One of the more pervasive justifications on the theocon right for the failure of their economic policies is that they would all be eliminated if there were a million more people in the workforce as a result of making abortions illegal. This is a completely ridiculous argument; abortion rates in countries where the practice is illegal are virtually unchanged from countries where it’s legal; all that criminalizing abortion does is cause the deaths of women who attempt to end an unwanted pregnancy. Furthermore, it’s one of those theories that sounds right but can be easily made applicable to account for pretty much anything, good or bad.
Crime: “If it weren’t for abortions, there’d be 50 million more potential murderers and rapists on the loose!”
Iraq: “If it weren’t for abortions, we’d have 50 million more potential National Guard recruits! We wouldn’t have this shortage!”
Tort Reform: “If it weren’t for abortions, we wouldn’t have 50 million more potential lawyers filing frivolous lawsuits!”
Abortion: “If it weren’t for abortions, we would have 50 million more people in the world arguing against abortions!”
Abortion (the other way): “If it weren’t for abortion, we would have 50 million more potential high-risk teenagers about, some of whom might want to get an abortion!”
So I never expected to see such a reductionist argument used in anything but the outer fringes of political debate. Except when the venue is the Values Voter Summit and the speaker is Mike Huckabee:
“Sometimes we talk about why we’re importing so many people in our workforce,” the former Arkansas governor said. “It might be for the last 35 years, we have aborted more than a million people who would have been in our workforce had we not had the holocaust of liberalized abortion under a flawed Supreme Court ruling in 1973.”
Thus ending the Huck-mentum bandied about by media types trying to wring some excitement out of a depressing GOP race. First of all, the Anti-Defamation League and all sorts of other organizations should be up in arms about comparing a medical procedure to the death of 6 million Jews. Second, this idea that Huckabee would unify social and fiscal conservatives was always a phantom, considering that the Club for Growth calls him Tax Hike Mike, and that tax issues were two of the top four issues to voters at the Values Voters Summit. And by the way, Huckabee split the straw poll vote with Mitt Romney, whose speech there was much more well-received.
But really, I want to stress that this could be the most inane argument ever expressed by a serious Presidential candidate. Or at least for this week, anyway.
13 Responses to “Women Having Control Over Their Own Medical Care Is The REAL Holocaust”
I don’t think this will be a problem for Huckabee. He’s really just preaching to the choir, which is what you do if you want to win a primary. Although I don’t agree with Matt, and it is a minor point, he is right about Huckabee’s use of the word holocaust. It is not specific to the Holocaust and is used that way commonly such that it doesn’t need to be considered as a reference to the Holocaust.
I really don’t see how you can talk about a holocaust without conjuring in your own mind or those of your listeners the memory of The Holocaust. By using that word, rather than talking about just a mass murder, you are invoking, deliberately and for effect, the emotional reaction we all have to Hitler’s genocide. And that’s crass, plain and simple. You wouldn’t stand up and say, “The REAL 9-11 is Roe v Wade” or “The REAL Virginia Tech is Roe v Wade”. Why not grant the victims of the Holocaust the same respect? A second point: it may be that only the minority of abortions are matters of medical necessity, but the pro-life forces, as the SD referendum showed, cannot consistently make allowance even for that minority of cases. If abortion is murder then there is no room to allow it under any circumstances.
hey dave, my boy is soon going to be your president, the religous cooks might not like him now, but as soon as your foolish party sends up hillary, its game over bwahaahahahahaahaha nice favorables hillary bwahahahahahahaha her first act as president: fire all the female interns hahahahahahhaa.
It’s Roe v Wade.
Spell it correctly. I don’t know how you can claim something is unconstitutional if you aren’t even aware of its proper spelling. And you’re obviously not pro-choice so I’m unsure why you even prefaced your comment with that. Your comment is steeped in ignorant and disingenuous claims.
Do you honestly feel that intern jokes are humorous? Is that really all you have at this point?
hey dave, my boy is soon going to be your president, the religous cooks might not like him now, but as soon as your foolish party sends up hillary, its game over
I’ll take that bet. Easiest money a person can make.
No one outside the fundie circles knows or cares who the hell he is, Matt. How exactly, and with what numbers, do you surmise he’ll be president?
‘Is that really all you have at this point?’
no, i have a candidate that out paces your democrats in PA, Ohio, NJ, Michigan, and Florida, while you have the most polarizing woman in the history of the country, hahaha. if roe v wade was overturned, as it should be, then abortion would return to the states and would be on the ballots in each state. in my state i would vote choice because thats what i believe, what i would never dream of forcing another state to follow it. they should have the right to decide for themselves. termination of pregnancies dates back to ancient times, and if they felt it was a right, the framers would have included it in the constitution, but they did not. only an amendment to the constitution would grant it as a right, instead of the judicial activism that has made the law what it is today.
‘No one outside the fundie circles knows or cares who the hell he is’
uh what? everyone knows who america’s mayor is, and clear headed logical people understand he is going to be the next president.
Hey Matt – Why do you hide? Who are you? How about a website or blog or last name?
Otherwise your just cheap graffiti.
Government should just stay out of personal matters like this. No further discussion needed.
the problem with the 50 million argument (other than its sheer tastelessness) is that it assumes all women having abortions will continue to have as many children later. In fact, probably a large number of abortions have the practical effect of delaying births. Meaning that if those 50 million abortions hadn’t happened, many of the women who had them would have declined to later have children that they had.
while you have the most polarizing woman in the history of the country,
Madeleine Murray O’Hare is dead Matt, she can’t run. Or were you talking about Susan B. Anthony? She certainly did polarize the country, but she’s long dead. Or maybe you were talking about Jeanette Rankin who as a representative from Montana voted against going into not just 1, but 2 world wars? She’s dead too, so she can’t be running. Any of these 3 women (and I can think of several more, like Carry Nation, Mrs Sarah Yorke Jackson, and Phyllis Schlafly) easily beat Mrs. Clinton for the title of most polarizing woman in American history. Heck, Eleanor Roosevelt is still more polarizing than Hillary.
Also you’ll find that creaping into your numbers are the number of “abortions” that are removals of miscarriages. Without the abortion clinic my sister would have had to face a calcified dead fetus which could have ruined her general and reproductive health forever. The removal of which is an abortion.
Lastly, you are correct everyone knows who America’s mayor is. But Bloomberg hasn’t jumped into the race yet, so hold your knickers for a while for that to happen. You can’t be talking about Rudy because he’s spending faster than he’s bringing in, answers cell phones during speeches, and keeps taking the neocon stance on foreign policy. He’s imploding almost as fast as McCain and grandpa Fred. And he’s also in favor of abortions being safe and rare, just like Democrats.
[...] ago, when Mike Huckabee compared a woman’s choice in determining their own medical care as a holocaust? And some of our more pointy-eared, living-under-a-bridge commenters claimed that Huck was just [...]
Something to say?
weak arguement? i think calling the crushing of an unborn infants skull and removal of its brain more then just ‘ a little medical procedure’.
i am pro choice, but i believe roe v. waid is unconstituional. the states should have the right to decide on abortion until an amendment to the constituion is made granting it as a right.
but democrats who hide behind it as a woman’s health issue are absurd. the vast majority of abortions are social choices, not medical emergencies. the truth is, all abortions are trajedies, and its a shame no democrat will admit it.
also, huck said ‘a holocaust’ not THE holocaust, but you’re liberal and liberals like ignoring facts and details and truth so i can see why you missed that.
Left by matt
October 20, 2007 at 3:29pm