On March 2, 2017 David Hogberg posted this article about the death of Norma McCorvey: "Social justice warriors threw "Jane Roe" away after she outlived her usefulness to the abortion movement", saying:
"And why would social justice warrior-lawyers Weddington and Coffee help McCorvey? Leftists like Weddington and Coffee have a whole world to change! Getting bogged down in the details of one individual human being just gets in the way."And who exactly is Norma McCorvey? This is the woman who has been immortalized in American history as the plaintiff known as Jane Roe in the landmark Roe v Wade ruling making murdering unborn children a legal Constitutional right in this country. She died telling the world she regretted this whole thing - supposedly becoming a pro-life activist - and blamed the left for not giving her options.
Well, the left did use her. But she used them. No one made her make that decision. And the whole idea women need to murder their unborn children to assure their economic future is a load of horsepucky. McCorvey never got anywhere in life. Did winning the right to murder her child (who was born - given up for adoption - is now 47 and unknown to the public) make her life better? It's true she claimed she was gang raped, and as heartbreaking as that is we must ask -would murdering her child have made her successful in life? Would murdering her child have been better than adoption? Does rape really justify infanticide?
I know, I know, infanticide is supposed to be for the murder of children within a year of birth - so spare me any arrogant pontifications. The fact of the matter is - I don't like that definition because it implies an unborn child isn't a human child. Well, I say it is, and I don't care what the rest of the world thinks, so I'm calling abortion infanticide - get over it!
The article goes on to say these leftist should have done something to assure her comfort in life. Really? Why? She was used and cast aside, that's true, but why did anyone owe this woman anything? Didn't she choose all of this in order to be able to make choices in life without being burdened with the responsibilities of caring for an unexpected child? Isn't that one of the themes leftists use to justify infanticide? Seemingly that's the concept she embraced! So why does anyone owe her anything? However her story demonstrates what the left is all about.
Here's the reality of the left. Thomas Sowell who once wrote:
“For people on the Left … blacks are trophies or mascots, and must therefore be put on display. Nowhere is that more true than in politics. The problem with being a mascot is that you are a symbol of someone else’s significance or virtue. The actual well-being of a mascot is not the point.”The author goes on to say quote Sowell in another article saying :
“The actual fate of the mascots themselves seldom matters much to their supposed benefactors.” Substitute “poor women” for “blacks,” and it is very easy to apply that to McCorvey. That McCorvey was a mascot is evidenced by how much her attorneys were concerned about her after they filed the case. Given how long pregnancies last, the lawsuit dragged on much too long for McCorvey to have an abortion. Indeed, by the time the Supreme Court ruled on Roe v. Wade, McCorvey had given up her then two-year-old child for adoption. According to the Post, McCorvey “learned of the ruling in a newspaper article.” Perhaps Weddington and Coffee were too overwhelmed giving press interviews to pick up a phone?This proves what anyone who reads already has to already know - the left only cares about the latest philosophical flavor of the day they're promoting. And invariably a philosophy that will attain some irrational, misanthropic and morally defective goal, that will undermine America's traditional Judaic/Christian values. And all their mascots are always abandoned after they've served their purpose.
Let's look a Cindy Sheehan.
So who is Lisa Fithian? "Fithian, [is] an experienced behind-the-scenes leftist agitator [who] went on to help organize the Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter protest movements."
But when Sheehan attempted to protest President Barack Obama they dumped her. As for the "peace" movement that was so supportive when she served their purposes - they are neither seen nor heard. "The silence in fact is deafening...." goes on to ask: "Where are the email appeals to join Cindy from The Nation or from AFSC or Peace Action or “Progressive” Democrats of America (PDA) or even Code Pink? Or United for Peace and Justice." "This writer contacted several of the “leaders” of the “official” peace movement in the Boston area – AFSC, Peace Action, Green Party of MA (aka Green Rainbow Party) and some others. Not so much as the courtesy of a reply resulted from this effort"
Here, let me explain it, because it's real easy to understand - it's not about peace - it's about promoting leftist Democrats no matter what they do, and protesting Republicans who may be conservatives, no matter what they do. But it's not about peace. That was the "cause" of the moment, and when that moment passed - they picked another one. Just so long as that cause was a challenge to traditional values and those supporting those values.
Then Sheehan filed to run for Congress against Nancy Pelosi - that was the final straw. The left must have found this absolutely hilarious thinking - who does this loon think she is? She thought she stood for something meaningful to the left. She didn't know she was just another mascot, and the left has no meaning because the left has no moral foundation.
Then we have Sandra Fluke (who was presented as a young political neophyte) who became famous for demanding the federal government force Catholic institutions provide free-birth control. In my article, There is No Such Thing as a Conspiracy! I say: "It turns out this really is a Twilight Zone drama "to take the attention off of Barack Obama's assault on religious freedom." It gets better. It turns out she has been an activist for some years fighting against domestic violence and human trafficking, for which she should be commended. But she is no unknown 23 year old neophyte who just dropped in one day at a Congressional hearing to promote forced contraception payments by groups that disagree with this on religious grounds........and we now know that she was a plant."
Where is she now? She was going to run for Congress, but that didn't work out, and now the left no longer needs her. Here's Sandra Fluke now, who apparently needs an "Official Woman Card". Didn't she know that before? Oh, I forgot....she's a Democrat and a leftist....all those silly kinds of definitions are fluid for them, much like the term "social justice"!
Then there's the dead mascots, like Trayvon Martin, and all the other criminals and thugs who were killed by someone they attacked. The left really loves them because they're.....well....dead. That way they can eulogize them unendingly with no fear they'll be in the news for committing more crimes. That's so embarrassing when icons of the left don't fit the narrative. Worse yet, they have to go out and find another mascot. But most importantly they can drag them out every once in a while and they won't need their permission or cooperation, and the media will eat it up.
But of course you realize why the left really likes the dead so much. Because they vote so often. And invariably they vote for a Democrat. Those are the mascots "Justice Warriors" love the best.