Illinois Primary thoughts

Just a couple of thoughts on primary day for those of you here in Illinois. It’s a work day, so I’ll be quick.

I’m hearing a lot about Kirk Dillard and how he’s awful because he has some union support. Much seems to be coming from Rauner staffers calling into radio shows claiming to be regular guys. Whatever, that’s fine, we all know that goes on. Here’s what I keep thinking in response.

All these Rauner paid staffers supporters keep saying that they can’t wait to vote for Rauner because he’s an “outsider.” Give me a break. He might be a great guy, and I like the fact that he knows business. But let’s all admit that he is where he is today, at least in part, because he is well connected in Chicago. The Chicago machine does not consist of only elected officials, and just because Rauner has never held office before does not mean he’s not been a part of the machine for a long time. He’s buddies with the Chicago power brokers, he’s donated to Democrat campaigns and he’s pulled a Democrat ballot before. He’s pro-choice and he’s already racked up a couple of self-contradictory statements that make him seem like more of a politician than the career politicians he’s running against. As a conservative, I can’t expect him to represent my views just because he’s a businessman that’s never held office before. That’s ridiculous.

Now on Dillard. People are complaining that he’s successfully courting some union voters. Listen to yourselves. This is Illinois. We have had one-party rule for ever and ever, amen. Look where it’s gotten us. Now Kirk Dillard is getting some Democrats to come across the line and vote for a Republican. Isn’t that exactly what we need to happen!?

Dillard is a career guy that’s been in politics since before he was born, and that bothers some people. But guess what–none of these options is great. Look hard enough and you’ll find a reason to dislike each of them. Dillard is strong on life and strong on the 2nd amendment, two issues close to my heart, and he has the same basic economic plan as the rest of the primary field. Consider this a late Basic Conservative endorsement. Disagree? Have it out in the comments!

Now go vote!

About these ads

, , ,

  1. #1 by theexfundie on May 16, 2014 - 4:13 pm

    I really don’t understand why conservatives are so gung-ho about people that are pro-life when these officials do absolutely nothing to end abortion once elected. Reagan used this tactic bag in the 80’s to screw over the vast majority of his voters by claiming to be pro-life and promising to end abortion. Then, he didn’t follow through on his promise. And politician after politician after politician since then have used the exact same tactic and conservatives fall for it over and over and over and over again.

    Do you understand why Roe v. Wade happened? Watch Cider House Rules sometime and it helps explain it. Young girls were turning up dead because in a moment of panic, they resorted to turning to underground, unregulated abortion clinics that botched their bodies up so badly, they ended up in critical condition, or, they tried to self-abort at home using hangers and other methods and bled to death. If one is prof-life, and believes life is sacred, then, the lives of these girls should be sacred, too. Many people chose to legalize abortion specifically because of the value they place on life. Making abortion illegal can actually increase the death toll. And it certainly won’t stop abortion from happening. It will just make abortion more dangerous.

    I also don’t understand why, if abortion is such a true, dear issue to your heart, and to so many others that describe it as the number one issue in America, or at least in the top few issues….why none of you do anything to help pregnant in crisis so they will simply choose not to abort? Actions speak louder than words. To say something is so incredibly important and to do nothing about it but cast a ballot ever couple of years is to live a lie. If it was that important, you all would be doing so much more. Please don’t reply that there are pregnancy crisis centers for that kind of stuff so it’s not needed for you to do anything. Those crisis centers are overwhelmed and cannot serve the number of women that need their help.

    I believe abortion should be legal for the protection of the pregnant women. I also find abortion to be gut wrenching, and I would want to help someone make the decision not abort as often as I can. I’ve been called pro-death, pro-abortion and other ridiculous things. Yet, I’ve taken 3 women into my home on separate occasions, allowed them to stay with me for free through their pregnancy, helped them through the birth, and let them stay with me until they were able to get back on their feet after a year or so after giving birth. I watched their babies for them in the evenings while they worked. I provided food, shelter and whatever I could offer them until they were able to be on their own again. All these people that call me pro-death and pro-abortion…I’ve saved more babies than they have.

