The Abortion Bible

THE
ABORTION
BIBLE
THE LAST WORD ON FAITH, REASON,

WOMEN, CHILDREN, & TRUTH
By MICHAEL LEE
Library of Congress Control Number: 2023920215
ISBN: 979-8-8595-6176-6
Copyright. © All rights reserved. Note exception: Writers,

journalists, podcasters, and pundits are granted carte blanche
use of up to 1,000 words with book and author attribution.
Content
PART I THE JOURNEY
CHAPTER 1 EARTHQUAKE................................................................. 12
OF TWO MINDS .................................................................................................................... 13
CHAPTER 2 THE GODFATHERS: HOW WE GOT HERE. ............. 15

IN THE TRENCHES: RELIGION 101 ................................................................................... 18
BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR ................................................................................ 21
NOT PRO-LIFE, BUT PRO-BIRTH....................................................................................... 24
CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM.................................................................................................. 25
CHAPTER 3 THE SUPREMES.............................................................. 31

PANDORA’S BOX ................................................................................................................. 36
LITTLE WOMEN.................................................................................................................................. 38
CHAPTER 4 THE HOLY MEN.............................................................44

A DIFFERENT WORLD ........................................................................................................ 46
THE VIEW FROM THE PEW ................................................................................................ 48
THE CLERGY AS SINNERS................................................................................................... 50
GENDER ROLES IN THE ABORTION WARS ...................................................................... 52
CHAPTER 5 GOOD PEOPLE ................................................................55

THE BIBLE ............................................................................................................................ 59
GOD’S WILL .......................................................................................................................... 62
WHERE ARE SATAN, LUCIFER, AND THE DEVIL? .......................................................... 66
CHAPTER 6 BIG BROTHER IS IN THE HOUSE (YOUR

HOUSE!) ...................................................................................................69
THE KGB, GESTAPO, AND STASI ....................................................................................... 74
FETUS INCUBATOR ............................................................................................................. 79
SNEAKY ................................................................................................................................. 81
CHAPTER 7 LIFE AND TIMES BEFORE ROE . . . THE GOOD

OL’DAYS?.................................................................................................... 83
CHAPTER 8 IF YOU DON’T WANT TO HAVE AN ABORTION,

DON’T HAVE ONE .................................................................................. 88
THE FAMILY VALUES PARTY ............................................................................................. 89
CHAPTER 9 RAPE AND INCEST: LOONY TUNES!......................... 94
DOCTORS AND NURSES ..................................................................................................... 99
CHAPTER 10 A VERY SHORT CHAPTER ........................................ 103

THE COMPANY YOU KEEP ................................................................................................105
PART II WOMEN: MOVIN’ ON UP
CHAPTER 11 WOMEN ON THE MARCH ........................................ 108

I AM WOMAN, HEAR ME ROAR .........................................................................................109
GIRLS IN THE PASSING LANE ...........................................................................................110
YOU’VE COME A LONG WAY, BABY .................................................................................113
VIRTUE .................................................................................................................................115
A DIFFERENT ROAD...........................................................................................................116
BEST ADVICE TO EVERY DAUGHTER .............................................................................117
CHAPTER 12 MEN JUST DON’T REALLY WANT TO KNOW ....... 122

GUYS AND DOLLS ...............................................................................................................126
IN PRAISE OF MEN AND DADS .........................................................................................128
CHAPTER 13 OLD GOATS: (MIA−MISSING IN ACTION) ............. 131
CHAPTER 14 FAMILY MATTERS ..................................................... 134

THE FAMILY: PAST AND PRESENT ..................................................................................136
NO LICENSE REQUIRED ....................................................................................................138
DOUBLE STANDARD ..........................................................................................................141
THE 30--YEAR CHALLENGE .............................................................................................142
CHAPTER 15 SEX, SEX, SEX............................................................... 145

WHEN PENIS MEETS VAGINA ...........................................................................................147
CONTRACEPTION ...............................................................................................................149
GOOD NEWS ........................................................................................................................154
CHAPTER 16 WHAT DO WOMEN WANT? ...................................... 157
PART III CHILDREN
CHAPTER 17 THE ADOPTION OPTION.......................................... 161

WHY FOSTER CARE? ..........................................................................................................165
CHAPTER 18 CIVIL RIGHTS .............................................................. 168

A FAIRY TALE: A SIGHT YOU WILL NEVER SEE .............................................................170
SHOW ME THE MONEY ......................................................................................................174
WHY? WHY? WHY? EXPLAIN! EXPLAIN! EXPLAIN!.......................................................175
CHAPTER 19 WHO IS HAVING ABORTIONS? AND WHY? .......... 178

ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIPS .................................................................................................180
COST OF RAISING A CHILD TODAY.................................................................................182
A COMMON STORY .............................................................................................................184
WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD .......................................................................190
NOTHING SADDER IN THE WHOLE WORLD ..................................................................192
CHAPTER 20 THE COUNTRY CAN’T AFFORD IT ......................... 195

A NEW ATTITUDE ...............................................................................................................199
DOLLARS AND SENSE ........................................................................................................205
FILTHY RICH COUNTRY ....................................................................................................210
FOOLISH MONEY................................................................................................................214
FREE MONEY.......................................................................................................................217
CHAPTER 21 CHASING THE AMERICAN DREAM ....................... 224

BABY BUST! .........................................................................................................................226
CHILDCARE: THE HARDEST NUT TO CRACK ................................................................229
REALITY CHECK .................................................................................................................231
CHILDREN FIRST ................................................................................................................235
PART IV THE CRYSTAL BALL: WHAT’S NEXT
CHAPTER 22 FREEDOM, CHOICE, WOMEN ................................ 242

A SWEET SPOT.....................................................................................................................244
A SMART CONCESSION ......................................................................................................246
CHAPTER 23 THE END GAME ......................................................... 250

THE BACKLASH COMEBACK ............................................................................................251
THE DEATH STAR? .............................................................................................................260
DÉTENTE?............................................................................................................................262
EPILOGUE ............................................................................................. 266
PART V CODA
THE “TRUTH” ABOUT HYPOCRISY ON STEROIDS: NO DOUBT! ............................... 268

ROLE MODELS: STANDING UP FOR “TRUTH!” ............................................................269
“BORN AGAIN” ELEPHANTS: REFLECTIONS ON “TRUTH” ........................................275
ELEPHANTS: FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ....................................................................286
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
The author writes from California, is married, and has spent

his career in education and business. The author holds degrees in
History (BA), Education (M-Ed. Adm.), Business (MBA), and Law
(JD) and is a keen observer of the current political zeitgeist scene.
Disclosure: The author of this book was a lifelong Republican

who years ago left the party and became independent as the party
moved closer toward the fringe right and lost its way, becoming
less interested in governance and objective truth than in fear and
grievance. The author has never been a Democrat or progressive
but believes no one has a monopoly on the best ideas or policies.
The author considers his political views as “purple” (centrist) and
grounded in common sense, as opposed to warring red and blue
extremes. The author is also a Christian who believes character and
temperament are critically important in all our elected leaders with
the integrity and courage to speak truth to power and to always
defend the truth. Objective reality is critical to democracy.
Note: Generalized proper names used in this book are
representative for narrative purposes and do not represent
actual individuals.
A previous book by Michael Lee: Title: Boomers Turning 60ish.

What’s Next on the Highway of Life? An insightful look at life that
focuses on all aspects of the last quarter of life from 60 to 80. It is
guaranteed to be a thought-provoking, informative, humorous,
and insightful GPS map for your life (relevant at any age). The
fourth quarter can be the best quarter of life when combined with
wisdom, opportunity, and possibilities along life’s journey. It will
make you reflect on what you want out of life and how to maximize
the years of joy on the highway of life. With some wise foresight
and timely planning, the best is yet to come. Good times are still
in your future. Available on Amazon.
Author Contact Information:
Website: Michaellee77.com
Email: AbortionBible@gmail.com
Mail: Michael Lee P.O. Box 7885 Redlands, Ca. 92375
DEDICATION
Dedicated to all women who make tough
choices every day for themselves and their
families. Women are smart and trustworthy to
make their own personal decisions.
They know best.
Book Review Michael Anderson
Review from Sarah, a Women's Rights Supporter:

"The Abortion Bible is a powerful and insightful book that eloquently
defends women's rights and reproductive autonomy. The author's thorough
exploration of the historical, legal, and social aspects of abortion provides a
compelling case for protecting women's choices. I appreciated how the book
highlighted the importance of empathy and understanding, fostering a
society that respects women's decisions about their own bodies. It is a must-
read for anyone who believes in upholding gender equality and supporting
women's rights."
Review from John, an Advocate for Informed Discussions:

"The Abortion Bible is a comprehensive and well-researched book that
addresses the complexities of the abortion debate. The author presents a
balanced and thoughtful analysis of various perspectives, allowing readers
to engage in informed discussions about this sensitive topic. While I may
not personally agree with all viewpoints, I value the author's dedication to
shedding light on the multifaceted nature of the issue. It is a valuable
resource for promoting respectful dialogue and understanding among
individuals with differing beliefs."
Review from Emily, a College Student Exploring Reproductive Rights:

"I found The Abortion Bible to be an eye-opening and enlightening read.
The author's unwavering support for women's reproductive rights is
commendable, and the book effectively presents a well-rounded view of the
abortion debate. As a college student studying reproductive rights, this book
broadened my perspective and encouraged me to be more compassionate
and open-minded towards differing opinions. I believe this book has the
potential to empower women and contribute to a more inclusive and
understanding society."
Review from Alex, a Senior Publishing Consultant:
"The Abortion Bible offers a comprehensive and compelling exploration of
the abortion issue. The author's dedication to presenting all aspects of the
debate, from historical context to legal considerations, makes for a thought-
provoking and insightful read. I appreciate how the book encourages
empathy and respect for differing opinions while advocating for women's
autonomy. It is an essential book for anyone seeking to gain a deeper
understanding of the complexities surrounding reproductive rights and the
impact on women's lives."
INTRODUCTION
This book is an insightful four-part story that begins with how

