Comments on: A Modest Proposal

By: The Forester

The Forester — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 01:23:21 +0000

On behalf of my fellow faceless cubicle-dwellers, I can only wish I had veto power over anything.

In aristocratic governments, there is no right to bear arms. It is a privilege (Latin for private law) that is limited to the nobility. God forbid that us ordinary folk might have the means to defend ourselves against, oh, let’s say, a tyrannous government, blood-thirsty savages, or even gangs of armed criminals. The Right to Keep & Bear Arms is the right of self-defense. (Sidebar: one of my all-time favorite bumper stickers reads “I support the right to keep & arm bears.)

In regards to abortion, it is a brutal & barbaric practise. However, I can’t support any law that forbids medically safe abortions to poor women but allows the wealthy & upper-maiddle class to obtain them by traveling out of the country or paying a large fee to an unscrupulous physician.

By: Roberta X

Roberta X — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 00:12:08 +0000

1 through 5, 6 and 7 are questions you have to answer to buy a firearm. They want to know where you were born and they’d kind of like your SSN, too. And then the seller’s got to ring up the Feds and find out if the purchase is okay with them; Uncle Sam can say yes, wait, or no. (But they only let the cops look at the info and it’s supposed to be destroyed after a day or so).

Think there would not be an outcry if abortions required the same little ritual before proceeding and some faceless cubicle-dweller had veto power over it?

It’s a big complicated weird world we’ve built and way too many people get to veto our actions. I don’t remember elections for most of them, either.

By: Steve Foerster

Steve Foerster — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:02:55 +0000

I’m not thrilled with abortion either, but Frank’s point is a very good one. People always seem to forget that once you give government power against those you oppose, that power will eventually be used against you.

By: LtCol

LtCol — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 14:50:47 +0000

Since the orginial Modest Proposal suggested the fatting of Irish babies for the English dinner plate, I take this in the same vein.

By: frankchadwick

frankchadwick — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 13:48:49 +0000

Gary, thank you for that charming sentiment and constructive addition to the conversation.

Barton: It’s true that a majority of my columns deal with the military, but that is not a policy decision of the site. If you look back in the archives you’ll find a lot of non-military articles. My column deals with current events. Most of those columns will deal with military, diplomacy, and foreign policy, but not all of them.

By: Gary

Gary — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 17:06:05 +0000

If abortion is such a wonderful thing, it’s too bad Frank’s mother didn’t have one.

By: Gary

Gary — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 17:02:29 +0000

“If Roe V Wade is ever overturned be prepared to have the Government decide if you can use contraception or even if you can reproduce at all.”

Already done. The Supreme Court is part of the government.

By: Gary

Gary — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 16:59:42 +0000

So, tell me where I can find the word “abortion” in the constitution. Thanks in advance.

By: Jack Radey

Jack Radey — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 04:02:45 +0000

Blood pressure here quite safe. Actually, the proposal about gun ownership isn’t such a terrible idea. Just heard from an old friend that his second son, sweetest and smartest of his four, was shot four times a year ago (jaw and gut), fortunately within a few blocks of the best trauma unit in the county. Recently had a discussion with my brother-in-law about the 2nd Amendment. He insisted that there should be no restrictions of any kind on the ownership of weapons; including towed artillery. Didn’t say what kind of arms in the Constitution, so assuming flamethrowers, rocket launchers, or 105mm howitzers are excludable is not possible, in his mind. He lives in a nice community where very few if any young guys get killed by the flood of available hardware out there. I’m of two minds on the question, but…

One for the anti-abortion types out there, actually two. First, understand that besides the reawakened feminist movement of the ’70s, the biggest push for Roe v Wade’s decision came from the medical community, particularly ER docs, and GPS, OB/Gyns, etc, because they were sick and tired of having 20 something year old patients dying on them regularly from septic abortions performed in back alley’s and the like. Outlaw it, that’s what you get, because surveys done in many countries show only one effect of banning legal abortion – the rate of abortions does not change, what changes is the mortality rate of the women. Make it illegal and it skyrockets. Pro life my ass.

By: Ted

Ted — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:35:35 +0000

Good Article Frank. You should have mentioned that Roe V Wade was actually based on the protection of a Woman’s Privacy. If Roe V Wade is ever overturned be prepared to have the Government decide if you can use contraception or even if you can reproduce at all.