    So, my question to you is, if life is a very dear issue to your heart, what have you done in your lifetime to save babies from abortion?

    Secondly, being that you are a conservative, may I assume you are against policies that will allow everyone to have access to medical care? And if so, I would like you to please explain how you reconcile your deeply held belief that life is sacred with your belief that we should allow people to die of treatable illnesses if they have a lack of funding.

    • #2 by basicconservative on May 17, 2014 - 4:39 pm

      Whoa there, Trigger, let’s pick one argument and focus on it for a minute. If you want to claim that pro-life politicians never write or pass pro-life laws, I might direct you to the absolute brain-exploding panic going on for the last two or three years over the new abortion restrictions that have been passed in, what, a couple dozen states? It recently made one Texas lawmaker and her shoes an Internet Hero.

      “If one is prof-life, and believes life is sacred, then, the lives of these girls should be sacred, too.”

      We agree so far.

      “Many people chose to legalize abortion specifically because of the value they place on life.”

      Some may have supported legalizing abortion because of the value they place on *some* lives. However, abortion by definition means ending a human life. You cannot support abortion and claim to value “life” in general; you value life that falls in certain categories (based on age, intelligence, mental/physical disability or lack thereof, etc).

      “….why none of you do anything to help pregnant in crisis so they will simply choose not to abort?”

      Eh? You don’t know who or what I support with my time and money. Please don’t make such assumptions if you want to have a serious debate. I know people who are staunchly pro-life and people who are violently pro-choice, and people in both groups support charities, women and children. I know far more people who give based on their faith and pro-life values, but that’s to some degree because I move in those circles.

      “…being that you are a conservative, may I assume you are against policies that will allow everyone to have access to medical care?”

      Again, that’s a hell of an assumption, after complaining about people that call you pro-death after the good you’ve done to help pregnant women in crisis. No, you may not assume that, since that’s not my position.

      Let me ask you a question. If, as you say: “I also find abortion to be gut wrenching, and I would want to help someone make the decision not abort as often as I can,” tell me why? What’s wrong with it? Why would you want to help keep someone from choosing abortion?

      • #3 by theexfundie on May 18, 2014 - 11:16 pm

        Pro-life politicians have not done much to decrease abortion. Liberals greatly exaggerated the impact those restriction will have on access to abortion, first of all. Secondly, why not increase support to pregnant women?

        To say abortion should not be illegal is not the same as supporting abortion. I would never tell someone they should get an abortion. And I would never support their decision to get one. But, IF they are going to get one, I want them to do it safely because I value their lives, too. So, no, my statement is not hypocritical. I want to choose the route that will result in the least amount of loss of life. To say one is pro-life, and to pursue that value by choosing actions that actually increase the number of lives lost really doesn’t even make sense.

        If a woman is desperate enough to get an abortion to begin with, she’s gonna be desperate enough to go to an underground abortion clinic or to stick a wire into her body to terminate her pregnancy. And we know this because so many, many women, especially young teenager girls, were doing it.

        Of course, there will always be those handful of women that get multiple abortions and don’t even care. There are exceptions to practically every rule. But, MOST women that get abortions are terrified and very desperate. Not many women that have gotten an abortion end up having a second unplanned pregnancy because the entire experience, including the abortion, was so dramatic and traumatizing for them.

        So, I’m just being honest about reality. And the reality is that I can’t stop women from having abortions. Not completely. But I can decrease the number of women that do. And for those that we simply can’t stop no matter what we do, I want them to do it safely so that her own life isn’t put at risk in the process. I want to do what will make the loss of life caused by abortion as minimal as possible. Because I value life. ALL human life.

        No, I do not know what you support. And, as I mentioned, I admit and accept there are exceptions to nearly every rule. But, by and large, most people who are pro-life are against measures that would make healthcare more accessible in this country because doing so would cost them money. They say they’re pro-life and it’s so, so, so important to them when it times to go to the voting booth. But, when their pocket book will be affected, suddenly, they’re not quite so gung-ho about the value of human life anymore. And that very much frustrates me. I don’t care if people disagree with me, but it bothers me a LOT when they are either not informed in their opinions or they’re not consistent (or both).

