Comments on: Money And Values http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/ n. the principle of good order "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman Sat, 20 Mar 2010 21:56:10 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: Ashish George http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8138 Mon, 19 Nov 2007 04:22:23 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8138 Maybe. I think that, at the very least, pro-lifers and animal rights advocates can learn a lot from each other. Now that there seems to be a greater emphasis on humanitarian causes like Darfur and human trafficking among evangelicals, the two groups can share similar heroes--William Wilberforce, for example. Maybe. I think that, at the very least, pro-lifers and animal rights advocates can learn a lot from each other. Now that there seems to be a greater emphasis on humanitarian causes like Darfur and human trafficking among evangelicals, the two groups can share similar heroes–William Wilberforce, for example.

]]> by: Consumatopia http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8136 Sun, 18 Nov 2007 18:43:52 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8136 <i>(I am pro-choice, but as a vegan I appreciate this predicament because I feel a similar strategy is required for those who advocate vegetarianism or veganism.)</i> But supporters of animal rights still try to pass laws respecting animal welfare wherever possible--dolphin-safe tuna nets, for example. The hope is to put us on a virtuous slippery slope towards respect for animal rights as these restrictions rachet up. The analogue for the pro-life movement would be to refocus away from conception (stem cells and emergency contraception) and towards things like later-term abortion where it would be easier to arouse public sympathy. I'm not in either movement, but I really don't see how either the animal rights or pro-life movements will get anywhere unless they start seeing each other as allies rather than rivals--a single movement advocating respect for all life in general, across all species and gestation barriers. Such a movement might cross party lines, which would make them more powerful when voting as a bloc. (I am pro-choice, but as a vegan I appreciate this predicament because I feel a similar strategy is required for those who advocate vegetarianism or veganism.)

But supporters of animal rights still try to pass laws respecting animal welfare wherever possible–dolphin-safe tuna nets, for example. The hope is to put us on a virtuous slippery slope towards respect for animal rights as these restrictions rachet up.

The analogue for the pro-life movement would be to refocus away from conception (stem cells and emergency contraception) and towards things like later-term abortion where it would be easier to arouse public sympathy.

I’m not in either movement, but I really don’t see how either the animal rights or pro-life movements will get anywhere unless they start seeing each other as allies rather than rivals–a single movement advocating respect for all life in general, across all species and gestation barriers. Such a movement might cross party lines, which would make them more powerful when voting as a bloc.

]]> by: Daniel Larison http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8132 Sat, 17 Nov 2007 23:12:34 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8132 I agree, GOM, but at the rate we're going the claim that the other side is always worse will probably cease to be true at some point, at least at the level of the leadership. I agree, GOM, but at the rate we’re going the claim that the other side is always worse will probably cease to be true at some point, at least at the level of the leadership.

]]> by: MuteNostrilAgony http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8129 Sat, 17 Nov 2007 20:46:46 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8129 Ms. Williams is also voting Republican for the sake of "free trade" deals that outsource middle class and entry-level jobs to India, and for the sake of plunging the U.S. military head-first into no-win wars in the Muslim world. Yup, her slavish devotion to the GOP makes perfect sense to me. This circumstance is producing the worst of both worlds for social conservatives. On the one hand, the Republicans are this close to being reduced to a Southern regional party. (Zell Miller, the joke is on you.) At the same time, the Pat Robertson/Ralph Reed wing of the party can't even nominate one of their own; hence they grovel at the feet of a pro-abortion, pro-gay, pro-gun control neocon from New York City. Ms. Williams is also voting Republican for the sake of “free trade” deals that outsource middle class and entry-level jobs to India, and for the sake of plunging the U.S. military head-first into no-win wars in the Muslim world. Yup, her slavish devotion to the GOP makes perfect sense to me.

This circumstance is producing the worst of both worlds for social conservatives. On the one hand, the Republicans are this close to being reduced to a Southern regional party. (Zell Miller, the joke is on you.) At the same time, the Pat Robertson/Ralph Reed wing of the party can’t even nominate one of their own; hence they grovel at the feet of a pro-abortion, pro-gay, pro-gun control neocon from New York City.

]]> by: Grumpy Old Man http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8128 Sat, 17 Nov 2007 15:05:46 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8128 The dilemma is that no matter how precipitous the decline of the GOP, the Other Party is worse. There used to be conservative Dems, but they are a precious few, the primaries being dominated by leftist oikophobes and Nanny Staters. The party of DeLay vs. the party of Sharpton. Hmm, typhus vs. cholera. The dilemma is that no matter how precipitous the decline of the GOP, the Other Party is worse. There used to be conservative Dems, but they are a precious few, the primaries being dominated by leftist oikophobes and Nanny Staters.

