You can tell a lot about a person when they are a single-issue voter. For many years, I have known — and counted myself among — one of the largest voting blocs of single-issue voters, in that I support the Second Amendment. I believe the natural right to self-defense is fundamental, that the Second Amendment protects American gun owners from all infringements on firearms ownership, and that most our nation’s “gun control” laws at both the federal and state levels are unconstitutional. From this we can draw a conclusion. Setting aside hysterical projection by people who hate and fear guns, single-issue gun rights owners believe wholeheartedly in the property right that is self-defense.
I’ve said before that your right to your own life is a property right. You own yourself. If you don’t, if someone else owns you, then you are their slave. Assuming you are no one’s slave, your ownership over your own life gives you the fundamental, God-given prerogative to safeguard that life from those who try to take it.
There can be no more libertarian impulse, no higher declaration of respect for your fellow citizens, than to believe they can and should defend their lives from any and all unjust threats to those lives. For example, you will find no more ardent a defender of the civil rights of homosexuals, minorities, and women than the American who wants to guarantee their rights to own and carry firearms for self-protection.
There are more than a few “single issues,” or perhaps more accurately, “dominant issues,” that drive political behavior in the United States. One of those is abortion. It has always amazed me that for so many Americans — we call them Democrats — there is no more passionate a “right” than the “right” to murder their unborn children.
That is what abortion is, after all. Most abortion “rights” activists cannot even admit this much, preferring to dehumanize unborn babies as anything but human children not yet birthed. If we are honest with ourselves, however, we cannot help but admit it: Abortion is a procedure intended to stop a human being from existing — a procedure that, if it were not conducted, would see a human child born through natural means almost every single time.
Compare and contrast this to, say, contraception, the purpose of which is to prevent a potential child from ever having that potential. Abortion erases a child that already exists; contraception prevents the circumstances in which abortion would be “necessary” to do the same. This is an important distinction. The former is murder; the latter is prudence (if one’s goal is to prevent procreation).
Democrats have worked very hard to conflate the two. When Mitt Romney was running for president — something that seems hilarious now that Romney has all but announced his switch to the Democrat party — he was asked, out of nowhere, if he would prevent “access to contraception.” Setting aside for a moment that contraception is cheap, readily available, and not something any politician has talked about banning or otherwise restricting for decades in the United States, the tactic was an obvious one. If we can make American women believe that birth control pills and abortions are the same thing, we can successfully motivate women to vote for Democrats.
This is the reason for the current hysteria over the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court. Barrett is a Catholic — something that liars like Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden pretend to be, but aren’t. Because you cannot genuinely be a Catholic and also support abortion, Democrats believe Barrett’s religious faith makes her a threat to their precious, precious “right” to kill their children. Remember, these are not children who don’t exist and haven’t existed; these are children who exist now but who have not yet been born, who must be killed to prevent their inevitable births.
The Supreme Court invented the “right” to abortion, finding in the Constitution a protection that was not written. Democrats live in fear that a future court could just as easily “unfind” that “right.” This is why they hate, fear, and defame anyone they believe insufficiently devoted to the Left’s holy sacrament of abortion.
We understand that much; it would be the same if a Democrat president nominated to the Supreme Court a viciously anti-gun leftist Judge who vowed to ignore and misinterpret the Second Amendment. (In other words, it would be the same if a Democrat nominated any judge.)
The difference, and the mystery, is in why Democrats protect abortion alone. There is no civil right that Democrats support; there is no protection of the Bill of Rights they will not abrogate. Given that Democrats hate, fear, and seek to constrain freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, the right to keep and bear arms, and every other right protected by the Bill of Rights, why then are they so devoted to a “right” that is not in the Constitution?
Why baby murder, Democrats? Why is this alone the one “right” you will defend to your last, rabid, scrabbling breath? Why is killing your children so incredibly important to you?
I wish I understood. I used to think I did. I now fear I never will.