        For your last question, I think I answered it in this comment. I do value human life. And I want to choose whichever route is going to result in the least amount of loss of human life. Making abortion illegal will not only not reduce the number of abortions to any significant degree, it would actually increase the loss of life that abortion causes. And if you read much about the history behind Roe v. Wade, you will see that, by and large, that is why people pushed for the decision that was made to begin with.

        A lot of people don’t know that and they’ve heard the catch phrases, “It’s my body and I can do what I want!” and other such things. But, that’s not what Roe v Wade was ever about. And the liberals that walk around screaming things like that are just as ignorant about why abortion was legalized in this country as the conservatives who are running around shouting that certain politicians love baby killing. There is certainly ignorance on both sides of the issue.

        • #4 by basicconservative on May 23, 2014 - 5:05 pm

          I apologize for the delayed response- my four-day-old daughter is sleeping on my lap as I type. So I can’t really do this justice, but I will make a few points.

          “I would never tell someone they should get an abortion. And I would never support their decision to get one. But, IF they are going to get one, I want them to do it safely because I value their lives, too. So, no, my statement is not hypocritical. I want to choose the route that will result in the least amount of loss of life. To say one is pro-life, and to pursue that value by choosing actions that actually increase the number of lives lost really doesn’t even make sense.”

          I appreciate your desire to protect life, but your logic doesn’t work out. If you’re looking solely at the mother’s life and ignoring the dead baby at the end of every abortion, the numbers might work out that way. But unless you’re arguing that making abortions legal actually decreased the number of *abortions*, this makes no sense. Fifty-six million dead babies since Roe v. Wade sort of dwarfs whatever point you think you’re making about the “least amount of loss of life.” I would love to hear any response to that other than “fetuses aren’t alive.”

          “If a woman is desperate enough to get an abortion to begin with, she’s gonna be desperate enough to go to an underground abortion clinic or to stick a wire into her body to terminate her pregnancy. And we know this because so many, many women, especially young teenager girls, were doing it. ”

          I don’t have time to look up the stats, but the idea that hordes of women were dying in back alleys until Roe v. Wade passed is a myth. Did it happen? Sure. Was it common? Nope. But there’s an overriding argument here anyway.

          If we’re talking, say, drug use, that argument might hold water. Someone wants to harm themselves, they’re going to do it no matter what, let’s at least find a way to minimize the harm. That’s the argument, right? But we’re not talking about someone harming themselves. We’re talking about someone harming *someone else*. This argument no longer applies in that case. It’s more analogous to murder than drugs. Let’s set the same argument up and see how it works now: Someone wants to murder his neighbor. If we make it illegal, he has to be nefarious, and might end up just spraying his neighbor’s house with bullets. Ends up killing a bunch of bystanders. It’s much better to legalize the murder, and bring a doctor in to administer a safe, clean lethal injection to his neighbor, so nobody gets hurt, right?

          See the parallel? I’m running on little sleep, so I apologize if I’m not totally focused.

          You talk a lot about the history of Roe v. Wade and knowing the history of abortion. If that’s so important, I wonder why you keep arguing as if Roe somehow reduced the number of abortions. Abortion skyrocketed exponentially after it was legalized. Of COURSE it did. It is really, truly insane to imagine that making an action illegal will not reduce the occurrence of that action. If abortion becomes illegal, millions of babies will be spared a violent, painful death. Some mothers may still choose to seek illegal abortions, and that’s awful. But that’s not any more of an argument against restricting abortion than the fact of gang violence is an argument for legalizing murder.

          “For your last question, I think I answered it in this comment. I do value human life. And I want to choose whichever route is going to result in the least amount of loss of human life.”

          If that’s true, then please do look at the numbers and you’ll find that your position is inconsistent. If you are against abortion because 1) you value human life, and 2) you agree that a baby in the womb is a human life, then seeing the huge increase in abortion after it became legal might disturb your belief that abortion rights somehow means less dead humans.