The party of DeLay vs. the party of Sharpton. Hmm, typhus vs. cholera.

]]> by: Daniel Larison http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8124 Fri, 16 Nov 2007 23:52:57 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8124 I am familiar with Mr. Hart's article. If he is right, there is even less reason for pro-lifers to remain reflexively loyal to the GOP. Indeed, the political alliance with Republicans might prove to be an impediment in the work of persuasion that you mention. I am still not entirely persuaded by Hart's argument, but I do agree that the goal has to be to persuade people that abortion is wrong. I don't see that as being at odds with introducing laws that penalise abortionists, but a significant reduction in the number of abortions is certainly the most desirable end. I am familiar with Mr. Hart’s article. If he is right, there is even less reason for pro-lifers to remain reflexively loyal to the GOP. Indeed, the political alliance with Republicans might prove to be an impediment in the work of persuasion that you mention. I am still not entirely persuaded by Hart’s argument, but I do agree that the goal has to be to persuade people that abortion is wrong. I don’t see that as being at odds with introducing laws that penalise abortionists, but a significant reduction in the number of abortions is certainly the most desirable end.

]]> by: Ashish George http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8122 Fri, 16 Nov 2007 23:44:44 +0000 http://larison.org/2007/11/16/money-and-values/#comment-8122 Jeffrey Hart has argued--correctly, in my opinion--that given the large number of women of reproductive age who will have an abortion at some point in their lives and the autonomy that seems to indicate they will insist upon, conservatives should move past abortion because, barring some great change in women's attitudes, any change to the law will not diminish the reality of the high demand for abortions. "This has been a focus of conservative, and national, attention since Roe v. Wade. Yet abortion as an issue, its availability indeed as a widespread demand, did not arrive from nowhere. Burke had a sense of the great power and complexity of forces driving important social processes and changes. Nevertheless, most conservatives defend the 'right to life,' even of a single-cell embryo, and call for a total ban on abortion. To put it flatly, this is not going to happen. Too many powerful social forces are aligned against it, and it is therefore a utopian notion. Roe relocated decision-making about abortion from state governments to the individual woman, and was thus a libertarian, not a liberal, ruling. Planned Parenthood v. Casey supported Roe, but gave it a social dimension, making the woman's choice a derivative of the women's revolution. This has been the result of many accumulating social facts, and its results already have been largely assimilated. Roe reflected, and reflects, a relentlessly changing social actuality. Simply to pull an abstract 'right to life' out of the Declaration of Independence is not conservative but Jacobinical. To be sure, the Roe decision was certainly an example of judicial overreach. Combined with Casey, however, it did address the reality of the American social process." http://www.opinionjournal.com/ac/?id=110007730 I would add that if conservatives really want to end abortion, they should focus their efforts on persuading women that abortions are unethical or unwise rather than simply trying to change the law. (I am pro-choice, but as a vegan I appreciate this predicament because I feel a similar strategy is required for those who advocate vegetarianism or veganism.) Jeffrey Hart has argued–correctly, in my opinion–that given the large number of women of reproductive age who will have an abortion at some point in their lives and the autonomy that seems to indicate they will insist upon, conservatives should move past abortion because, barring some great change in women’s attitudes, any change to the law will not diminish the reality of the high demand for abortions.

“This has been a focus of conservative, and national, attention since Roe v. Wade. Yet abortion as an issue, its availability indeed as a widespread demand, did not arrive from nowhere. Burke had a sense of the great power and complexity of forces driving important social processes and changes. Nevertheless, most conservatives defend the ‘right to life,’ even of a single-cell embryo, and call for a total ban on abortion. To put it flatly, this is not going to happen. Too many powerful social forces are aligned against it, and it is therefore a utopian notion.

Roe relocated decision-making about abortion from state governments to the individual woman, and was thus a libertarian, not a liberal, ruling. Planned Parenthood v. Casey supported Roe, but gave it a social dimension, making the woman’s choice a derivative of the women’s revolution. This has been the result of many accumulating social facts, and its results already have been largely assimilated. Roe reflected, and reflects, a relentlessly changing social actuality. Simply to pull an abstract ‘right to life’ out of the Declaration of Independence is not conservative but Jacobinical. To be sure, the Roe decision was certainly an example of judicial overreach. Combined with Casey, however, it did address the reality of the American social process.”

http://www.opinionjournal.com/ac/?id=110007730

I would add that if conservatives really want to end abortion, they should focus their efforts on persuading women that abortions are unethical or unwise rather than simply trying to change the law. (I am pro-choice, but as a vegan I appreciate this predicament because I feel a similar strategy is required for those who advocate vegetarianism or veganism.)

]]>