America arrived at our current divide over the contentious issue of
abortion and the turbulence that has rolled across America for
generations. It touches upon faith, religion, law, the clergy, and the
conflict over sex and female coercion. The second theme is an
ongoing defense of women and their challenges in the shadow of
past and present patriarchy. It powerfully depicts the amazing
progress and revolutionary changes over the past century by
women. It is about their desired goal to demand respect,
opportunity, fairness and free agency. The third theme is a clarion
call to do more for babies and children without voice, choice,
agency, or voting power. It vividly demonstrates a lack of support
for many innocent children in struggling or dysfunctional homes.
The fourth theme is a crystal ball look into what may come next.
A concise epilogue crystallizes where America stands.
A Coda is added after the book’s conclusion requiring a

renewed dedication to truth. Regarding abortion, it opposes
misinformation, disinformation, and the dismissal of science all
tied up in the culture war. It is a reflection on our national divisions
and the critical importance of allegiance to integrity. It is a call for
courageous leaders to boldly be a profile in courage in defense of
honor and goodness. It is a call to stand against hypocrisy. It is a
call to be unafraid and speak truth even at the expense of power
and position to maintain our democracy and self-respect as a
nation. It is a call to be a noble American. It is a call to become
better Americans.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 1 EARTHQUAKE | 11
PART I
THE JOURNEY
How we got here. A story of the journey
that touches on history, law, religion,
clerics, God, and politicians.
CHAPTER 1
EARTHQUAKE
In America, the earth moved, and the ground shook. Across

the land, from sea to shining sea, there was shock, joy, anger,
dismay, vindication, and confusion about what had happened and
what would come next.
Six very conservative justices of the United States Supreme

Court overturned the national 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that
established a woman’s right to an abortion. The Supreme Court
case of Casey v. Planned Parenthood (1992) that reaffirmed Roe,
also went out the window. The landscape of America that had
seemed like solid ground for fifty years was suddenly upended and
rearranged, much like a major earthquake. It has been disorienting
for nearly everyone.
The battles, however, are far from over. They have just shifted
from the federal government to 50-state battles. These battles are
certain to be just as contentious and hard fought over the roles of
women, sex, pregnancy, class, and police enforcement powers. It
will be ugly with hand-to-hand combat and indignation on both
sides. It will be a contest between liberty and freedom on the pro-
choice side and righteousness and sin on the anti-abortion side.
Free agency vs. coercion. No middle ground, no surrender on
either side.
For anti-abortionists, there was celebration and jubilation in

the culmination of a long and drawn-out battle to end the federal
right promised by the Roe case of a woman’s right to an abortion.
Wrapped in the conviction of morality, religion, and moral
certitude, they vigorously campaigned for what was perceived as
the right of a fetus to be born. Proponents feel it is a simple black-
and-white issue of right and wrong, with no gray areas or nuances

to consider. A potential mother should be secondary, an
afterthought who should never get a vote.
For those who supported Roe and a women’s right to choose,

the court’s decision was a little short of a disaster, showing
profound disrespect for women and their choices. It was a rare
step backward in taking away rights, not adding to them as the
story of America has unfolded over centuries. Stunned and
incredulous, most women were in amazement at how this had
occurred. Women everywhere, both pro-life and pro-choice, had
to readjust their perspectives in light of the new Supreme Court
ruling.
The sorting process on the abortion issue among the states is

in full swing. This includes trigger laws, state court challenges,
statute codification, language clarification, prosecutor and police
powers, criminalization and civil damages, shield laws,
referendums, and many other major and minor proposed laws. The
major earthquake overturning Roe is resulting in 50 aftershocks
roiling the land in upheaval. They will continue to wax and wane
for decades to come. Fetus vs. woman is an ongoing battle that
shows no sign of reconciliation. The argument is over pro-choice
and no-choice.
OF TWO MINDS
Pro-choice advocates were angry at the Supreme Court for
overturning Roe. Their anger was about men in black robes and
men in state legislatures who displayed their misogyny, so it was
perceived as against women who just wanted to be left alone. And
yet, among other pro-choice women, there was less anxiety since
they lived in a pro-choice state, and nothing changed for them.
Even women in red states who had money and resources knew
that regardless of the ruling, they were only a drive or an airplane
ride away if an abortion was required for themselves or a family

member.
Everyone knows that those who are affected are the poor, the
young, and the marginalized. So, for financially privileged women,
after the anger, shock, and outrage began to dissipate and the new
reality became evident, there was also a feeling of resignation and
realization that this ruling will not affect them personally, absent
an unforeseen critical hospital emergency. It does not mean they
don’t care. Quite the contrary, they are distraught and will not be
silent, but intuitively they know they are exempt from the court
ruling no matter where they live. At the end of the day, money
($$$) is always pro-choice.
On the anti-abortion side, after cherishing a sweet victory after

years of effort and sacrifice, there will be little complacency in the
glow of victory. They see the overturning of Roe as only half a
victory. The real prize is the next push to make abortion illegal
nationwide. The call will go out to redouble their efforts in as many
states as possible and to lay the groundwork for the future to
“finish the job” by either federal legislation or judicial action to
outlaw abortion everywhere and make it the law of the land. The
Republican National Committee under re-elected Ronna
McDaniel passed proposals to double down on the abortion issue.
Members were urged to “go on offense” in future elections to
support the most restrictive measures possible. With the demise of
Roe, round two is just getting underway. It may go 15 rounds and
is sure to be a bruising fight. In the immortal words of baseball
Yankee manager Yogi Berra, “It ain’t over till it’s over.”
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 2 THE GODFATHERS: HOW WE GOT HERE | 15
CHAPTER 2
THE GODFATHERS: HOW WE
GOT HERE
Francis Schaeffer is a name mostly unknown outside of
evangelical circles. But in the mid and late 1970s, he produced
several books and films with his son Frank (now an ardent critic
and outcast), that galvanized evangelicals. Schaeffer’s view saw the
church and the era of the Reformation pitted against the
Renaissance and Enlightenment that promoted secular humanism,
leading to the beginning of the moral decline of Western Christian
civilization. Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop, a pediatric surgeon,
and later Surgeon General under President Reagan, teamed up in
the late 1970s traveling from church to church, preaching the anti-
abortion message. Seeds were planted, and over time, a nascent
movement would morph into a righteous crusade.
Often implied or just assumed was the woman’s role as a

mother above all else. Her role would always be secondary to a
fetus, her children, her husband, and her church. Her “agency” was
to serve others. Her dreams or aspirations were to be relegated to
the sidelines of life, as determined by a paternalistic band of wiser
men (always wiser men, never wiser women). Phyllis Schlafly, a rare
female public figure, would lead a crusade against feminism and
the ERA movement for equal rights for women. It found an
audience among many religiously conservative women who had a
much more traditional view of the role of women. In a weekly
sermon, a male preacher or priest told them what to think, how to
behave, and what was right and wrong in the eyes of God as told
to them by God.
The 1970s saw a shift in evangelical circles as a backlash to the

turbulent 1960s over civil rights and the women’s movement, with
both groups demanding to be recognized as more than second-

class citizens. The birth control pill came into wider use in the
1960s. It was seen as leading women to promiscuity and a
breakdown of the home, never mind any double standards for
men. Divorce rates began to spike. Hippies, free love, weed, and
rock and roll spelled doom for America. Sex in all its forms became
an obsession of the clergy over all the other sins of the Bible, which
is more than ironic as the Holy Men would become among the
greatest of sinners.
Schaeffer advocated for political involvement by the church to

protect the values and precepts of Christianity. He particularly
railed against abortion as a fundamental assault on Christian values.
Schaeffer felt strongly that the abortion issue was to be the primary
symbol of America going off the rails with a profound disrespect
for the unborn. However, this was not a central issue in most
evangelical churches at the time. Most were ambivalent about
abortion, and some leaders spoke favorably about Roe v. Wade
concerning women.
David Roach, writing in the Baptist Press in a January 16, 2015

article, outlines just what the mindsets of Baptists were in the ‘70s.
He writes, “Baptists, the largest protestant denomination, said little
about abortion before the 1980s. It was always considered a
Catholic issue. In 1970 a poll conducted by the Baptist Sunday
School board found 70 percent of Southern Baptist pastors (note-
pastors no less!) supported abortion to protect the mental health
of the mother, 64 percent due to physical deformity, and 71
percent in cases of rape.” In 1973, a poll conducted by the Baptist
Standard news journal found that 90% of Texas Baptists believed
their states abortion laws were too restrictive.” This is pretty
amazing in hindsight. And in 1970, three years before the Roe
decision, a Texas district court ruled the Texas abortion ban was
illegal because it violated a constitutional right to privacy.
Anti-abortion alliances were formed with Jerry Falwell of the

“Moral Majority,” Pat Robertson of the “700 Club,” and James
Dobson of “Focus on the Family,” among many others, most of

whom either changed their positions or adjusted it to take center
stage. Evangelicals thought they had arrived with the election of
Ronald Reagan in 1980, a true conservative, they felt, even though
he would become the first divorced man to become president. It
was good to have friends in high places. Since then, evangelicals
have moved in lockstep with the Republican Party as a perceived
bulwark against the Godless left and, even worse, their socialist
tendencies to redistribute wealth to the undeserving with racial
overtones. The unspoken message among the faithful is that Jesus,
at heart, is a Republican.
Yet in another twist of irony, it was Republican Ronald Reagan

who in 1967, signed one of the most progressive abortion laws in
the country as governor of California. It was also another
Republican in New York, Nelson Rockefeller, who did the same
for his state. But Ronald Reagan would not be the last Republican
candidate “to see the light” and change his mind on the abortion
issue when he calculated where the votes were. George Bush Sr.
and Donald Trump would also flip-flop on this issue from earlier
positions that favored women. Christian leaders often became
giddy, rubbing shoulders with the movers and shakers of the
political elite and being feted by them. Heady stuff.
With crime surging in the ‘60s, along with the assassination of

JFK, his brother Bobby, and Martin Luther King, there was a lot
of fear in America. And over all this hung the trauma of Vietnam
and civil rights for African Americans along with the women’s
movement. All these issues split the country so much that there
was real worry about whether America would recover. Riots,
protests, marches, and unrest were daily fodder in the news. And
television, new in the ‘50s, came into its own in the ‘60s, which
brought everything into people’s living rooms like never before
and in color.
Since the passage of Roe v. Wade in 1973, many evangelicals

in the 1980s took up the anti-abortion banner and moved toward
a moral crusade of righteous proportions to get rid of the national

ruling of Roe, partially succeeding in 2022 by sending the issue
back to the states. In what can only be described by evangelicals as
God’s miracle, six conservative Supreme Court justices were
placed on the Supreme Court. Three of them were appointed by
the Bushes, father, and son, and three more by the irreligious
Donald Trump, following the wishes of the conservative Federalist
Society working behind the scenes. Evangelicals everywhere can
recite the theme of an old English hymn, “God moves in
mysterious ways,” and a most amazing feeling that Donald Trump
“was raised up by God for such a time as this.” Esther 4:14.
Especially when Trump’s views on women clearly run more
towards “Playboy” and that of the late Hugh Hefner than the Holy
Scriptures.
Emboldened by the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn

Roe, former Vice President Mike Pence quickly announced that
the job was only half done and that abortion should be abolished
throughout the land. Mike Pence was always a true believer against
abortion. Yet, his goal is for evangelicals to promote him as their
chief champion despite lacking in charisma or personality in a run
for president. While Pence is undoubtedly sincere, being relevant
is also a calculated political move. Appealing to the evangelical base
is critical to winning conservative votes. But did Mike Pence come
out and pledge to raise taxes in order to give more child benefits
or announce new support programs for mother and fetus and child
till adulthood? No, we are for lower taxes, not higher taxes. As for
a fetus, babies, mothers, and children, the consensus is that “we
will pray for them,” but no $.
IN THE TRENCHES: RELIGION 101

Religion has always been the catalyst for the fight against
abortion. However, evangelicals came to the issue relatively late. It
was never the “burning issue” that it became over the past
generation, starting in the ‘80s. As reported by Politico, the founder
of the flagship Christianity Today magazine, Carl Henry, affirmed

that “a woman’s body is not the domain and property of others.”
In 1971, delegates to the Southern Baptist Convention passed a
resolution calling for the legalization of abortion, a position
reaffirmed in 1974 and again in 1976 after the Roe decision.
When the Roe decision was announced in 1973, W.A. Criswell,

pastor of First Baptist Church in Dallas and a president of the
Southern Baptist Convention, praised the ruling in a statement
saying, “I have always felt that it was only after a child was born
and had a life separate from its mother that it became an individual
person, and it has always, therefore seemed to me what is best for
the mother and the future should be allowed.” But he would later
change his position and oppose abortion.
Even James Dobson of “Focus on the Family” in 1973 said

that the Bible was silent on the matter and, therefore, it was
plausible to believe that “a developing embryo or fetus was not
regarded as a full human being.” But he would later change his
view and become an implacable opponent of abortion. Billy
Graham, the world-renowned evangelist, was anti-abortion but
took a different path and refused to make the issue a central focus
of his ministry. Incredibly, a 1972 Gallup poll, a year before the
Roe decision, found 68% of Republicans saying that abortion
should be between a woman and her doctor. Most people at the
time believed this was a medical issue, not a political, moral, or
state issue. The same is true today in the 21st century. But
beginning in the 1980s and ‘90s, more moderate Baptists in the
church hierarchy were shoved aside by more hardline
ultraconservative fundamentalists preaching a take-no-prisoners
message regarding abortion. Baptist leadership lurched more to the
right with a heavy accent on orthodoxy.
By his own admission, Jerry Falwell, founder of the Moral

Majority and Liberty University, did not preach his first sermon on
abortion until 1978, five years after Roe. As further reported by
Politico, the evangelicals of the ‘60s and ‘70s were consumed by race
and segregation and the threat from the civil rights movement,
particularly in the South. Whites—only educational institutions,
like Bob Jones University, were denied tax exemptions (Green v.
Connally—1971) from the IRS because of their exclusionary
segregated policies. Paul Weyrich, one of the architects of the
religious right, observed the abortion issue was beginning to get
more traction than the racial appeal as society evolved. This pivot
meant the potential for winning elections increased, enhancing
power and influence for the religious establishment. A powerful
wedge issue was born. Politicians took note.
The abortion issue has become a proxy umbrella cause in the

culture wars between right and left. Ironically, in some parts of the
pro-life movement, abortion is beside the point. It is about power.
It is a way to raise tons of money and a platform to win elections
while making a candidate a hero to the faithful. It is about defeating
the liberals and all their socialist tendencies, real and imagined.
Conservative politicians love it even if the abortion issue only

moves 35% of “base voters.” They figure another 16% of voters
can be easily obtained by talking about crime, guns, immigration,
and socialism. They are home free as an election path to winning
in any mildly red conservative district. But these politicians know
that the laws against abortion do not apply to them. If a family
member were raped or needed an abortion for any reason, it would
be quietly arranged out of public view. So much of their concern
is political posturing to get money and votes and be a power player
on the national stage.
Unfortunately, religion and friendship have become divided by

red and blue. Numerous stories abound of how families, relatives,
churches, and best friends have become estranged over political
issues. Tip O’Neal, the Bostonian Irish Speaker of the House
during the years of Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, had a famous
quote regarding election issues. He said, “All politics is local,”
meaning that what was happening in the community had
far more importance than what was happening in the national

news.
Sad to say, but today, Tip’s observation is often completely

upside down. Most politics is national these days. When Tip made
his famous observation, there were no all-day rage podcasts, no
internet, no bloggers, and no social media. CNN was in its infancy,
and Fox News and MSNBC would not show up until the mid-‘90s.
Today, the local newspaper is dead or on life support. Instead,
millions of dollars are raised in just days in “rage” online
campaigns. Messaging on a national scale is virtually free money
online and requires no gatekeeper or truthfulness. The bombast,
rhetoric, and anger are all red hot. But it rings the cash register.
People may not know what is going on down their street anymore,
but they are plugged into the latest outrage halfway across the
country or halfway around the world. The global village is
everywhere. Besides, somewhere out there, terrible things are
happening. Breaking news starts right now after the commercial
break.
BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR

Victory inevitably leads to a backlash. The losing side is quick
to lick their wounds, get their bearings, and make plans for a
counterattack. Success can be sweet, but at times can be fleeting.
In life, church, and politics, nothing is static. It is always a moving
target.
The pro-choice crowd was largely taken by surprise and

shocked by the overturning of Roe and had taken for granted that
it was a settled law, had a 50-year legacy and was favored by 60%
of the American people. For six robed justices (five men and an
ultra-conservative woman) to take away such personal and private
rights of potentially half the women in America seemed
incomprehensible. A mere six justices vs. approximately 64 million
childbearing women seemed disrespectful toward women, who
were viewed as children themselves who could not be trusted.

Over the following months, many women woke up one morning
to find themselves living in states with abortion restrictions ranging
from mild to draconian.
Conservatives feel strongly that yesteryear was a better time

than the present. Morals, values, and religion all played a larger part
in American life. Today, change and complexity are ever more
threatening. The prevailing viewpoint among conservatives is a
fixation on the cup of society that is half empty and, in recent years,
has sprung a leak in the bottom of the cup. Palpable fear and worry
are ever-present. The election of conservatives, and more so
religious conservatives, is the way to slow or reverse the tide. Plus,
the appointment of conservative judges is the key to power.
But the story of America is that the pendulum always swings

back and forth. The great “silent majority” does rouse itself when
needed to drag extremists back toward some semblance of the
middle where most Americans live. With a free press, despite
disinformation bubbles, the pro-choice forces hope to restore
rights back to women. Most Americans are in favor of choice and
female autonomy. Yet, there is great concern about a level playing
field when gerrymandering, voter suppression, and big-time dark
money corrupt the democratic process.
One prime example of this pendulum swing was the Kansas

referendum vote on whether they should change their state
constitution. It was about giving legislators the right to make
restrictions and perhaps a complete ban on abortions. The vote
was held just weeks after the overturning of Roe and would be the
first public vote on the hot topic. Republican legislators, who
dominated the Kansas legislature, tried to put their thumb on the
scale by scheduling it during a primary when turnout was usually
low. A deep red state in the heartland that is so red the last
Democratic president they voted for was Lyndon Johnson would
be a national litmus test as to which way the wind was blowing.
Most activists on both sides predicted that turnout would not be
high and that the vote would be close with an outcome that could
take a week or more to decide. Many thought it could be a nail-
biter, going either way.
The results of the Kansas vote were a shocker that no one

predicted. It was a blowout. Turnout ran about 15% higher than
was anticipated, and the vote was not even close. The pro-choice
vote won by about an 18% margin. It was a huge win for the pro-
choice side that was magnified by being in such a red state that
President Trump carried it by 15%. Even in the reddest parts of
the state, the vote was either against change or a small margin
differential. The results in Kansas and subsequent states like
Montana and Kentucky have made some question whether in
some restrictive states, there was a disconnect between the voters
on this issue and the more radical state legislators, often dominated
by male conservatives.
Other setbacks have occurred in other states. Over a year later,

Ohio, a trending red state, would also decisively vote in favor of
abortion rights. In Wisconsin, a highly contested judicial race for a
seat on the State Supreme Court is likely to be the swing judicial
vote and rule in favor of abortion rights. Abortion was the main
issue in the campaign, and a stunning one million more people
came out to vote in Wisconsin than in a previous judge’s election.
The liberal judge, Janet Protasiewicz favoring abortion rights won
by a crushing eleven-point margin.
South Carolina saw five bipartisan women (note, women) in

the legislature oppose severe restrictions before a legislative
override of the Governor’s veto established a six-week standard.
Both Nebraska and North Carolina retreated from outright bans
and opposed limited six-week bans by setting 12-week limits. But
there will surely be more attempts at referendums and judicial
action in other states. Alarmed activists in favor of abortion
restrictions are already attempting to deny democracy and
statewide voting on the abortion issue in great fear of losing. They
do not want the public to be able to vote. They oppose citizen
democracy. Legislators are easier to control than citizens. It will be
a battle on both sides.
NOT PRO-LIFE, BUT PRO-BIRTH

Get ‘em born, then forget ‘em. One of the biggest criticisms
of the anti-abortion movement is their short-sighted fanatical
focus on the fetus and making sure it gets born and has the right
to life. Mission accomplished! Let’s move on. Most women and
their babies after birth are generally left alone to fend for
themselves. But for destitute women, a few organizations try to
step in with at least some meager post-natal support of diapers,
baby formula, and toys for needy women. An even smaller fraction
of some activists will try to help with living arrangements and
maybe some job counseling and some initial financial support. But
it’s tough with some low-income women without job skills,
childcare, resources, and little support. No one has any long-term
answer for them.
However, even in these few cases of assistance, rarely does this

help last for more than a few months. A prayer for a blessing and
a “God will provide” attitude is what mother and baby are left with.
The activists are gone and quickly turn their attention to saving the
next fetus. The activist’s job is to get babies born, which is the
relatively easy part, not to RAISE them or be responsible for them
after the fact, which is the hard part that requires a minimum of
eighteen to twenty-two years of engagement. Left unsaid, but
assumed, is that the care of mother and baby is the government’s
job, but nearly everyone is opposed to raising taxes. Besides, there
is a general societal bias against most of these perceived
irresponsible mothers, who don’t deserve to get government
freebies for being dumb enough to get pregnant in the first place,
if they can’t support a child.
Activists never define their pro-life message as mentoring a

baby through to adulthood. What happens to the baby and what
kind of life they will have is not our problem. Neither is the
mother’s long-term welfare, despite shallow and disingenuous
claims to the contrary of heartfelt concern for a new mother. It’s
not what we do and what we are about. Former Massachusetts