          Final point. I’m tired of abortion-rights advocates arguing as if this is a childishly simplistic, binary option–you can EITHER support abortion, OR you can’t care about women in need. There has never been any reason not to support both the mother and the child, and that has always been my position, and I find that’s the position of the bulk of the pro-life movement today.

        • #5 by theexfundie on May 26, 2014 - 8:48 pm

          First, congratulations on your new baby girl. My son was due to be born on May 14, but I had to have an emergency C-section 3 months ago. 13 weeks in the hospital and a heart surgery later, we’re still here and won’t be going home for quite some time. So, be thankful for that little girl and her health. It’s difficult for people to truly grasp how fortunate they really are if they’ve never had to endure a situation like this. Of course, if I hadn’t experienced it myself, the same could be said about me.

          Regarding your points, I’m not ignoring the dead baby at the end. If a mother goes to a legal or illegal abortion clinic, there is still going to be a dead baby at the end. So, those numbers aren’t going to change. But, if some mothers end up dying, too, the numbers do change.

          We can’t really compare number of abortions before and after Roe v Wade because there aren’t records tracking the frequency of illegal activities. The truth is, we don’t know how many abortions were being done. But, we do know one thing…the number of girls injuring themselves trying to self abort at home or getting injured through unsafe, unregulated clinics has gone down dramatically. Because we do have those numbers for comparison.

          Second, the numbers pro-lifers quote about the number of abortions are very misleading. They assume the number includes only elective abortions that are done for a matter of convenience and that is not the case. There are abortions done because the life of the mother is at risk. There are abortions done because it’s discovered something is wrong with the baby that makes it very certain the baby will either not survive to term or, if it does, will die shortly after birth because no possible treatment is available. I recall reading a story about a couple that, sadly, went to an ultrasound and found out an enormous cyst had developed in their very young baby’s head and had prevented the growth of her brain. The baby was not going to have a brain and there was nothing to be done. There was just enough there to maintain life functions while in the womb but there would be no other brain growth. So, she could either terminate the pregnancy or carry the baby to term, deliver the baby, and her hold her while she dies.

          To make matters worse, these laws made to restrict abortions past a certain time period apply to anyone getting an abortion for any reason. And she only had a few days before the time period would pass in which she could legally terminate her pregnancy. So, she didn’t have time to really think about what she wanted to do and emotionally prepare. That’s so unfair. If I was in that situation, and I decided to terminate my pregnancy, I would need time to cope with receiving such horrible and shocking news before going through the procedure. This mother wasn’t given that luxury. But, should we force her to go through a pregnancy and carry a child for that long, while she knows all the while there is a 0 chance the child will survive? What good would that do? Some people may prefer to do that and that is certainly decision. But, people would cope in different ways and some would find carrying the pregnancy through to term far more traumatizing. We have no right to dictate what people should do in these situations, and we certainly have no right to give them a time table they must abide by. But, the laws that pro-lifers push for create a LOT of these situations.

          I read another story about a woman in a southern state that had to travel all the way to another state because when she also found out her baby was definitely going to pass away, she passed the time period abortions were allowed in her state. She was having a lot of financial difficulty and had to borrow money from friends just to get the money to go. Instead of being surrounded by friends and family during such a horrible time in her life, she was all alone because there was no money for anyone to travel with her.

          These situations absolutely should not happen. And a lot of the abortions from the numbers you quoted are for medical reasons and are babies that are very wanted by their parents and grieved for the rest of their parents’ lives.

          Secondly, to compare abortion to outright murder is something I disagree with. I guess you could say yes, in very strict terms, if you define murder as ending human life, it’s murder. But, I do not believe that it should be treated the same as cold blooded murder. People have suggested that people who get abortions should be tried for murder and jailed the rest of their lives. And that is ridiculous, in my opinion. You did not state where you stand on this issue, but I’m just referencing what I’ve heard other people say while we’re on the subject.

