal simplicity and confound the whole thread of comments. They've thought about this too long. They express their views in the language they use to think through it so we are shown their intellectual neural pathways and not shown clear and simple conclusions.

Realizing that Trump has the opportunity to alter the world view of the Supreme Court freaked out Democrats about Roe vs Wade being overturned, because they know for certain that's what they would do. Their overreaction is logical when viewed from the standpoint of knowing themselves so well. Of course they project that onto Republicans.

Conservatives are not that fierce. Democrats keep making this same mistake. Conservative politics exist to check Democrat wild ambitions, not to enact their own wild ambitions. Why? Because they are con ser va tive! Root word: conserve. They're far more likely to conserve Supreme Court law than attempt to overturn it. But Democrats understand the law to be so flimsy and so forced they don't trust it to endure any change in Supreme Court outlook. They don't trust the strength of their own freaking law.

I'm certain Alabama would not have changed their law to prohibit abortions, nor the states that intend to follow, had not New York hastened to change theirs first so far, so extremely, so bizarrely to include actual murder. And then have their state congress give it a standing ovation!

When liberals push that hard that fast then that forces opposition to push back. But they cannot help themselves. It's what worked up crackpots do.

I was watching Japanese news cover this American state change its abortion law to be much more restrictive. I did not previously see Japanese news cover New York change its law to be so far outrageously liberal to include murder of infant children. But I might have simply missed that. Unlikely, I watch everyday. Then, when Japanese news does cover the change in Alabama law, a strange thing for Japanese to be interested in, they describe the change fairly but then provide footage of a pro-choice protestor saying, "Now if I'm raped and conceive I'm stuck with a baby conceived by rape." With no fact check to that statement, no exploration into alternatives, and no footage of anyone supporting the new law. They described the change dispassionately and  then reported with extreme bias. *click*

We can expect the same treatment from British liberal news, Canadian liberal news, Australian liberal news, pick any country and their news reporting will give it the same treatment. No mention of the new restrictive laws as reaction to new outrageously liberal laws in reaction to presumed Supreme Court reaction to actual previous Supreme Court overreach.


As a very young man I saw firsthand what pre-marital pregnancy does to a family, and how people living in a state with restrictive abortion laws handle abortions.

Did I say young man?

I meant to say, "boy"

I was fifteen.

And I looked like I was twelve.

I didn't understand anything.

My family had just moved to Colorado. The next summer I flew back to Louisiana to visit a friend. I ended up working for the friend's mother in the hotel that she managed. I did quite a lot of things at the hotel. I lived at the hotel and at the friend's house.

The younger sister of my friend had become pregnant by another young man that we knew. He was a friend of ours. The son of a military officer at the AF base, a football athlete at our school. I must say, a High School stud. A handsome young man.

The friend's sister was a gorgeous young girl. Now a beautiful woman.

Neither of them was prepared for marriage far less prepared for delivering a baby, but had they not aborted, that would have been one extremely beautiful child. There is no way to deny it, both boy and girl were tops in looks and in brains and in athletic abilities. Those two together were paired outstandingly.

But my friend's family just couldn't handle it.

And Louisiana had restrictive abortion laws.

The friend's father was devastated his gorgeous angelic daughter had been violated. He wanted to kill the young man who soiled his daughter. And he had guns. And he was capable of murder.

A pall was cast over the household.

The daughter's bedroom was large. She lay in her king size bed a shrunken heap of tangled unwashed hair and covered in blankets protecting her frail unfed body from the chill of the air conditioner. The curtains drawn to darkness. Her deep dark depression vibrated outward from her room and rang like a funeral fugue throughout the entire house.

The friend's mother controlled everything. Her aspect was similar to Texas Governor Ann Richards. They look and sound similar. Except the mother was larger and heavier. She decided the daughter will have an abortion in California. She handled the whole thing. Made all the arrangement. She decided that I was to accompany them for moral support along with the brother.

Here's where it gets strange.

To disguise the trip to California, to ease the anguish of abortion, to put another face on the trip to Anaheim, the four of us also went to Disneyland.

There we could more easily cheer the daughter and distract her from her depression.

And it worked.

As I say, we were all very young.

But this is not a good case study.

Because this family had resources that most families do not.

Most families cannot do what this mother of my friend did. They cannot just fly across half the country to get to a state that allows the procedure.

It's not so much a matter of making abortions convenient, it's more a matter of making them available. I think conservatives tend to underestimate the devastation unwanted pregnancy brings to lives of people and we tend to conflate that with simple inconvenience. It's a lot worse than that.

But then again I cannot deny it, under any circumstances however devastating at the time based on the parentage that would have been an extraordinarily beautiful child.

Then you'll say all children are beautiful.

Well, maybe. But this one extraordinarily so. You should have seen these two kids, bright, creative, athletic, and gorgeous.