representative Barney Frank often remarked that “Conservatives
believe that life begins at conception and ends at birth.”
CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM
Christian nationalism is a term usually bandied about by
people on the left who mischaracterize the term and use it as a
hammer and a slander. It is often unfair. Lefties try to paint a
picture of hopeless radical white Christians who want to cram their
view of religion and morality down everyone else’s throat. Yet,
some of that is true for a minority, but far from the whole picture.
It is not any more accurate when people on the right accuse all
lefties of being radical socialists, redistributing all the money to the
lazy poor, murderers of fetuses, and glorifying the LGBTQ crowd
as standard role models for all of society. Yet, in every stereotype,
there is always some truth to be found. If not, it would cease to be
a stereotype no matter how over-hyped it may be portrayed.
Factions of the extreme far right and the extreme far left often do
live up to some of their characterizations, even though most
Americans reject them.
Christianity is all over the map today. Old mainline

denominations have struggled with declining membership since
the 1960s. In contrast, evangelical churches exploded in
membership over the Baby Boomer generation. Catholics saw their
heyday in generations past and have been struggling for decades.
Without Catholic immigrants, their numbers would have declined
even further. In recent years, evangelicals are the latest to peak in
membership. They are in trouble as they bleed members while
trying to hang on to their remaining faithful members in the pews.
All churches have seen continuing declines in attendance coming
out of the Covid pandemic. The fragmentation inside the umbrella
of evangelicals is also problematic, although often ignored.
Independent churches and ministries that are non-
denominational number in the thousands. The American DNA is

to be as independent as possible.
Institutional denominations have become more strident with

their aging and graying members in attitude and policies. At the
same time, the spirit of members in the pew is often split into two
camps. The first camp tends to be more “live and let live,”
concentrating on fellowship, worship, friendship, service, and
community. There is less adherence to doctrinal superiority or rigid
political orthodoxy. The second group wallows in victimhood and
anger at the changes in American society egged on by a relentless
radical media that trades in apocalyptic warnings. There is a siege
mentality that views everything through the lens of existentialism
to a particular way of life.
However, Christians do see religiosity and spirituality declining

in America and are alarmed. The secular culture, particularly
among the younger generations, is on the rise, as it has been for
decades. More young people identify as “nones” (no religious
affiliation) than ever. Christians feel threatened by the trend lines
when looking into the future.
However, Christians have blinders on when looking at a

mythical golden past. Religious wars, slavery, colonialism, overt
discrimination, and the poor treatment of women were not tranquil
days of old. It is a remarkable part of human nature that when some
look back on their personal lives or that of the country, they have
selective memories. Many remember what seemed to be better
times, ignoring all the problems of the past. And for many women
and minorities, the old days were anything but great, being
marginalized, overlooked, and discriminated against with
opportunities denied. Today’s world is not peaches and cream and
has many challenges. Still, great strides have been made, which are
often under appreciated.
The problem with Christian nationalism is that they have been

discouraged from the hope of persuasion based on the gospel. A
preacher feels he cannot compete with modern life’s one million

and one distractions. Pleading with a congregation to be more
Christ-like as opposed to a hundred cable TV shows, social media
addiction, or even the hot political rhetoric spewed forth all day
long is viewed as a losing battle. Moreover, he cannot “put on a
show” that attracts the self-centered young, addicted to spectacle
and instant gratification. Church going can be boring to many of
the addled young (and adults) if denied the use of their iPhone for
an hour or two.
In response, the Christian right has focused its attention on

obtaining temporal political power in the public square. The feeling
is that, by new laws, the country can be saved from what is
objectively seen as moral decline. As a result, they have married
themselves to the Republican Party, which promises restoration to
the perceived glory days of the past. Democrats are seen as the
permissive party where anything goes without any norms or
standards of conduct, which is more than a little ironic in the wake
of Donald Trump, who thumbs his nose at all norms and is the
anti-Jesus on so many levels and a direct rebuke of Christian
standards. But he has become the cult leader for many evangelicals
who turn a blind eye to any transgressions. Likewise, and perhaps
worse, he has spawned a cloned army of Mini-Me’s who promote
Trumpism without Trump. Ronald Reagan’s positivity and
optimism are out. Negativity and pessimism are in.
It has been observed that Republicans are the Daddy party and
Democrats the Mommy party. Dad wants to bring down the
hammer to suck it up and get with the program. In contrast, Mom
is the gentle facilitator and peacemaker concerned with fairness
and more willing to overlook the shortcomings of others. Getting
Mom and Dad to agree on the basics has led to a political divorce.
Christians have an apocalyptic worldview of the last days. The

2ndcoming of Christ is presumed to be a central message, although
many do not act like it. Being prepared morally and spiritually for
that day is supposed to be crucial to salvation. Seeking temporal
power was never part of the preaching of Jesus. He was much more
concerned with the soul than votes, with righteousness than power.
He did not take on the mighty Roman Empire of the day, seeking
to overthrow it. He did not sign up for Jewish nationalism, the cause
of his day. Christians forget that Jesus was quite explicit about
temporal power when he said, “My kingdom is not of this world”
(John 18:36). Indeed, the story of Jesus is a rejection of power by
being born in a lowly stable and dying on a cross. That’s
unappealing to Christian hardliners.
The admonition given by Jesus in the book of Matthew is this

“And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world
as a witness unto all nations, and then shall the end come.”
(Matthew 24:14). This “Great Commission” says nothing about
convincing anyone or about seeking political power. It just says to
spread the message whether people accept it or not, along with
attending to the needs of the poor and less fortunate. That’s it. The
rest is left up to conscience and God. Only a remnant (small
minority) will be saved. Get ready. That’s the message in a nutshell.
Unfortunately, far too many Christians, particularly on the far

right, have made politics their new religion. It is the gospel
according to your favorite TV provocateur or radio shock jock,
always playing with matches and lighter fluid. It certainly is not
about a wimpy Jesus. “I don’t want to turn the other cheek but
punch the opposition in the mouth.” Shall we all stand now for the
closing prayer?
The Christian church also struggles with the idea of nominal

Christians. CINOs (Christians in Name Only) display a
superficiality where members know more about movies, sports,
and celebrities than Bible stories or the essence of what being a
disciple of Jesus really means. Many of these CINOs don’t have a
real clue about their own faith. The Bible warns in Timothy 3:5-7
about “having a form of Godliness but denying the power thereof:
from such turn away.” In modern terms, this means “fake
Christians.”
Modern Christians (i.e. men) also struggle with the role of

women in the 21st century. Trying to square the circle of
contemporary society, the Bible, faith, history and free agency in
the light of the amazing advances made by Western women in the
past hundred years has not been easy. In much of the Muslim
world, there is panic over the role of gender and women (and
control) that is central to power, history, and religion. Orthodox
Jews in Israel and New York City keep their wives and daughters
on a tight leash and believe in general apartheid of the sexes.
Across Asia, women increasingly chafe under sexist and patriarchal
attitudes.
What Christians fear most is creeping secularism that denies

God’s place in the public square. They fear that any defense of
their way of life will be “canceled” by progressives who have no
respect for the religious history of our country. While they may
have a valid point, Christians are wrong that all the Founding
Fathers were of one accord. They were not, and the Founding
Fathers did not all stand around singing Kumbaya. Many were not
even particularly religious. There were real disagreements and lots
of squabbling. Contemporary Christians feel the country is slipping
away from moral precepts and into humanism and situational
ethics. Yet this lament has been going on for centuries. But with
social media and new technology, there is an acute feeling that
these trends are speeding up and accelerating faster than ever.
However, Christians also point out the perception that many

left-wing extremists are also intolerant and bigoted toward
Christian values, particularly regarding sexuality and the family,
who demand Christians acquiesce on bended knee to such views.
Each side blames the other for intolerance and bigotry. For the
left, sexuality is about identity and freedom with no constraints.
For the right, sexuality is the bedrock of faith, family, and society,
and not the business of the school or the state. As they see it, there
is a difference between tolerance and indoctrination and required
acceptance.
But another piece of perceived Christian nationalism that does

not get talked about is which Christians. Is it the Catholics or
Evangelicals, the Methodists or the Baptists, the Jehovah’s
Witnesses or the Presbyterians, the Mormons or the Seventh-day
Adventists, the Methodists or the Lutherans, the Pentecostals or
the Assemblies of God, along with Episcopalians and others? They
are not all of one accord. Or is it among the thousands of
unaffiliated independent congregational Christian churches?
Christian nationalism is, on one level, a myth because if you put
them all in a room, they would struggle to agree on what to have
for lunch, must less theology or ideology. Division and strife would
be sure to follow. Without religious tolerance, history tells us there
will eventually be coercion and oppression with the threat of blood
in the streets. The Founding Fathers were not stupid.
What Christian nationalists want is a seat at the table in the

hoped-for belief they can shape moral behavior by law and statute.
They will be disappointed. Morality comes from within the human
heart and soul and is not imposed by new laws. God’s gift was free
will within the law. He is the ultimate decider. And in the Christian
tradition, it is up to God to sort out the mess and contradictions
in a future judgment. But too many Christians have given up on
converts and righteous living by example and have instead opted
for power in the tribal political arena. It’s so much easier. Jesus is
not pleased, as this was not his mission to seek mere temporal
power, otherwise, he would have taken on the mighty Roman
Empire. God is more concerned about transforming the human
heart than ideology or even many abstract fights over theology. For
Jesus, the heart is the heart of the matter.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 3 THE SUPREMES | 31
CHAPTER 3
THE SUPREMES
No, this is not about Diana Ross and the Supremes, although
they were great back in their day. We are talking about the Supreme
Court, where five out of nine people get to decide what the law of
the land is for 335 million Americans. In the House of
Representatives, there are 435 members and, in the Senate, an
additional hundred members. We have only one president at a
time, but even all of them can’t rule arbitrarily and say what the law
is. These five justices can turn the tide of history with their rulings
and have done so in profound ways throughout our history. Court
rulings, with few exceptions, have always been about expanding
freedom, liberty, and justice. In many ways, they have fulfilled
Martin Luther King’s belief that the “arc of the moral universe may
be long, but it bends toward justice.”
But the overturning of the Roe decision was so momentous

because it took a basic right away—it did not add rights. The
majority of public opinion saw it as a step backward, not a step
forward, and opposed the ruling. The result was the lowest
recorded public polling of confidence in the Supreme Court.
Some see the court as an accidental court hanging by a thread

between a liberal and conservative-leaning court because of the
2016 presidential election. For those who see a politicized, biased
court, the stars all aligned due to sheer luck and a heavy dose of
hypocrisy. Those who favored the overturning of Roe see it almost
as a divine miracle coming from the hands of Donald Trump and
Mitch McConnell, the owl-eyed leader of the Senate at the time.
Evangelicals will claim that God meant for this to be and used
Donald Trump, the least religious president in history, to bring it
about. Simply amazing. Praise the Lord!
Mitch McConnell denied Barack Obama his pick of Merrick