          Even with murder itself, we don’t treat all of them the same. Some people get sentenced to death after committing murder. Others get life in prison, even if capital punishment is practiced in their state. Others get even less than that. Because when it comes to killing someone, we look at all the situations surrounding the murder to decide how we should respond.

          When pro-lifers try to make things sound very black and white, like murder is murder is murder, that’s just simply not true. If someone walks into a gas station and just randomly shoots a 3-year-old child as his mother purchases him a Nutri-Grain bar, that person will likely get a much more severe punishment than someone that got pushed over the edge in an abusive relationship and retaliated with murder. In both cases, a life was ended. But, the sentences for each will be quite different. And the reaction from the public would be quite different as well.

          If you’ve seen the movie Bernie, it tells the story of a man that experienced such extreme, blinding rage, he shot and killed an elderly woman in the back. He’d just gotten so angry and felt so trapped, he just did it and didn’t even have any memory of doing it. He was sentenced to life in prison, but recently, his appeal was heard and the judge decided to release him after serving 20ish years in prison because he felt he’d served his debt. They showed that he was indeed trapped in a very abusive relationship with this woman and he was just pushed over the edge in stress. Because of that, his sentenced was drastically reduced.

          If a person kills someone and doesn’t even know they were committing murder or didn’t understand murder is illegal due to mental health issues, they won’t get sentenced to time in jail at all. Of course, they’d be forced in rehabilitation, but he wouldn’t be found guilty of murder.

          So, we can’t just compare abortion to murder as if this is black and white because even murder toward humans already born aren’t black and white.

          So, we have to look at all the circumstances surrounding abortion. Often, a woman is young and in sheer panic. Many women don’t consider it a baby yet.

          I know that last statement will bother you. And it definitely bothers me, too. I lost a pregnancy at 8 weeks, and when I hear people say it’s just a clump of cells, a very sharp pain shoots through my heart. As my doctor told me my child had died and prepared me for what I would experience going through a natural miscarriage, she mentioned the passing of “white tissue.” I was too upset to speak, but I have always regretted not speaking up for my child and explaining that that is not white tissue…it was my baby. I opted for a D&C, knowing I would be far too traumatized to go through a natural miscarriage. After that experience, I have difficulty understanding how a woman can be pregnant and not see what’s growing inside her as a baby or at least something of the same worth of a baby. Because nothing about that experience made me feel like it was nothing but a clump of cells.

          Then again, I wanted to be pregnant, had struggled with infertility for years, and my experience of finding out I was pregnant was quite different than a 15-year-old girl who has only even recently learned how babies are made to begin with.

          But, ,those who say it’s not a baby do have some valid points. I don’t agree with them, but I recognize that they’re making some valid points. Babies very early in pregnancy may have a heart beat, but certainly have no degree of conscious existence. To some, this means it’s not the same. To you and I, it’s not.

          But, this is the problem in the discussion of abortion. There is a lot of disagreement on when a “baby” is considered a life in the same sense that we mean when we refer to your life or mine. Of course, everyone agrees that once a baby is born, it’s a human life like yours or mine (well, except maybe a handful of weird people). But, before that, there is a lot of disagreement and everyone on all sides has good points to be made.

          I can definitely tell you, having had a son born extremely prematurely, there IS a difference between a fetus and a baby. I’m definitely not saying this difference made me value my son any less. I valued him the same from the moment I saw that second pink line on a pregnancy test. But, seeing him at birth and seeing hi now that he’s past my due date, there is a reason they call a fetus a fetus and a baby a baby.

          And to some, these does make a difference in rights. To them, the ability to consciously feel or experience is more what defines a human life as a life with the same rights and values as someone that is born. Like I said, I don’t agree…but I do think they have a valid enough point that I can understand their perspective.

          So, I just don’t think abortion can be compared directly to murder for all these reasons in the same sense that we often use the word murder. It really can’t be compared to anything else. It’s in it’s own category.

