Whoopi Goldberg (whose real name is Caryn Elaine Johnson and who is paid some $8 million per year for hosting ABC’s The View, a position she’s occupied since 2007), made a numbingly stupid remark the other day.
It was hardly a “Stop the Presses!” moment, as the actress, comedienne, and authoress has a history of making stupid statements. The most famous was probably when she defended Roman Polanski (convicted of raping a 13-year-old girl) by saying that the act (which included drugging the victim and rendering her unconscious) “wasn’t ‘rape’ rape.” Whoopi also excused Michael Vick’s involvement in dogfighting as a result of “cultural influences” and fairly recently declared that the Holocaust wasn’t about race, but was a matter of “white people doing it to white people.”
Her latest, as she chimed in on the current kerfuffle over the prospect of the Supreme Court overturning the Roe v. Wade decision regarding abortion, was to declare that the decision to have an abortion was strictly between “my doctor, myself, and my child.”
(Leaving aside that her use of the terminology “my child” would seem to contradict the argument by abortion advocates that what is aborted is not a child, but an inconvenient, non-viable mass of tissue,) I find it quite remarkable that her comment seems to imply that the child has a vote in the decision-making process. I wonder how the child casts that vote or otherwise makes its wishes known.
I know it’s wrong to presume how someone will vote, but I think it’s a pretty safe bet that a child in its mother’s womb would vote to be born rather than to be aborted. And yet, even if the child has a vote, and a way to cast it, it can be easily outvoted by the woman and her doctor. And this provides a “teachable moment” about Democrats’ understanding of voting and of the nature of American self-government.
Democrats (as well as the various permutations of Libs/Progs/Commies, etc.) have a great fondness of late for proclaiming, in high dudgeon, that almost everything of which they disapprove or with which they disagree constitutes “a threat to our democracy.” They even paint the Electoral College as being “anti-democracy,” claiming that it subverts the notion that every vote should count equally.
Actually, they’re right: the Electoral College is anti-democracy, precisely because it prevents more heavily populated states — with their greater number of votes — from “democratically” imposing their will upon less populated states. (You’d think people who are always claiming to want “a level playing field” would appreciate this.)
This is illustrative of Democrats’ (perhaps willful) failure to grasp the distinction between a democracy (which the U.S. is most assuredly not; it’s notable that the word “democracy” appears nowhere in the Constitution or in the Declaration of Independence) and a representative, constitutional republic (which the U.S. most assuredly is, or at least was founded as).