Garland to sit on the bench following the death of conservative
justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016, nearly nine months before
the 2016 election. Mitch McConnell conjured up the fictional
nonsense excuse that the next president should get to select the
justice. Everyone knew this was politics without ethics.
McConnell’s complete lack of integrity and coherence was laid bare
when liberal justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died on September 18,
2020, a mere six weeks before the 2020 election.
Mitch McConnell did not wait for a new president as he had

disingenuously claimed before, but this time rammed through a
new justice in record time. Hypocrisy has no shame. Before the
election of Joe Biden, conservative justice Amy Coney Barrett was
quickly nominated and confirmed in record time, a mere week
before the election. So those who see an accidental court believe
that Obama got unjustifiably denied out of one appointment and
Joe Biden out of another. History works in strange ways. Religious
conservatives cite providence. But had Ginsburg died four months
later, a liberal justice (Jackson) would have taken her place. The
vote on Roe would then have been 4 to 4, with Chief Justice
Roberts the deciding vote, who would have taken the middle road
by keeping Roe, but with the Dobbs case making 15 weeks the new
standard for abortion by replacing the old “viability” standard of
about 22 weeks. Such is the hinge of fate.
Another factor cited in the overturning of Roe was the part

religion played. While every Supreme Court justice pledges to rule
on all cases based on the law, they are only human. They also lean
on their personal beliefs, how they were raised, and how they see
the wider world. Interestingly, the court was composed at the time
of seven justices who were raised Catholic (Justice Gorsuch is now
an Episcopalian) and two Jews. As for elitism, they all went to
Harvard or Yale Law School except Amy Coney Barrett, who
attended Notre Dame Law School, the Harvard for Catholics. As
for life experience growing up, only justices Sonia Sotomayor and
Clarence Thomas could lay claim to a humble origin story. Justice
Thomas, even at one time, wanted to become a Catholic priest and

is still devout, as is Barrett. Thomas’s opinions over decades have
been highly critical of Roe and even contraception, and his views
were widely known.
When all the conservative justices sat for their confirmation

hearing in the United States Senate, they were asked about the Roe
decision. They often tried to parse their answers in generalities.
Still, they mostly agreed with the doctrine of “stare decisis,”
meaning settled law as a precedent. Only God knows if this had
been done with a wink, a nod, and tongue in cheek with fingers
crossed behind their back. The justices wasted little time in
overturning Roe when they had the votes. All six judges voting to
overturn Roe were raised and influenced by Catholicism, which has
been strident in its opposition to abortion despite the Catholic
church hierarchy being a monopoly only for men from top to
bottom.
Consider the recent justice, Amy Coney Barrett, who was

confirmed just before the 2020 election. She is not only Catholic
but a member of People of Praise, a more conservative group
comprised mostly of Catholics who believe the church, in some
regards, is not Orthodox enough, particularly on the issue of
gender. The group believes strongly in gendered roles where the
men decide and the women abide. Previously, women in the group
were called handmaidens. Due to negative connotations among the
public, the name was changed to “women leaders,” whose
leadership is mostly limited to helping other women with family
matters. Amy Barrett’s parents were heavily involved in the group,
and when she attended Notre Dame, she lived with one of its
founders. She has been heavily acculturated by family and friends.
However, Amy Barrett is an amazing woman. She is smart,

accomplished and has excelled academically in high school, college,
and law school, taking home award after award. She is married to
a lawyer and the mother of seven, two of whom are adopted from
Haiti, and one of her children has Down’s
syndrome. In this day and age, that is remarkable by any standard.

She is to be applauded for being a Supreme Supermom who also
wrestles with difficult court decisions. She lives her life and faith
with dignity and prizes family. Superlatives do not do her justice.
She is among the best of the best. But it would be impossible for
her not to have her view on abortion skewed by her church
teachings. While it works for her, that is fine, but to coerce other
women without resources, support, or privilege in such a profound
way is not.
But one needs to be careful in questioning people’s faith. It

can be unfair to paint too broad a picture. People of good
conscience, of any religion, wrestle with many competing
viewpoints, hopefully in good faith. Certainly, the Roe decision
would have been the same if six conservative Protestant
evangelicals sat on the court. On the other hand, a court dominated
by six liberals would have gone the other way and upheld Roe.
Who is on the court matters? Again, history often hangs by a thread
and the strange machinations of politics. Yet, it would be
interesting to think if there were a national lottery to choose nine
women randomly (yes, all women, no men) to decide this issue,
would they have made the same decision the Supreme Court did?
It’s a possible long shot due to chance, but highly unlikely. The
odds would overwhelmingly favor leaving Roe intact and trusting
women to make the right choices for themselves. However,
patriarchy still matters across the judicial and legislative realms.
It is also relevant to compare the strong opinion of the first

woman to sit on the Supreme Court. Sandra Day O’Connor, a
conservative Republican appointed by President Reagan, was the
deciding 5 to 4 vote upholding Roe in the Planned Parenthood v.
Casey case (1992) for another 30 years. A mother of three sons, it
was widely assumed she would side with her conservative justices
to end Roe. But her jointly co-authored opinion with two other
justices is a striking contrast to Justice Alito and associates in 2022.
Casey’s opinion is profound in its defense of privacy. It states:
“Our law affords constitutional protections to personal

decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family
relationships, child-rearing, and education [and] recognizes the
right of the individual, married or single, to be free from
unwarranted government intrusion into matters so fundamentally
affecting a person as the decision whether to bear or beget a child.
. . .Our precedents have respected the private realm of family life
which the state cannot enter.’. . . These matters, involving the most
intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime,
choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the
liberty protected by the 14th Amendment. At the heart of liberty
is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning,
of the universe, and of the mystery of human life. Beliefs about
these matters could not define the attributes of personhood where
they formed under compulsion of the state.”
O’Connor continues: “These considerations begin our analysis

of the woman’s interest in terminating her pregnancy but cannot
end it, for this reason: though the abortion decision may originate
within the zone of conscience and belief, it is more than a
philosophical exercise. Abortion is a unique act. It is an act fraught
with consequences for others: for the one who must live with the
implications of her decision, for the persons who perform and assist
in the procedure; for the spouse, family, and society which must
confront the knowledge that these procedures exist, procedures
some deem nothing short of an act of violence against innocent
human life; depending on one’s beliefs, for the life or potential life
that is aborted. Though abortion is conduct, it does not follow that
the state is entitled to proscribe it in all instances. That is because the
liberty of the woman is at stake, in a sense unique to the human condition and
so unique to the law. [emphasis added] The mother who carries a child
to full term is subject to anxieties, to physical constraints, to pain
that only she must bear. That these sacrifices have from the
beginning of the human race been endured by a woman with a
pride that ennobles her in the eyes of others and gives to the infant
a bond of love cannot alone be grounds for the state to insist she
makes the sacrifice. Her suffering is too intimate
and personal for the State to insist, without more, upon its own
vision of the woman’s role, however dominant that vision has been
in the course of our history and our culture. The destiny of the
woman must be shaped to a large extent on her own conception
of her spiritual imperatives and her place in society.”
The Casey opinion is powerfully articulated on behalf of

women and its steadfast defense of privacy by the first woman, and
a conservative, to ever serve on the court. With the overturning of
Roe, it is now history for millions of women living in restrictive
states.
PANDORA’S BOX
If the conservative justices think they have “settled” the
abortion question by handing the hot potato back to the states,
they are under a great illusion. In that case, they settled nothing.
Instead, they have opened Pandora’s box, which will be even more
contentious and ferocious. It is much easier to rail against a huge
government far away in Washington D.C. But now the contest will
become more fraught. If it had been personal before, now it will
be nose-to-nose confrontational inside state lines and across state
borders. The Supremes have opened a can of worms, dividing a
divided country even more.
The Supremes have caused a tsunami of lawsuits nationwide

that will tie up millions of hours in litigation and clogged courts.
They will cost taxpayers billions of dollars that could support a
small country. It might be called a full employment decision for
lawyers and judges nationwide. Fights over “personhood” will be
contentious. In vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics for women who
want their babies and the struggle over left-over embryos will pit
anti-abortionists against clinics. Rape and incest claims, inheritance
rights for embryos, surrogacy, and rules for minors (even ten-year-
old rape victims, as we have seen) who are children themselves will
be highly disputed.
The Supremes will have opened the floodgates in a torrent of

lawsuits surrounding doctors regarding what they can and can’t do;
and who decides. Can doctors be prosecuted for rushed judgment?
Can their license to practice be yanked? What about contested
hospital protocols walking a fine line with convoluted and
confusing policies? What about attempts to prosecute CEOs who
have promised to help their employees get to states where abortion
is allowed and pay their expenses? What about privacy data
regarding a woman’s periods and potential pregnancy? There will
be lawsuits on behalf of mothers who died because of botched
medical decisions by fearful physicians who dithered and delayed.
What about a woman charged with murder upon returning home
after getting an abortion in a pro-choice state? What about a family
member or friend who gave abortion advice?
Already, an ex-husband in Texas, in a revenge lawsuit, is suing

his ex-wife’s girlfriends for a million dollars each for helping his
ex-wife facilitate an abortion with pills. What about being charged
with illegal drug possession for abortion pills in your own home or
on your person and being considered a drug dealer? Beyond civil
damages, what about jail time for aiding and abetting, or the
woman herself, having had an abortion, being jailed or tried for
murder? Yes, the Supreme Court has ripped open a hornet’s nest.
Millions of women will get stung one way or another.
A Texas woman was given a ticket for riding alone in the

carpool lane not too long ago. She told the officer she was
pregnant, and since the fetus was a “person,” there were technically
two in the carpool fast lane. She got a ticket anyway but may
contest it in court. Perhaps legislators will require pregnant women
to have a written statement from their doctor and show a
sonogram when an officer stops her. Ridiculous, yes, even funny,
but such is the crazy new world of abortion politics.
There is also the feeling that the country is polarized and

unbalanced in an unfair manner. Republicans have lost 7 out of the
last 8 presidential elections in the popular vote. Their only hope is
the archaic electoral college (minority rule) which reduces the

entire presidential election to about six swing states. The other 44
states are pre-ordained and mostly a sideshow. Hillary Clinton lost
the 2016 election by less than 1% in the states that mattered. In
2020, Donald Trump lost by roughly 1% in the contested swing
states but lost decisively in the popular vote each time. Both
elections were nail-biters, but only because of the electoral college.
Without the arcane electoral college, the country would be

