So you invite the media to a book signing event and then kick them out. Whatever. ‘Go to hell’: how Project 2025 chief kicked the Guardian out of book event Heritage Foundation staff member, introducing Kevin Roberts to the reporter, says: ‘You’ve got two minutes with our best friend Adam from the Guardian’ https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/13/kevin-roberts-project-2025-book-events
I would post articles from realclearpolitics.com related to Project 2025 here, but it appears the corporate firewall or browser I'm on triggers RealClear Politics autoblock when I click on an article. There might be a lesson here regarding conditions being placed on information or ideas.
Instead, I'll post a link to https://www.heritage.org/. This site appears to stay current with events. Below is an excerpt of their mission: The Heritage Foundation’s and Heritage Action’s mission is to promote human flourishing by restoring self-governance to the American people. As the everyday American’s outpost in Washington, D.C., Heritage promotes and advocates for public policies based on the principles of limited government, economic freedom, a robust civil society, and a strong national defense. In recent years, those principles have been under attack by the leftist ideologues running America’s elite institutions. Heritage’s place in this fight is primarily in the arena of ideas, public policy, and government accountability. As conservatives, our weapons are not the fleeting trends of the moment, but the proven, permanent fundamentals of human flourishing: faith, family, freedom, and nation. Through a rigorous analysis of public policy, opinion, and events, Heritage has identified seven challenges where our efforts are most needed and where we can do the most good. It will be on these seven fronts that The Heritage Foundation will make our stand, to: Empower parents to make education choices, Secure America’s borders and reduce crime, Ensure free and fair elections, Reverse the growth of regulations, spending, and inflation, Counter the threat of Communist China, Hold Big Tech accountable, and Protect unborn life and family formation. These are the issues that will decide the fight for America’s future and the conservative movement’s success over the next several years. Parental rights. The rule of law. Democratic accountability. Individual liberty. National security. Equal opportunity. Human dignity. As matters of political debate and public policy, these issues seem distinct, but in the context of woke totalitarianism’s escalating culture war, they blend into a single fight, the same fight Americans have been waging—and winning—since 1776. Will our government serve “We the people” or a political, cultural, and corporate aristocracy that hates them?
I don't like the heart strings being pulled about abortion by propogandists, especially the way some like WC go about it. Men who don't even have families or steady relationships trying to claim moral outrage for a few dopamine hits. This however is quite sobering as to what happens when you let authoratarians put their tip in.
You highlighted one concern out of the seven major imperatives of Project 2025. Does this suggest you are ok with the other six? As far as Roe vs Wade in concerned, I believe the Supreme Court should have maintained the fifty or so year status quo, as I've posted before. Is there not a legal principle related to established practices? One question I have is whether the abortion issue should decided on a state by state basis, rather than the Federal Government.
It should be decided federally since we know the absolute fucking mess and horror before Roe is why Roe happened. It should never be a plaything for shitheads. It is hard enough to be human in an uncaring universe.
I was hoping for a little more detail from you. It sounds like you believe the issue should be based on "universal" principle that applies to all, thus Federal. Seemingly similar to how many religious practitioners apparently feel. One nice thing about state rights is if someone feels strongly about something, they can chose to live in the state that supports their view. Bit of a pain being born into a state that does not. However, transportation in the United States is readily, if not often freely available, and almost all abortions involve the setting of an appointment in advance. Where I have the most concern is where the restrictive home state attempts to prosecute a resident who went across state lines to have an abortion in a less restrictive state. There are the practical situations, including rape, incest, danger to health, Down Syndrome and the like, baby born to a parent who has not want or has the ability to care for the baby, the effect a full term pregnancy has on a woman's body, or an "avoidable" increase to world population, which many see as too high, that support maintaining abortion rights. Who pays for the abortion of an indigent parent? ACA? If so, how are healthcare premiums affected? Does it really matter? What about the idea of the state paying a little now, or potentially a lot over time. Should there be an disincentive of some kind related to unplanned pregnancies that do not meet exceptions? Especially as most pregnancies are unplanned, apparently. Should a special consideration be allowed for the first unplanned pregnancy, but not subsequent unplanned pregnancies? Should prostitutes be allowed to deduct abortions they pay for as an business expense? It would be nice to settle this issue, but no matter what happens, many will be or remain, dissatisfied.
You are not in my view mature enough to have this conversation with. It is not a subject for lightweight personalities to hash about for fun. I will say that had the "pro-life" movement not fucked about so much we would by now have the ability to move an embryo to an artificial womb.