At The Scientist, we are informed, “Scientists Predict “Brain Drain” From States That Ban Abortion: Following the overturning of Roe v. Wade, numerous researchers have announced plans to either vacate or decline career opportunities in states where abortion is or will soon be illegal.” Well, if the right to [ … ] live babies matters so much to them, the rest of us might think the bargain worthwhile. Although, later in the article, we read:
It’s unclear how many scientists will follow through with their stated plans to leave and avoid abortion-banning states or to leave the country altogether, and it may take years for the effects to emerge in enrollment and hiring data. Many may find such declarations impossible or infeasible to act upon. Amanda Meshey, a cancer biology graduate student at the University of South Florida who tweeted in 2019 that she would leave the country if Roe v. Wade was overturned, tells The Scientist over email that, despite the great personal risk she now feels, she and her husband don’t have the financial freedom to pack up and leave. Additionally, she says that doing so would mean abandoning both of their PhDs altogether.Dan Robitzski, “Scientists Predict “Brain Drain” From States That Ban Abortion” at The Scientist (June 30, 2022)
Stop and think about what’s being said here… The person who contacted The Scientist, giving her name, wants to live where she can [ … ]
By the way, the vast majority of biologists believe that human life begins at conception (though the researcher who did the study got into trouble for asking).
Okay. As noted earlier, at least one pundit believes that the abortion people did not state strongly enough that they do believe that abortion is killing. “When “pro-life” forces agitate against feticide on the basis that it is killing, pro-abortion feminists should be able to acknowledge, without shame, that yes, of course it is.”
U.S. President Joe Biden apparently acknowledges that very thing:
Joe Biden: “abort a child”pic.twitter.com/Kxr2D537LZ
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) July 1, 2022
However, some abortion advocates still think that emphasizing the “child” part is a mistake: Their colleagues may have gone a bit overboard on that theme. At Unherd, a writer mourns the demise of Bill Clinton’s formula for appealing to the center: Abortion should be “safe, legal, and rare”:.
And yet, in the past 10 years, “safe, legal and rare” has fallen out of favour, as arguments emerged in the more language-obsessed corners of the Left that the “rare” part was unduly stigmatising. “It posits that having an abortion is a bad decision and one that a pregnant person shouldn’t have to make”, one activist wrote last year, in an essay demanding the phrase be retired.
It’s hard to overstate the utter self-sabotaging lunacy of this argument, which not only undermined one of the most popular lines of party messaging in decades but is also farcically nonsensical: “safe, legal, and rare” are surely a solid and desirable set of criteria for any medical procedure that is both unpleasant and unplanned, as abortions (but not only abortions) invariably are. And yet, the argument prevailed: by the time Hillary ran for president in 2016, the word “rare” had been excised from the Democratic party platform.Kat Rosenfield, “The Left killed the pro-choice coalition” at Unherd (June 29, 2022)
“Rare” is apparently not a Woke value, even if it is a selling point with the culture:
Goodbye, “rare”. Goodbye, “women”. Goodbye, “choice” — the beating heart of the movement, now categorised as “harmful language” — and goodbye to the allies who favoured these terms, now severed and drifting away from the movement like Inuit elders who have outlived their usefulness, cast onto an ice floe to die.Kat Rosenfield, “The Left killed the pro-choice coalition” at Unherd (June 29, 2022)
Given the rapid advance of euthanasia, the “ice floe” image Rosenfield provides of allies like herself is more apt than she probably realizes.
Time will tell but the current trend to sever the relationship between “women” and “pregnancy” altogether (which Rosenfield goes on to discuss) does not sound mainstream.
One group we don’t hear much from, of course, is the children who survived abortion and lived to grow up. Theyare an awkward problem. The natural instinct of an abortion supporter must surely be to wish that they had just been quietly killed despite their demonstrated viability. But the advance of euthanasia in jurisdictions favorable to the Woke point of view will doubtless take care of that.
You may also wish to read: The Woke without their makeup… After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Roe (abortion on demand everywhere) unconstitutional, the elite Woke have been rampaging generally – but against one judge in particular. Mr. Justice Clarence Thomas is black and, wouldn’t you know …