When I read the story about the Alabama Democrat Representative John Rogers was that a Catholic who is personally pro-life was saying this:
“Some kids are unwanted, so you kill them now or you kill them later,” Rogers said. “You bring them in the world unwanted, unloved, you send them to the electric chair. So, you kill them now or you kill them later.”
It reminded me of a moment in what Stacy McCain called “The Battle of Fitchburg” when Planned Parenthood moved in. I was talking to one of the persons working on the building where they opened suggesting that these guys were preying on the Spanish speaking folks many on assistance who were increasingly living in the city. To my shock he expressed an opinion that if this got rid of some of the “Spanish” it was fine with him. Despite being in my mid 40’s at the time I had never in my life heard such a thing as the open suggestion that the disposal of poor minority children was a feature rather than a bug. That this was the goal of Planned Parenthood was accentuated by their recent move from main street to the building holding the local food stamp office.
That brings me back to Representative Rogers.
Representative Rogers represents Birmingham Alabama (Ironically the home of EWTN) where he was born in 1940. This means that unlike the student snowflakes at elite $70K a year universities who consider hearing any opinion contrary to their’s oppression and racism he would have 1st hand experience with the real thing
He would have seen and experienced actual, Jim Crow straight up racism, both in culture and in law. He would have been old enough to have spoken to actual slaves or their children and known what real oppression was. He would have heard people unabashedly and without shame make a public argument that blacks,were inferior to and of less value than whites, particular if they were poor. For him the statement “Black Lives Matter” would not be a twitter hashtag but a question that was for open debate in the culture around him.
To hear such a man make the a utilitarian argument that to restrict abortion, a procedure overwhelmingly deployed on the offspring of black and “Hispanic” women, simply means you are bringing people into the world that you will have to incarcerate or execute, essentially that those black and “Hispanic” children were destined to be criminals preying on society who would have to be eliminated, an argument that would have not been unusual to be made by a Democrat in the Alabama Legislature in 1940 is simply incredible and leads to a pair of incredible and uncomfortable conclusions.
- The fact that a black Democrat is defending abortion based on eugenics and is not being condemned nationally by Democrats and or activists conclusively proves that abortion has reached the level of a sacrament to their party and that no principle trumps it.
- The fact that a black Democrat representing an urban majority black district is defending aborting blacks and Hispanics before they become criminals preying on the community suggests that the biggest threat to the lives and property of the minority community that he represents means he knows who is preying on his community and it’s not a bunch of racist white cops.
If you told me anytime in the 20th century that I would see this deep into the 21st I wouldn’t have believed you.
If you think what we do worthwhile please consider subscribing to help keep our writers and the bills paid. Of course one time Tip jar hits and always welcome too.