very different with majority rules. It would force Republicans to be
more moderate and Democrats not to be so in thrall to their left
wing. That’s not all. Each state gets two votes in the Senate, so
Wyoming gets the same two votes as California, with 66 times the
population. How fair is that? Obviously, the founding fathers did
not foresee this. Indeed, they had never heard of “California.”
When the Constitution was ratified, Virginia, the largest state, was
only 13 times larger than the smallest state of Georgia. Nationwide,
small rural states have veto power in the Senate that is far out of
proportion to the country at large. It is evident in the contest
between large, populated states and small rural states. And who
controls the Senate has a big say, yea or nay, over Supreme Court
appointments, which has become a gladiator contest with no
mercy rule. The point of this is that elections do have
consequences. The country can get little done in a polarized
Congress of 535 squabbling legislators preening on TV and bomb-
throwing on social media. Smart political people look at the math
and figure that regardless of party, their side only needs to count
five-lifetime robed justices. It’s much simpler. And so it goes.
LITTLE WOMEN
In Justice Alito’s opinion decision regarding the overturning
of Roe, he states, “the authority to regulate abortion is returned to
the people and their elected representatives.” He did not address,
or perhaps even perceive, that on such a personal issue that affects

only women, the “elected representatives” are all dominated by
men, a patriarchal ruling class still in control of such a private
matter. Imagine if Justice Alito merely suggested a state
referendum in which only women could vote as a matter of equal
protection on a biological question. The odds are that Roe would
be retained in all fifty states, a clean sweep. The women have
spoken! Democracy wins.
Justice Alito also believes strongly in patriarchy. When sitting

on the 3rd circuit, he dissented in the Casey case on the issue of
notification, which did not require a woman’s duty to first inform
her husband before having an abortion. Obviously, a woman, in
Justice Alito’s eyes, should not have free agency to be able to make
such a decision on her own, ostensibly without a man’s permission.
In fairness to Justice Alito’s’ ruling on Roe, his opinion is not

out of proportion to a rational point of view, even if a narrow and
parochial one, marinated in patriarchy. He references “potential
life,” which suggests life begins at conception. But he does not
consider the fact that every act of sexual intercourse should
therefore be scrutinized, monitored, and perhaps controlled as
potential life, since any interference may impede such potential life.
Maybe having sex should be regulated by the state alongside
abortion.
Alito proclaims that abortion is not mentioned in the

Constitution and proceeds to argue the finer points of the 14th
Amendment and discussions about the right to privacy. Alito goes
into detail, citing historical records from the common law and
attitudes from the 19th century. He cites laws of state legislatures
along with analysis by renowned expositors of the law from the
past. But here, he suffers a fatal flaw.
It probably never occurred to Justice Alito that the historical

record was decided by men and largely determined by the “male”
clergy of the day, plus a nascent “male” medical association trying
to establish a medical monopoly by sidelining competition from

midwives in the mid-19th century. The newly formed A.M.A. was
intent on becoming the authoritative voice on all medical issues.
They had a vested monetary interest in all-female matters since
doctors make more money off female patients.
Furthermore, it perhaps never dawned on Justice Alito that

there were no women in drafting the Constitution. Therefore,
there was nothing in it to assert or protect their rights. Women
were not consulted and were invisible. In olden days, women were
treated as second-and third-class citizens. Generally, they were
under the thumb of their father and then transferred to being
under the thumb of their husband.
Justice Alito probably never considered the words of Abigail

Adams when writing to her husband John during the first
Continental Congress (all male members), imploring him to
“remember the ladies.” She warned, “Do not put such unlimited
power in the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be
tyrants if they could.” This could apply equally to many male
legislators today.
In 1776, it was inconceivable to let women vote, which would

have to wait 144 long years into the future. Women were to know
their place and stay out of men’s affairs. Indeed, the opening words
of the Declaration of Independence state, “We hold these truths
to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” Obviously, it
does not say men and women are created equal because for the men
of the 18th century, this would not be self-evident at all, but
laughable and inconceivable. Justice Alito, in his “originalism”
approach to the law, could not find anything in the Constitution
or the 14th Amendment on abortion or privacy as he interpreted
it because back then, men did not think about it because obviously
they were men. Women had no representation. Judge Alito looked
back to consider the “Founding Fathers” but never the “Founding
Mothers,” muzzled and stuck in the kitchen with a half dozen or
more children.
Justice Alito also brushed aside parts of the common law that
mention “quickening,” usually around the 14th week or so when a
mother can feel the baby’s presence. Abortion was not considered
a crime in the common law if it occurred before quickening. Even
afterward, when state statutes in the early 1800s began to slowly
criminalize it, it was problematically enforced. Again, all decisions,
laws, and statutes were determined by men. Justice Alito, in his
majority opinion, fails to adequately grasp the critical facts that the
historical deck was stacked against women. He does not even
superficially gloss over it since it is a non-factor and irrelevant in
his analysis.
It is a fatal flaw of jurisprudence when “originalism” attempts

to interpret the minds of “men” (of course, not women) from the
past. The idea is to consult a crystal ball to divine the intent of
legislators from long ago with different mores, cultures, and beliefs
in those days. An analogy for those who tout the legal concept of
originalism should use the same rationale regarding guns and the
Second Amendment. All citizens should be given the
constitutional right to bear arms (as part of a well-regulated militia
along with some basic safety training) and be free to carry around
town a five-foot-long, one-shot musket as the “original founders”
so intended at the time. An AR-15 assault rifle was no more
conceivable to them than landing a man on the moon. Likewise,
one could argue that the right to “bear arms” under the 2nd
amendment should allow private use of modern-day hand grenades
and a bazooka. One can never be too safe!
It also fails to recognize there was no law enforcement on the

farm or the frontier. A 911 call for help was beyond their
imagination. Originalism can be highly selective cherry picking and
lacking in consistency. It also suggests our laws should remain
forever bottled in formaldehyde.
While the historical record may be an important guide, it

should not handcuff the tremendous strides made on behalf of
women and the modern world of the 21st century. We may be
informed by the past but not chained to it. Women no longer wear
hoop skirts, corsets, pantyhose, or bonnets. The historical record
of horse and buggy days should not be interpreted as outlawing the
automobile or the airplane, which was inconceivable to prior
generations. Men of the 18th century should not have the final
word over men (and women) of the 21st Century. History moves
forward and is not frozen in amber.
Imagine if the court ruled that all adult men must be

circumcised. Ouch! Now it is more personal. But some could argue
it comes out of the historical record as part of our Judeo-Christian
heritage and is more hygienic based on medical grounds. Or
imagine outlawing the use of Viagra or similar ED products as
interfering with God’s “natural laws.” Men would not put up with
any of it.
While Justice Alito’s majority opinion talks about “potential

life,” nowhere does it offer any guidance about RAISING a
forced-birth baby into adulthood. This seemingly is to occur by
magic. He makes no reference or observations on anything that
relates to post-birth. He makes no requirements nor sets any
minimal standards on the state to aid and provide for such a baby
growing into a toddler, teenager, and young adult. He is mute!
One sight you will never see is Justice Alito or his male
Supreme Court justices offering their babysitting services and
generous monthly subsidies from their own pockets for the next
21 years to some poor single mother in an anti-abortion state
“forced” against her will to forgo an abortion. Neither would
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, with her hands full contending with
her own seven children, but immensely blessed with the aid of a
good and present husband, money, wealth, help, and privilege.
Justice Alito and his concurring justices ruled against half the
people, just the ones who could get pregnant. A woman’s
conscience is irrelevant to the power and interests of the state. The
poor little darlings need a chaperone as determined by the state
and male legislators, who are in control of writing the laws. Women
just can’t be trusted.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 4 THE HOLY MEN | 44
CHAPTER 4
THE HOLY MEN
Priest, Preacher, Rabbi, Imam, Pastor, Holy Man. The visual

image that always jumps to mind is that all the holy men are, well,
no surprise, men. In all their diversity, ideology, or belief, the clergy
is still universally a brotherhood, not a sisterhood. A female’s
proper place is relegated to the pew to be preached at, not the
pulpit. Women are denied participation outright or are heavily
marginalized in the sacred sphere. In one manner or another, these
holy men are assumed to have a special and exclusive connection
to God. Women are not seen as having “gravitas” and lack spiritual
authority.
The Holy Men feel threatened by the secular culture and the
advancements made by women in all walks of life in modern times.
They cling to a few New Testament verses by Saint Paul (not Jesus)
that tell women to be quiet and to effectively “be seen but not
heard” (I Timothy 2:12) (Ephesians 5:22-30, etc.) and that religious
leadership is exclusively the domain of men. Some have suggested
that these verses reflect more on Paul’s personal views and the
prevailing cultures (both Jewish and Roman) of the day rather than
a prohibition toward women for all time.
In June of 2023, Baptists kicked out several churches for

ordaining women “pastors,” including its largest congregation,
Saddleback, in Orange County, California, with over 50,000
members, for such an offense. Their recently retired pastor, world-
renowned author Rick Warren of the wildly successful book, “The
Purpose Driven Life,” made a passionate case for women, but to
no avail. Furthermore, an amendment was passed by the national
convention, stating in clear and definitive language that no women
pastors of any kind are to be allowed. Churches that do not comply
are to be kicked out. Titles are important to men, exclusively so. It

confers power and authority.
Baptists, Catholics, Mormons, and other conservative faith

traditions, all send the same message. Women are to listen, follow,
and obey the Holy Men, with no exceptions. The Holy Men see
the ministry and the church as their last fortress, sanctuary, and
refuge (and source of power) from women on the march. Circle
the wagons!
The Holy Men are promoters and protectionist interpreters of

