Select Page

Left goes bonkers over Roe v. Wade for no good reason

Left goes bonkers over Roe v. Wade for no good reason

In my many years of political involvement, I have not seen such an extreme overreaction and scaremongering over a public issue as we see coming from the left in reaction to the overturning of Roe v. Wade.  If anything is outrageous, it is the reaction on the left.

The left-wing press is devoted to myopic condemnation of the Supreme Court ruling as some sort of social catastrophe.  They talk about an end to legal abortions – which is a lie.  They claim that the reversal will lead to widespread back-alley abortions carried out by medical charlatans with wire coat hangers.  Colorful propaganda.

Radical politicians like Senator Warren and Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez are screaming their anger and frustration at protests – claiming that a fundamental right has been stripped away from women.  Not so.  Congresswoman Waters is calling for defiance of the Supreme Court decision.  Liberal networks are featuring pro-abortion politicians and the heads of such organizations as Planned Parenthood, NARAL and the Center for Reproductive Rights to express their shock, dismay and their exaggerated tales of woe.  President Biden has taken to the cameras to express his outrage and his commitment to “do everything in (his) power” to defend unfettered access to abortion-on-demand. 

Common to all their statements is one central theme.  You must not allow Republicans to win any office in America in the November midterm elections.  Yep!  All that gnashing of teeth and theatrical anger is to convince folks to vote Democrat.  Chicken Little style scaremongering is the strategy – hyper scaremongering.

In reality, overturning Roe v. Wade is not the big deal they claim it to be – or the pro-life community wishes it to be.

In fact, overturning the previous court decision will have a far less impact on abortion in America than did the original opinion.  The 1973 decision was imposed on the country at a time when abortion was virtually banned, with very limited exceptions.  Roe v. Wade shifted America from a nation with almost no abortions – legal or otherwise– to a nation in which abortion-on-demand would result in the deaths of tens of millions of developing human beings.

Conversely, overturning Roe v. Wade will have a very limited impact on the number of abortions.  That’s right.  All this hyper consternation we see being promoted by the left is a total exaggeration of reality.  

First and foremost, the Supreme Court decision DOES NOT MAKE ABORTIONS ILLEGAL OR UNAVAILABLE.  It merely means that it is up to the states to deal with abortion.  And that is where the left is really avoiding the truth.

Every news report deals with states that have – or are likely to – limit or ban abortions.  The focus is on Missouri because it was the plaintiff in the case that ended Roe v. Wade.  Before the decision, however, Missouri only had one abortion clinic.  Most of the states that have abortion restrictions are already very limited in providing the procedure because most of the people in those states (including women) are pro-life.

Even with Roe v. Wade overturned, there are a lot of states in which abortions will be permitted – business as usual.  Importantly, they also are the most populous states. The majority of women in America currently reside in states in which abortion is legal – and will be legal in the future.

Here is a very important point.  More than 60 PERCENT OF WOMEN IN AMERICA WILL BE UNEFFECTED – TOTALLY UNEFFECTED – BY THE OVERTURNING OF ROE V. WADE.   All those women you see demonstrating and protesting in California, Illinois, New York, New Jersey and another 20 states, will be able to secure abortions-on-demand after the Supreme Court decision as easily as they did before.  They are unaffected.

California, alone, has 19.6 million women.  That is more than the ENTIRE population of 47 states.  New York CITY has 4.4 million women – more women than 39 states.  

And when you consider that the women more likely to live in those liberal big-population states are the more likely to seek abortions, the percent of women unaffected by overturning Roe v. Wade could go up to 70 percent.  

The reason red states are limiting or banning abortions is that the populations of those states tend to be pro-life.  The men and women in those states are electing pro-life candidates.  Where pro-abortion women reside, they are electing pro-abortion legislators and governors – and consequently, they are not having their access to abortion hindered by legislation or the nullification of Roe v. Wade.  

That is why a pro-life person like me – who believes the developing human in the womb is a PERSON, not a lump of extraneous flesh – is not claiming victory over the end of Roe v. Wade.  Its actual impact on the number of abortions in America will be very limited.  Abortion-on-demand up to the ninth month of pregnancy is still too prevalent.

It will take awhile to see what impact the Supreme Court decision actually has on the number of abortions in America – but I am betting it will have a lot less of an impact than one might assume when listening to all the caterwauling by those whose primary motivation is to make it an issue in the November elections as a distraction from inflation, crime, border crisis, supply chain shortages, foreign policy failures and woke insanity.  Regardless, Roe v. Wade is NOT what Biden might call a big f-ing deal.

