Select Page

Category: Barstool Thinking

What Will It Take To Actually End Abortion? (1 of 3)

How the pro-life movement is unwittingly aborting our pro-life era.

What Will It Take To Actually End Abortion? (1 of 3) How the pro-life movement is unwittingly aborting our pro-life era.

What will it take to actually end abortion? The abortion debate is a messy one; unlike other social issues, there is dispute over who the victim is. Abortion is a polarizing issue and once we reach polarization, there’s not much progress that can be made. It’s too easy to get lost in the weeds of polemics, bad arguments, irrational outbursts, knee-jerk reactions, self-righteous piety, and so on. There is no easy way to talk about this issue, so regardless of how I present this, someone is going to bite back. Let me preface what I’m about to say, by stating emphatically that I am staunchly pro-life, and I base that view on medical science, bioethics, and the Non-Aggression Principle (which affirm my theological view). However, I’ve been disenchanted (and even cynical at times) by some tactics taken up by the pro-life movement. My reasons for this disenchantment will become clearer as we go along, but it bears saying at the outset that I neither support nor defend the legality of abortion. This is a topic that I used to be very vocal about, but I’ve left untouched for several years because each side seems, at least, more interested in winning the debate, than either saving lives or empowering women. In fact, I think this has been observed by most people who explain their stance on abortion by beginning with the phrase, “I’m pro-life,...

Read More

Answering the Christian Feminist View of Abortion (2 of 3)

A response to Rachel Held Evans and Christian feminists

Answering the Christian Feminist View of Abortion (2 of 3) A response to Rachel Held Evans and Christian feminists

What’s the first thing you think of when you hear “Women’s Rights?” Chances are your first thought was, “abortion,” but then recoiled because you know there’s more to it than that. And yet … abortion … why is abortion the forefront issue of feminism and the women’s rights movement? I have a theory, but in order to unpack it, we need to step back and re-evaluate how we view abortion on both sides of the issue. Abortion is a multi-faceted problem that requires a multi-faceted solution, and there is a silent majority in America who have the power to make change. Who are they and how do we come together in spite of the many nuances divide us on the issue? Join me, Kerry Baldwin, as we Dare to Think About the Christian Feminist View of Abortion. Answering the Christian Feminist View of Abortion Rachel Held Evans and I are at almost polar opposite ends of the spectrum on many things; I’m Calvinist, she’s Arminian. I’m a libertarian anarchist, she’s a social progressive. Evans qualifies herself as a Christian feminist, while I qualify myself as a Christian humanist. This sets the stage for an interesting dichotomy between the two of us on the topic of abortion; we both begin our explanations on abortion with the phrase, “I’m pro-life, but …” and while we share this trait, our perceptions and solutions...

Read More

Political Manipulation in the 2016 Presidential Election

What to make of the emotional fallout from the election

Political Manipulation in the 2016 Presidential Election What to make of the emotional fallout from the election

Dare to Think about Political Manipulation in the 2016 Presidential Election I think the only headline competing with Donald Trump’s upset of the Presidential Election, are all the stories of emotional fallout from Hillary Clinton supporters. Apparently many Clinton supporters are emotionally distraught about Trump’s unexpected win, so much so that students are being given reprieves from their school work, and even going out to protest in the streets – violently sometimes. On my own Facebook news feed, I’m seeing posts being shared with emotional trauma and suicide hotline numbers. One CNN reporter interviewed a Trump protester who demanded that Clinton “sue the government,”1 ostensibly because the level of political discourse never rose above the level of insults and polemics rather than discussing policy issues in a rational way. In a CBS article, psychologist Lynn Bufka made the observation that “US adults are experiencing significant stress from the current election,” calling it “election day anxiety.”2 Another CNN reporter described Clinton supporters as stone-faced, crying, in shock, and stunned at the results.3 But these reactions are not necessarily a matter of sore losing. Bryant Welch, an attorney and psychologist specializing in political manipulation, said this in an article shortly after President Bush’s term ended in 2009:4 “America has been gaslighted. Gaslighting is an insidious set of psychological manipulations that undermine the mental stability of its victims. These techniques have invaded our media, infiltrated...

Read More

How Should We Respond to Free Speech? Part 4 of 4 in a series on free speech

Free speech can be controversial and offensive. It can introduce ideas we aren’t comfortable with or reaffirm moral trends that we don’t like. It can speak about politicians who may be violating their oaths, or supporting their ideas instead. It can speak against all government, some government, or none of it. Our offense to a particular idea isn’t indicative of it being morally defunct, only that it’s outside of our comfort zone. Free speech has been in the news a lot lately  from Sony’s decision to not release a satirical political movie (a decision they later rescinded) to protests and hashtag activism both for and against law enforcement and concerns over a growing police state in America. It’s very easy for us to look at an issue and take the polar opposite extreme in order to show our disagreement with that issue. This is happening with the polarization of the nation on the topic of law enforcement. Polarization doesn’t help either side. It puts the greatest distance between two sides with no hope of coming together, just like opposing ends of a magnet. Polarization is to the free flow of ideas what isolationism is to our relationship with other countries. Which begs the question, if polarization is not a liberty-minded response to free speech, then what is? How does our society typically respond? Today in the Rio Rancho Observer,...

Read More

Is Offensive Speech Free Speech? Part 2 of 4 in the free speech series

← Free Speech-Introduction ← The First Amendment as the Standard Bearer (Part 1 of 4) Some forms of speech under the First Amendment are relatively innocuous, but what about offensive speech? Is offensive speech free? The penalty for penning the Declaration of Independence was treason; under threat of hanging. This document itself was highly offensive to more than just King George. It offended colonists still loyal to the British Crown. And the United States herself was born out of the will and desire to express freedom from (among other things) stifled speech, belief, and expression. America hasn’t always gotten...

Read More
  • 1
  • 2

Follow Mere Liberty



Pin It on Pinterest