God’s will. God speaks to them through prayer, meditation, and
the parsing of the Holy Books to puzzle out God’s divine will for
his flock, which is often opaque and open to varying
interpretations. When women pray to God, they, more often than
not, just get a busy signal. It is also worth noting that all 66 books
of the Bible were written by men. According to most biblical
scholars, even the books of Ruth and Esther are ascribed to being
written by men. One can only imagine if all 66 books were written
by women. Fake news and fake Bible, perhaps? In the entire Bible,
women are only discussed or present about nine percent of the
time. Men dominate the other 91%.
Holy Men set the standard for what is acceptable and what
should be condemned in the eyes of God. Those among his flock
that disagree or ignore the pleadings of the pious and righteous
Holy Men are labeled “backsliders” or “heretics” at worst.
Ostracism, shunning, and demonization quickly follow with the
threats and warnings to members not to heed anything these
troublemakers may have to say. The Holy Men also carry an ace up
their sleeve, claiming God’s denial of eternal life to the dissenters.
“Fall in line and do not question” is the intended message. It is a
powerful weapon for believers. The other shoe to drop is the threat
of eternal damnation in hell, with its intended goal to be “scared
straight.” Coercion with carrot and stick to keep the flock in line on
the straight and narrow path is, of course, determined by the boys
in the all-boys club. No girls need to apply
to the clubhouse. After all, it is “men of the cloth” that count, not
women. Women can go shopping.
Fear of missing out (FOMO) on heaven is an effective

weapon. One can only score points with God (work your way to
heaven, despite nods to “grace”) by following the rule book set
forth by the Holy Men. Some disaffected members will go “church
shopping” to find another Holy Man who preaches what they want
to hear. For true rebels, they opt out for a more humanistic, secular
lifestyle away from pontificating self-righteous and finger-waving
clergymen. For many Holy Men, the adulation and attention given
to them by virtue of their exalted status goes to their head and
becomes their own form of a drug that feeds their ego.
Regarding abortion, most male clergymen see it as a threat to

morals, hierarchy, power, sexuality, male privilege, and the central
role (and control) of women as homemakers and
“complementarians” to the leadership of a man as the head of
every household. Women should comply, defer, and accept their
“natural place” and role. And most importantly, women need to
adhere to the admonishments and dictates of the Holy Men. After
all, they speak to God and for God. “Can I get an Amen . . .
sisters?”
A DIFFERENT WORLD
Can you imagine a different world? Try to imagine the
following for a few minutes. What if every priest were a female?
Also, all the Bishops, Cardinals, and even the Pope were female.
Wow, that bends the mind. What if all the Protestant pastors of all
denominations, along with their head leadership in Conferences
and Conventions and all the key administrative staff positions,
were held by women? Can one even fathom the Muslim world
having all the imams as women, along with assorted high and
mighty ayatollahs? This would cause Muslim men to have an
immediate heart attack. It would be their worst nightmare.
Ayatollahs consider keeping women in their place as their most

important duty, above all else. They are the boss.
All of these scenarios seem absurd on one level. Yet, it also

vividly shows how patriarchy is entrenched nearly everywhere in
the religious realm. In no other field of work (bar none) are women
so underrepresented in numbers or influence as in ministry. It is
the last refuge of men who claim that God is on their side, and
who, after all, can argue with God? England’s Prime Minister,
Winston Churchill, a magnificent writer who was a journalist early
in his career, remarked later in life after the momentous events of
World War II, “History will be kind to me, for I shall write it,”
which he did and won a Nobel prize in literature. In a similar
manner, “Holy Men” claim the same privilege for themselves as
God’s special translators since they alone can interpret God’s word
or receive his instructions.
Women are certainly not wanted in the pulpit or in any other

authoritative position and should find another profession. The
Holy Men will not relinquish any real authority to women. But how
would the world be different if women held all the leadership
positions? Because of history, customs, culture, biology, and man’s
superior physical strength, it is nearly impossible to fully grasp any
such scenario. But a sure bet would be women demanding respect,
opportunity, fairness, and free agency. And a near certainty that
women would preach to men to grow up and get their act together.
A true nightmare for many men. Men may be inclined to give up
religion en masse.
Furthermore, in law or practice, women in ecclesiastical power

would never surrender their choices to the whims or dictates of
men on deciding fundamental questions of privacy, like abortion
on their behalf. Because they prayed to God, and she (God) told
them so. Can you even imagine what these women would impose
as punishment for male clergy sexual predators of innocent
children? They would likely bring back the guillotine and cut off
other body parts first before eventually stretching their neck on the
block!
THE VIEW FROM THE PEW

Women make up a majority of all regular churchgoers. They
are the backbone of the church that makes it run. They are the
church secretaries, the organizers, the teachers at Sunday school,
and the potluck coordinators. If women all left the church at the
same time, the church, left to just the men, would collapse
overnight. Thousands of churches would have a closed sign on
their front door, and preachers would be looking into other
occupations to sustain themselves.
Women find the church to be a safe space, a chance for

fellowship, worship, friends, and acceptance. A second home away
from home. Those with tough lives or crosses to bear on Earth
rejoice in the hope of a better world to come. It is a comfort zone
for like-minded people trying to do the best they can.
Men, who by their nature are more rebellious and have more
vices than women, attend church less frequently than women.
Many men don’t want to be told how to behave and to “shape up
and fly right.” Men don’t want some Holy Man preaching to them
every week to just be better. It’s a high standard that many men
just give up on.
Women listening to the pulpit, without even sometimes

realizing it, are sometimes treated to the “Best hits of Bible stories”
on how they come up short. Guilt is a subtle thing and is felt more
by women than men. Eve is blamed for falling to the serpent’s
seduction in the Garden of Eden. Because of her, God canceled
the mortgage and sent them an eviction notice. They had to move
out of the Garden, and the world has had to suffer ever since. Yes,
Adam was guilty too, but more out of love for Eve, the Holy Men
rationalize, making Adam less culpable. The present world of sin

is a mess because of Eve.
Certainly, no one should want to be a Jezebel, a despicable

woman who planned murder. Leah (and her father Laban) pulled
a fast one on Jacob, tricking him into marrying her instead of
Rachel. Poor Jacob had to break his back for another seven years
for the dowry of Rachel. Potiphar’s wife tried to seduce Joseph,
who wisely ran away. Delilah tricked Samson, and he was delivered
to his enemies, shorn of his power and eyesight. Lot’s wife
disobeyed and was turned into a pillar of salt. Her daughters
plotted an incestuous relationship. Herodias and her daughter
Salome conspired together and asked for John the Baptist’s head
on a silver plate, and it was done. See, it is quite obvious that
women can’t be trusted.
The Bible story of the woman caught in adultery who was

about to be stoned to death before Jesus intervened is interesting.
No one was picking up a rock to stone the man involved in the
affair. Fat chance, for the man’s part was irrelevant and invisible.
But the woman, in contrast, is demeaned, humiliated, scorned, and
deserves to die. It was a stark warning to other women not to
“mess around,” or this could also happen to them. Men, on the
other hand, live by a double standard and are largely not held
accountable for their sexual sins. Women are seen as the weaker
sex and as temptresses.
Muslim men are so frightened by female empowerment that

they want to keep their women cocooned in burkas and hijabs.
Rules are strict. In Iran, female protests against the “morality
police” and rigid rules around the hijab are, in reality, a revolt
against clerical patriarchy. (Note: In Shiite Iran, the mullahs and
imams fear emancipated women far more than Jews, Americans,
or Arab Sunnis.) Real Muslim radicals deny girls an education
(better to keep them ignorant) out of fear and terror of losing
status. Jewish rabbis in Bible times thanked God they were not
born a gentile, slave, or woman. Many clergymen in America
implicitly preach women should stay home, raise the kids, clean the
house, put dinner on the table, and be subservient. Rank has its
privileges.
Even in literature, one of the classic American stories in the

book “The Scarlet Letter” is revealing. The principal protagonist,
Hester Prynne, is pilloried for adultery and required to wear the
letter “A” (for Adultery) on her clothing. She is cruelly mistreated
by the community. At the same time, her adulterous lover (the
preacher, Rev. Dimmesdale, no less) slinks away. It is a tale of
unfairness and misogyny in spades.
In India, the culture has historically been that women fetched

a good price in a dowry. The caste system was even more brutal
for women whose families had nothing to offer. In America,
among some Native American tribes in the past, women could be
traded for horses, goats, or other valuable items. Even today, the
general custom in American society is that the bride’s family pays
for the wedding, which on one level, is required of the father to
pass her off to a husband’s responsibility. It is displayed today as a
symbolic wedding custom where the father “gives away” his
daughter to another man.
THE CLERGY AS SINNERS

In recent years, the Holy Men of God have been caught with
their pants down and humiliated for stupendous hypocrisy. It is
beyond scandal. Thousands of priests in the Catholic church stand
condemned as sinners on a magnitude scale that is unforgivable
since most all the rape and abuse were directed at children. Even
an atheist will agree that this is sin big-time. Most people will agree
that if there is a hell, all those involved are the people who should
be first in line to go there. And it gets worse. Bishops and Cardinals
in leadership positions covered up damaging information,
destroyed evidence, stonewalled, lied, and feigned ignorance,

which violated their sacred oaths.
The scale and scope of deception are hard to believe. The

decades and generations of denial are staggering. The millions of
scarred and damaged children and their devastated families can
never be calculated. Recent reports from France alone estimate
that priests there have molested over 200,000 children since 1950.
Worldwide, the numbers are beyond tragic. Worse, it can be safely
assumed that the actual numbers are even much higher as many
acts were never reported or records were mysteriously (or
conveniently) “lost.”
The Catholic church stands condemned as a haven for many

pedophile priests. In Matthew 18:6, Jesus says regarding children,
“If anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin,
it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around
his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.” Jesus did not
mince words when it comes to children. In the past, when such
heinous behavior came to light, these predator priests were not
publicly defrocked and turned over to authorities, but rather the
church hierarchy quietly and appallingly moved pedophile priests
to a new parish where the same abuse continued over and over
again. The silence was the default position. Less well publicized are
priests preying on young female parishioners and even, in some
cases, on nuns.
But Catholics are not alone. Other Protestant denominations

have had their own reckoning as well over sexual matters. Recent
shocking revelations in the Baptist church have also made
headlines. However, these sins have mostly involved young
women who were used, abused, and demeaned. Again, church
leadership circled the wagons and lied about what was actually
happening. An internal report cited “a pattern of intimidating
survivors of sexual assault; by denigrating them as opportunists.”
Leadership was blamed for “stonewalling.” Similar stories of
varying culpability abound in other denominations. In addition,
mega-church star preachers with large followings have fallen, one

by one, to sexual scandals. Other independent congregational
churches have also had their issues with pastors who have sexually
preyed on (rather than praying for) some of their female members.
What makes all of this beyond the pale is that it is from the
clergy. It would still be an inexcusable and deplorable sin if it had
been sports players, privileged business types, or other professions.
No excuses. But the clergy are supposed to be the ultimate role
models, the spiritual heirs to goodness, the standard bearers. What
an indictment of the church. Tragically, many members have lost
their faith over these revelations, much less the molested and
abused victims traumatized for life. A sacred trust was thrown in
the trash for self-gratification, and mostly against innocent
children, no less, or vulnerable young females. Of course, without
debate, these Holy Men should decide whether women should
have free agency when it comes to abortion. Certainly! No question
these Holy Men know best. They can be trusted, but women are
untrustworthy.
GENDER ROLES IN THE ABORTION