So, there ’tis.

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry HoristLarry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.

14 Comments

  1. Rick

    Liberals are nuts, Liberals are nuts, Liberals are nuts, Liberals are nuts, Liberals are nuts, Liberals are nuts, Liberals are nuts, Liberals are nuts, Liberals are nuts, Liberals are nuts, Liberals are nuts, Liberals are nuts.

    • Harold blankenship

      They are fascist bullies. It’s their way or no way. But our great scotus, with 3 exceptions, showed them.

  2. tom

    I do not disagree with your numbers nor do I disagree with your theories based on the numbers. Where I do disagree is in your statement, ” It merely means that it is up to the states to deal with abortion. And that is where the left is really avoiding the truth.” The truth that you are avoiding in your discussion is that in the 26 states that have restricted or banned abortion, and trigger laws, these states have not dealt with, nor have they codified in law, how to handle many situations that can now be interpreted by ultra conservatives as illegal abortions. Such issues as invitro procedures, ectopic pregnancies, pregnancies dealing with fetal low survivability rates as determined by science which you say you support decisions by science, stillborn pregnancies, babies that will be born very crippled and require a huge amount of medical and social system dollars to support whereas if left to normal natal care they could not survive, rape and incest which are both very illegal but abortion laws in these states vary for these cases, and then there is very little to no support for women after the pregnancy, especially single women who have to work. Even the Gov. of South Dakota on Sunday Face the Nation admitted they have little to nothing in place and have to work this issue to determine what is needed and the costs. I used to be very pro-life but now I am not so pro-life when it comes to these aforementioned situations. Let me ask you, would you be willing (if you lived in a state that has strict bans on abortion) to pay an abortion tax, say 5% of your income to support women that will now be forced to carry pregnancies to term? We conservative and moderate men can be all righteous in our rhetoric, but it is we who get women pregnant yet we do not share equally in the costs of those pregnancies in many cases. How do you propose to change that? Pro-abortion women are now proposing “sex strikes” which I think is ironic because it moves these otherwise moderate and liberal females into an ultra conservative religious contention of “abstinence is best practice” – are you in favor of all single and divorced men and women not having sex at all? Believe it or not, it is ironic that the pro-life people have educated me on many of the reasons for abortion (such as Catholic Loop Magazine) and have caused me to see the pro-abortion side a little more.

    • larry Horist

      Tom … you really drop a load of issues in your reply — but all good points. As the issue matures in the various states, all those question will be considered. Even when matters are left up to the states, the legislation tends to homogenize. If there is a bumper crop of babies — and I think that may be far less than the critics suggest — both government, churches, welfare organizations, etc. will start to adjust. If I were unrolling these laws …. contraception would not be made illegal. If you outlaw abortion, it makes no sense to outlaw precautions against pregnancy. That is a no brainer. One of the areas that is going to have to be fine tuned is the condition of the fetus. In the case where a fetus has a very low survival rate, I think that could allow for an abortion. But how that is defined medically would have to be very clear — and that is not easy. Not sure the liability of the father is a problem. Bio fathers are made to pay child support until the child is 18. Extending that to birthing issues should be easy. The rights and responsibly of the father have always bothered me when I hear it is a woman’s body and a woman’s right. In those cases where social welfare is needed, government are going to have to step up — although, we have a lot of support already for single mothers. It is not a matter of adding new features, but rather adding more money to accommodate more individuals in need. The debate over abortion is not ended … just shifted to the states. In states where abortions are restricted or banned the pro-choice folks in those states will be lobbying to roll back the laws. In states where abortion is not restricted, the pro-life lobby will be tying to imposed various restrictions. Ironically, that is not much changed from what was going on before Roe v. Wade was overturned. The only win for the pro-life community is that greater restrictions are legal. I just do not see justification for the extreme reaction on the left.

      • tom

        I agree Larry. You have excellent points. I hope you are right that the discussions have just begun. I agree on the system and money issues. We probably do have the supports in place but getting conservatives to fund them to a higher level will be a big issue with them. I may be wrong on this so correct me if you know, but I am under the impression that it is illegal for a man to be forced to take a paternity test? Yes? I think many women know who got them pregnant but they cannot get the man to admit it or take a paternity test. This will be a sticky issue if I am correct. I hope you and I are right because I can understand why women now feel that the federal government has abandoned them. And yes, I think as you that liberals are over-reacting, especially those that resort to violence, but we shall see if the supports come through or if they were right in their over-reaction. Good topic for a future blog.