          Having experienced a 5-year fight to overcome infertility, a pregnancy loss, and a premature son born with a congenital heart defect…it is gut wrenching to me to hear of anyone willingly and voluntarily terminating a healthy pregnancy, knowing there are people out there that would give up vital parts of their body to have a baby. But, I also recognize that this is a very complicated issue. I know for a lot of pro-lifers, it’s very simple and black and white. But, I think that’s because they haven’t heard of the lot of the stories out there and are only getting partial information, such as the vast numbers of abortions you said were happening, seeming to think those all refer to abortions done due to convenience.

        • #6 by basicconservative on June 2, 2014 - 5:22 pm

          Thank you for for your congratulations; congratulations to you too, and you and your son are in my prayers. You’re right that I really can’t imagine what it’s like to be in the situation you’re in.

          Thank you for the serious response, by the way.

          I did look up some numbers now. So in response to a couple of things:

          “We can’t really compare number of abortions before and after Roe v Wade because there aren’t records tracking the frequency of illegal activities.”

          Yes and no. We can come up with a pretty reasonable estimate, because we do know some things with certainty. For example, we know that between 1973 (Roe) and 1979, the annual number of legal abortions doubled. At its peak, the number of legal abortions has been well over 1 million a year. On the other hand, in 1972, there were 39 maternal deaths from illegal abortion. These numbers are all from the CDC, by the way, not some pro-life site. Is that 39 a low estimate? Yes, probably- in years previous it was generally in the hundreds. Medicine was getting better.

          Still, it’s hard to argue that abortions increasing on record and finally doubling to a million plus, in the decade after legalization, somehow is balanced out by these numbers… even if we’re just coldly looking at the numbers, which I’m not.

          Also, with the recent news stories about Gosnell and others, plus the left’s insistence that any oversight or regulation of abortion clinics is a misogynistic War On Women, I’d be careful making any assertions about “the number of girls … getting injured through unsafe, unregulated clinics.” But that’s a side issue.

          “They assume the number includes only elective abortions that are done for a matter of convenience and that is not the case.”

          Also, yes and no. Pro-choice research groups like Guttmacher, even on their best day, only come up with 10-12% as the number of women seeking abortion for reasons to do with rape, incest, or health reasons concerning either the mother or the child. Other estimates put those numbers much lower, 5% or less. Since pretty much the entire pro-life movement is on board with doing whatever is medically necessary to save the mother, rape is generally the only real point of contention here. And abortions where rape is an issue sit, oh, below 1%. In any case, it’s statistically impossible to dispute that the overwhelming majority of abortions are done for convenience, despite the acknowledged exceptions.

          “Secondly, to compare abortion to outright murder is something I disagree with… Even with murder itself, we don’t treat all of them the same.”

          Agreed. All valid points that nobody would dispute. I take issue with pro-life arguments that fail to make any such distinctions or lack charity. I don’t want to be seen anywhere near graphic signs that attack women or people yelling about hellfire and damnation.

          Here’s the thing on all this “see, even murder is complicated” stuff. You can’t make the leap from “abortion is a complex issue” to “therefore we can’t decide if it should be allowed or not.” Being an adult means figuring out complex issues. There was a time that slavery was seen as a complex issue and ending the practice would throw the entire country into chaos. It was still the right thing to do.

          “I can definitely tell you, having had a son born extremely prematurely, there IS a difference between a fetus and a baby. I’m definitely not saying this difference made me value my son any less.”

          I’m glad to hear that. Yes, in the same sense that there’s a difference between a newborn and an adolescent, and between an 18-year-old and a 80-year-old. There’s a difference between a man and a woman, there’s a difference between someone with Down’s Syndrome and someone with an IQ of 160. None of these differences mean that any of of these people has any more or less dignity or value than any other, however; putting a fetus in a separate “non-human” category so that we can legally kill them should be unacceptable in any serious system of laws. It’s totally arbitrary and akin to deciding that women, or black people, or mentally handicapped people are less human. On this point, things should be black and white. A living human individual deserves rights and protections against being killed, regardless of age or how “conscious” someone else decides they are.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 28 other followers

%d bloggers like this: