Late last week there was an interesting exchange on Fox News involving a couple of anti-choice radicals and the eminent scholar Geraldo Rivera. Geraldo valiantly defended the honor of Planned Parenthood, pointing out that, despite the unhinged rantings of women-hating right wingers, there is such a thing as a "good abortion." A good abortion, he explained, "is sitting in a clean place, where the woman’s health is protected! As opposed to a back alley! As opposed to a back alley where the woman dies with some butcher cutting her to pieces!”
Indeed, women should not be butchered in back alleys; they should be butchered inside Planned Parenthoods. This is America, people. Women deserve to be cut to pieces and left for dead by doctors, not untrained amateurs. As for the babies, they will of course die and be mutilated no matter the location, but it's important for this to happen in a safe and clean environment. Besides, if they're killed in the mythical Back Alley, there won't be anyone around to harvest their organs.
Geraldo's reasoning is not only insightful and compassionate, but ubiquitous. Abortion advocates across the western world have almost completely abandoned the scientific and moral arguments for the institution, planting their flag on the supposed inevitably of it instead. They contend that because abortion does happen, it should happen. Or at least that because it does, it doesn't matter if it should. Pro-abortion folks argue that society's duty is to not to prevent or condemn the murder of unborn human beings, but to ensure that it's done safely and cleanly and at the gentle hands of a rich man with a framed diploma hanging on the wall.
Planned Parenthood likewise trumpets the safeness of killing babies, and some clinics are even adorned with signs declaring their clinics "safe spaces." During the recent outcry over the selling of aborted children, abortion enthusiasts have hammered the inevitability and "safety" angle over and over again, both to justify abortion itself, and to excuse the trafficking of human body parts.
The rationale usually sounds something like this: "Look, I don't like abortion, but it's going to happen no matter what. Might as well have a safe and clean way to do it. And if the children are already dead, because they've already been killed, because they were already going to be killed, then we might as well sell their corpses to science so that we can cure cancer or whatever." (They might have trouble naming any single disease that's actually been cured by cultivating aborted children, but never mind that.)
[sharequote align="center"]Women should not be butchered in back alleys; they should be butchered inside Planned Parenthoods.[/sharequote]
This is a fascinating development in our culture. We seem to be accepting that abortion is a depraved and insidious evil, that it takes an innocent life, and that it can't be justified on ethical grounds at all, yet we still insist on funding and facilitating the practice. "Hey, it's a horrible, murderous thing, but since people will do it regardless, let's make it easier for them," the enlightened pragmatists say. Apparently, massacring a child is only truly objectionable if it happens outside and with a coat hanger (even though "back alley" abortions were actually conducted in doctors' offices, not back alleys), but we can mitigate the problem by moving it inside and swapping the hanger for a knife, a pill, or an industrial vacuum.
I've thought long and hard about this argument. I must admit, due to my closed mindedness, I at first cringed at the notion that an admitted evil should be legalized, funded, and exploited simply because it's likely to occur anyway. I found myself instinctively repulsed that child murder should be thought problematic only if it's done in the wrong place and with the wrong instruments. But I am not so arrogant as to dismiss morally repugnant, intellectually bankrupt ideas on their face. Clearly, many millions of people find the logic compelling, and since when have millions of people been wrong about something?
So after much internal deliberation on the subject, I've decided that these folks have a point. Why burden ourselves with making murder illegal when it can more easily be relocated? It's futile to have laws against things people do; laws should only ban things nobody would ever do. They're much easier to enforce that way.
Think about it: for thousands of years humans have written silly "laws" against murder, rape, arson, burglary, etc.. But people still murder, rape, set things on fire, and steal. Why continue the charade? Almost 15,000 innocents are murdered every year (not counting the unborn). The FBI says around 80,000 forcible rapes are reported. Statistics show that well over 10 percent of U.S. households fall victim to property theft annually. These things are happening, folks, often in unsafe and unclean conditions. In this environment, murder proves particularly dangerous, with well over 70 percent of cases resulting in injury or even death. And all because of our draconian laws and our feeble, backwards politicians attempting to legislate morality.
Enough of this. Time to stop living in a fairy tale land.
I submit that we take the "safe and clean" rationale all the way to its logical conclusion. If we're able to think outside the narrow, stifling box of morality and basic human decency (which we clearly are), we'll see that there ought to be clinics established to house and expedite all forms of brutality and bloodshed. Justifications for abortion aren't exclusive or unique. If we propose that a form of murder ought to be legal, safe, and clean because it is inevitable, then we've made an argument that must, in principle, be applied to any murder, or any crime at all.
Consider, for a moment, the conundrum I would be in if I decided to abort, say, you, for example. With current regulations, I'd be forced to conduct the procedure in your house while you sleep, or maybe out in the driveway while you're washing your car one fine afternoon. A back alley would be the most opportune, but it would put me at great risk, and hardly provide you with the sanitary conditions you're entitled to. Also, I am not a doctor, nor am I trained or educated in this form of medicine.
Now, I can already hear your two objections: 1) "But killing me is, like, different from killing a child." 2) "I actually prefer not to be killed. How could you convince me to come to the clinic to undergo this treatment?"
Understandable points, but naive.
On the first, I admit that killing a child is different from killing an adult. In fact, my study of history has shown that many cultures -- even ours, until recently -- would have thought it worse to kill a child, and they might have been onto something. A child is small, beautiful, innocent, and helpless. You, on the other hand, are large, cumbersome, and likely guilty of many sins. If we're measuring lives on any sort of utilitarian, spiritual, or aesthetic scale, the baby probably beats you on all counts. So if the baby is expendable, so are you. Babies at least have the potential to spend their lives contributing to society, whereas you've wasted the last decade of yours watching reality TV and taking selfies in the mirror. If it should not always be illegal to murder an innocent and helpless living human being, then there's really no reason for it to ever be illegal, and it's certainly nonsensical to pretend that the more useful and more innocent lives are somehow more disposable.
On the second objection, I suppose there would be two ways for post-birth abortion facilities to solve the logistics: 1) They could prescribe me a length of rope and chloroform that I'd use to escort you to the clinic (don't think of it as "kidnapping," think of it as "tissue preservation and transportation"), where health care professionals would take care of the rest of the operation in a respectful and hygienic manner. 2) Alternatively, we might go back to the old days where a doctor could be hired to perform house calls. Only, in this case, he'd be going to your house not to give you penicillin, but to shoot you in the face (safely!).
I'm just using you as an example, but I realize that surveys show most people oppose their own murder, even if they feel quite ambivalent about the murder of a child. In any event, obviously most murders are domestic. Certainly, if a parent wanted to abort their born children, it would be much easier to get them to the health care facility where this could be done by a qualified physician. I think any decent, civilized person would agree that these children ought to be murdered in a doctor's office, not a bathtub. And I guarantee the current laws against post-birth child murder have never stopped anyone from doing it. If someone gets to the point where the only thing preventing them from killing their child is the law, I doubt the dam will hold forever. What, then, is the law accomplishing, other than forcing parents to seek less safe and less clean options?
But this shouldn't be limited only to pre and post-birth abortions. The reasoning could be just as easily applied to all types of crime and cruelty. Again, if human life is not inherently worthy of protection against murder, why would it be worthy of protection against lesser indignities like assault, robbery, and so on? All of these things are happening, have happened, and will continue to happen regardless of busybody bureaucrats and their intrusive and complicated red tape. The only logical course of action is to make sure these grim but inevitable activities are executed in a safe, sterile, and professional way.
I imagine that nearly all assaults and robberies would necessarily be done on an outpatient basis. If you had to make the difficult and agonizing decision to beat someone to a pulp, steal their wallet, and burn down their house, you could set up an appointment with a medical practitioner versed in these methods, who would then complete the procedure outside the facility.
This plan would also serve as a fantastic jobs program. Just as legalized abortion improved the unemployment rate by giving jobs to medical hacks who weren't competent enough to heal sick people but still had the talent to stab a baby in the heart with a poison needle, the total legalization and professionalization of all crime would turn crooks and thugs into highly sought after specialists.
A Planned Parenthood location is seen on August 5, 2015 in New York City. The women's health organization has come under fire from Republicans recently after an under cover video allegedly showed a Planned Parenthood executive discussing selling cells from aborted fetuses. (Photo by Andrew Burton/Getty Images)
Don't worry -- they would still be required to get a medical degree! Believe me, I'm well aware that the biggest problem in our society isn't the savagery and destruction all around us, but that the destructive savages responsible for it are usually unlicensed. Planned Parenthood has resolved this issue in the baby killing niche; now it's time to address it in other markets.
Of course, my plan works brilliantly for most brands of inhumanity, but what about the sadist who wishes to maim or murder but won't be satisfied to hire out? Indeed, for some predators, the appeal is not in the result but in the process. You might propose that the prohibition against this kind of barbarity be kept in place because it commits the sin of being impractical, but I would suggest, for the sake of consistency, that we develop (fully regulated) training courses for these ambitious do-it-yourselfers. After all, serial killers are going to kill regardless of the law. Better they be educated in how to do it safely.
We can progress as a culture and build a better tomorrow not by toying around with these little ineffectual laws, but by systematizing and medicalizing all types of evil. Let's end the millennia-long Utopic pursuit of "human dignity" and finally work to make the most vile and inevitable atrocities comfortable, sterile, secure, safe, and segregated from all of us decent folk who don't care if human beings are ripped apart, just as long as we don't have to see it, for God's sake.
Our back alleys have been filled with murder and mayhem for far too long. Let's open the door and let it inside, where it's air conditioned and furnished and there's a receptionist with a jar of hard candy and a sign-in sheet. Like I always say, bad things ain't so bad when there's a bowl of Jolly Ranchers in the lobby.
We're already strolling by Planned Parenthood clinics nonchalantly as human lives are snuffed out just feet from where we walk; I think we need to afford this consideration and tolerance to all crime. That way, the next time someone gets beaten, raped, mugged, or murdered, you'll know that at least it was clean and professional. And, most importantly, nobody got hurt.
Contact Matt for speaking engagement requests at Contact@TheMattWalshBlog.com. For general comments, use MattWalsh@TheMattWalshBlog.com.
TheBlaze contributor channel supports an open discourse on a range of views. The opinions expressed in this channel are solely those of each individual author.