        • larry Horist

          Tom …. It may vary from state to state. My family took in a teenager who had a paternity issue and the court ordered a paternity test. When we went to get the test results in court, the woman and baby were there. I took one look at the baby and told new son that we did not need to get the official results….lol. That turned out to be my first grandchild — non-bio, of course.

  3. beven nation

    For Larry and can be sung to Get Off of My Cloud (sorry Stones) and I do me, just stay the fuck outta my business…..Larry.

    I live in an apartment on the ninety-ninth floor of my block
    And I sit at home looking out the window
    Realizing my pro-choice world has stopped
    Then in flies Larry who’s all dressed up just like my Uncle Sam
    And says, “I’ve won five bucks if I take his kind of pro-life stand”

    I says, “hey, heh, you, you, get off of my cloud
    Hey, heh, you, you, get off of my cloud
    Hey, heh, you, you, get off of my cloud
    Don’t hang around ’cause two’s a crowd
    On my cloud, Larry”

    The telephone is ringing
    I say, “hi, it’s me, who’s there on the line?”
    A voice says, “hi, hello, how are you?”
    “Well, I guess I’m doin’ fine”
    He says, “it’s three a.m., there’s too much noise
    Don’t you people ever stop your bonkers protesting?
    Just ’cause you feel so bad
    Do you have to drive me out of my head?”

    I says, “hey, heh, you, you, get off of my cloud
    Hey, heh, you, you, get off of my cloud
    Hey, heh, you, you, get off of my cloud
    Don’t hang around ’cause two’s a crowd
    On my cloud, Larry, yeah”

    I was sick and tired, fed up with this
    And decided to take protest downtown
    It was such a peaceful protest, a world of bliss
    There were no extremists, only Larry was around
    I strutted myself out, I was so loud
    And I started to scream
    Larry got mad cuz I can’t believe his beliefs
    Like his hand is stuck reaching down me briefs

    I says, “hey, heh, you, you, get off of my cloud
    Hey, heh, you, you, get off of my cloud
    Hey, heh, you, you, get off of my cloud
    Don’t hang around ’cause two’s a crowd
    On my cloud, Larry”

    • Ben

      You live on the 99th floor? Jump!!!!!

    • beven nation

      for evil Ben: Jump, EVHalen

      I get up and nothin’ gets me down
      You got it tough, I’ve seen the toughest around
      And I know, baby, just how you feel
      You got to roll with the punches and get to what’s real
      Ah, can’t you see me standin’ here
      I got my back against the record machine
      I ain’t the worst that you’ve seen
      Ah, can’t you see what I mean?
      Ah, might as well jump (jump)
      Might as well jump
      Go ahead and jump (jump)
      Go ahead and jump”

      • Ted

        Use your real name Ben. We know it’s you

  4. frank stetson

    “First and foremost, the Supreme Court decision DOES NOT MAKE ABORTIONS ILLEGAL OR UNAVAILABLE” except in a baker’s dozen states with trigger laws automatically enabled by the SCOTUS decision for a mandate to annihilate abortion. Only voting Democratic can change this quickly and decisively. Voting Republican can make this a National final solution.

    Many of these States could also use the Scotus decision to end the use of Plan B or IUDs since these remedies stop egg implantation post fertilization thus mandating the abortion of such choices. Only voting Democratic can change this quickly and decisively. Voting Republican can make this a national final solution.

    What’s next? As State’s turn Republican, one would imagine more of the same for those States. If the Congress turns Republican, it will go National.

    Larry, we thought it was the law of the land and now it is the law of the States. You say have no fear, nothing has changed. Bullshit. And it can get much, much worse. Especially depending on who folks choose at the polling place.

  5. Ben

    Which Ben? Original Ben, Bad Ben or Evil Ben?

    Is Ted really Ted? I am sure two out of three Ben’s are not Ben’s. They has Bens, ha ha ha.

    I just love people looking for reality on a website that supports handle-cloning, ad hominem attacks, disinformation, and racism.

    Ain’t free speech grand, Ted, you pygmy pricked pencilled neck geek whose real name is probably Mary.

    • Perry

      Stfu boy

  6. Ken

    I believe it was Mississippi, not Missouri. Otherwise, I agree with you!