WARS
Generally, men in the church, men as activists, and male
politicians are at the forefront of the anti-abortion movement. Yes,
there are also millions of women who are loyal soldiers and leaders
in this fight who feel passionately about this subject. It is
completely wrong to think these women have been brainwashed
and can’t think for themselves. It is not true, as these are good and
committed women. But the steady drumbeat constantly reinforced
in one’s own bubble world of church and fellow travelers will have
an impact on anybody. A holy cause can be reinforcing and take
on a life of its own. Belief, cause, mission, and righteousness all get
blended together. After all, women have been told relentlessly
from the pulpit that this righteous cause is gospel. Why should they
doubt the Holy Men? After all, they speak for God. The Holy Men
are special. All the main founding fathers of the anti-abortionist
cause that arose in the 1970s and 1980s were male leaders, and
nearly all were clergy from the church. Likewise, in 2019, when the
Alabama Senate voted against abortion in a pre-Roe declaration,
all 25 state Senators voting in favor were men. They know best.
Some committed zealots believe that the taking of one life is

justified to save hundreds of unborn babies. Since 1977, the
National Abortion Federation has recorded 11 murders, 500
assaults, 42 bombings, 196 arsons, and thousands of criminal
incidents directed against doctors, staff, personnel, and patients for
intimidation purposes, along with stalking and posting addresses
online. In nearly every case, all these acts were committed by men
as perpetrators. They cowardly failed at being a true hero and
adopting a special needs child out of foster care. They preferred
the much simpler role of an avenging angel and still expected the
approval of Jesus. Their actions did not require a noble 18-year
commitment to be a mentor and role model as an adoptive father
for a child in need. Guns, matches, bombs, and assaults are far
easier. They are cowards.
Today, the most hardcore and extreme views on abortion are

pushed by men. The harshest rhetoric, the most entrenched
positions, and the most hardline proposals nearly all come from
men. It is preached by men from the pulpit who implore that such
evil must be abolished. These Holy Men speak in certitude as if
they just had coffee with Jesus at Starbucks and received their
marching orders. Religious righteous politicians, convicted of their
cause as encouraged by the Holy Men and the votes in the pews,
feel they are doing the Lord’s work. Other politicians may be more
ambivalent but see a golden opportunity for a wedge issue to move
the masses to the polls in conservative-leaning districts. Saving
fetuses is a winning call to arms wrapped in a religious zeal to win
elections. Power is seductive and among the most dangerous drugs
there are. Of course, these righteous men, clerics, and politicians
alike, should decide on such a personal decision affecting women
when it comes to female autonomy. Certainly, for God told them

so! Women need to know their place and do as they are told.
Women can’t be trusted.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 5 GOOD PEOPLE | 55
CHAPTER 5
GOOD PEOPLE
Those who are proponents of the pro-life viewpoint are good

people and are passionate about their cause. They should be
admired greatly for their commitment, if not their sad lack of
consistency toward supporting all children to adulthood. These
worthy people are, at their core, honest, decent, and upstanding
people worthy of emulation by anyone in how they live their lives.
They are a credit and a blessing to their community and to
America. They fervently believe they are doing God’s work and
have no doubt God is on their side.
However, these good people look upon the state of America

and fear for its soul. Secularism and even hostility to religion are
seen as a direct threat to a historical order of faith and belief central
to America’s founding and subsequent great success. They are true
believers in American exceptionalism, firmly believing that God
has given a special mission for America to be a light unto the world.
It is best captured in the words of the American creed in the lyrics
of the song, “America the Beautiful,” “God shed his grace on thee,
and crowned thy good with brotherhood, from sea to shining sea.”
It is confirmed in Lincoln’s belief about America being “the last
best hope of Earth.” With a heavy heart, but righteous hope,
Christians feel they are in an existential fight between good and
evil. Unfortunately, the brotherhood between right and left has
become more like Cain and Abel.
Yet, dismay, alarm, and fear are preached every weekend from
tens of thousands of pulpits. The Godless “left” will be the ruin of
our great country. There is a certain sadness and victim mentality
that the world Christians know and love is slowly slip-sliding away
from them. They see what has happened in Europe, where
spectacular cathedrals are now mostly museums, tourist

attractions, and architectural marvels, but a shell of their intended
purpose. Former Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
expressed the sinking feeling best.
God’s plan made for a hopeful beginning

But man spoiled his chances by sinning
We trust that the story, will end in God’s glory
But at present, the other side’s winning
On the other hand, there is a militant spirit that believes the

Christian right must stand up and fight for truth and faith as they
see it, even if they have to fight dirty with profane, corrupt, and
ungodly allies. They see themselves as both victims and righteous
champions at the same time. It is an outward expression of Martin
Luther’s’ anthem. “Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war,
with the cross of Jesus, going on before. Christ, the royal Master,
leads against the foe. Forward into battle, see his banners go.” It is
not the introspection and humility of the old hymn of yesteryear,
“The Old Rugged Cross.” The downside is the tragedy that too
many are unwilling to display the Christian example of a loving
Jesus. That is a much harder road. Even more so when right-wing
politics sullies the Christian faith and diminishes the radical
admonition of Jesus to “love thy neighbor.” Jesus was a true
radical!
In contrast, over-educated academic elites, business tycoons,

hopeless Hollywood liberals, and lefty politicians all have a cavalier
opinion bordering on disdain for evangelicals, and that disdain
becomes mutual. They believe evangelicals are either willfully blind
or ignorant, easily manipulated, dismissive of science, and out of
touch with the 21st century. Elites sigh at the perceived “hicks from
the sticks” as stubborn, wedded to “alternative facts,” prone to
conspiracy theories, and often deniers of rational facts, data, and
scholarship as in, “Don’t confuse me with logical facts.”
Yet the “elites,” pointy-headed smug academics in their ivory

towers, the haughty “we know best” professional over-class do a
great disservice to evangelicals. Their barely concealed superiority
over the rubes in middle and rural America also helped create and
foster the great American divide of polarization. Elites also have
their own blind spots. They pride themselves on sophistry and
empirical wisdom and too often display their condescension. They
confuse tolerance and empathy with demanding acceptance
allowing for an “anything goes” attitude in a society with fewer
norms or rules. It is a biblical expression “Every man did what was
right in his own eyes.” Judges 21:25. Both sides feel the country is
stuck, and no one knows how to bridge the gap. Unity on
fundamental hot topics seems to be a fantasy as much as a two-
sided coin getting together. And the divide over abortion shows a
gaping chasm of incomprehensibility towards each side.
However, without question, the tens of millions of

evangelicals and conservative Catholics filling up the pews each
week are salt-of-the-earth-people. Devoted to faith, family,
community, and country, they are part of the glue that holds
America together. They will tell you they are not perfect but are
trying to live better lives. Their faith gives them meaning, purpose,
mission, and a strong sense of belonging. They are also about
doing good deeds to meet many needs in their communities. They
are well-intentioned and believe not only in the ten
commandments but also in virtue, decorum, and friendly manners,
which, unfortunately, has rapidly unraveled in the shadow of
Trumpism, a mockery of true Christianity. Worship is meaningful
as an expression of commitment, joy, and gratitude. It is the
foundation of a life of purpose and devotion and a guide in
confusing times. It matters a lot to a lot of people.
It is important to note that freedom of religion and practice is

mentioned first in the Bill of Rights before anything else, including
free speech, a free press, free assembly, and the right to petition
the government for redress. The Founding Fathers saw over the
previous centuries (16th, 17th, 18th) the blood of millions lost,
locked in endless European wars and persecutions over religion.

Ever since the Protestant Reformation was launched by Martin
Luther, religion was poison to any out-groups who differed from
the dominant groupthink.
It has been said that a nation with one religion has a

dictatorship theocracy, two religions a civil war, and three or more
accommodation and moderation. Indeed, part of the early story of
America was one of fleeing religious persecution. The Pilgrims,
Puritans, Quakers, Huguenots, Catholics, Jews, and others came
across the sea as refugees for a new start in the New World to
worship God as they saw the light. Even internally, the state of
Rhode Island was founded by Roger Williams as a haven for
dissenters from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Mormons, under
Brigham Young, would later pick up sticks and, in a mass
movement, flee to Utah.
One of the most unique features of the American experiment

is the separation of church and state. While in tension trying to
determine how high the wall should be, it has mostly been a
blessing to the country. With some exceptions, each side has
attempted to stay on their side of the wall. But with an extremely
conservative Supreme Court, change may be afoot. But as
evangelicals are quick to point out, freedom of religion does not
mean freedom from religion. But where this line is, is often fuzzy.
As America becomes more secular with each passing decade, some
wish to lower the wall while others prefer it be a high wall. On
contentious questions of morality, freedom, choice, fairness, and
virtue, the public today is mired in bitter culture wars that seem to
be only more protracted. Social media and cable TV are notorious
for their constant barrage of outrage and a drumbeat of negativity.
However, both sides need to display simple kindness. It should

be the first virtue. The Bible says, “A soft answer turneth away
much wrath, but harsh words stir up anger.” Proverbs 15:1
Without kindness, no one listens above the din of shouting.
Turning off the TV and one’s social media would be a start.
THE BIBLE
The Good Book is inspirational, historical, instructive, and a
road map of how Christians should live their lives in relationship
to God and their fellow man. It has been a source of comfort and
meaning for hundreds of millions of followers. Still, it is also used
as a club for those “others” who do not abide by its precepts and
commandments. Millions have been killed in the name of God.
Believers have displayed amazing love, acceptance, sacrifice, and
patience for sinners who are a work in progress while also showing
intolerance, judgment, and exclusion. It has also motivated
countless acts of good and been a source of enrichment as a light
unto family and community. It is transcendent in its hope and
belief in a better world yet to come, as promised by God. It is faith
in the “unseen” in a contest between good and evil on an earthly
and cosmic scale. At its core is the promise of eternal life for mortal
mankind if they live a Godly life as outlined in Scripture.
The problem is always about interpreting God’s Scripture. Ask

a dozen different denominations and thousands of independent
churches, and one will get many conflicting answers. It is not math,
whereby an equation pops out with the same result. They all read
the same Bible but come to different conclusions. Much of the
Bible is written with overarching themes, but the details are often
missing. Filling in the blanks is where most of the conflict among
Christians occurs.
So, what does the Bible say about the hot topic of abortion?
The answer is mostly “crickets.” The silence is baffling to many.
In the New Testament, on the life of Jesus and the acts of his
disciples, there is nothing said about abortion. In the Old
Testament, it is the same silence as far as anything explicit or
categorial. It is not discussed at all concerning a fetus having
“personhood.” There is a reference in Exodus 22:21-24 that if
another person harms a pregnant woman’s fetus, a fine is to be
paid, but it is not considered murder.
So where do those opposed to abortion come up with their

Biblical injunctions against such practices? It is all about “reading
between the lines” and how God values life. After all, humans were
made “in the image of God” (Genesis 1:26), and Psalms 139 talks
about God creating “me in my mother’s womb.” Jeremiah 1:5
states: “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.” But it is
all pretty thin, even as a pretext. It may also be read as a literary
allusion or analogy. It is a long reach for anti-abortionists to hang
their hat on these few cherry-picked verses. The sixth
commandment that says “thou shall not murder” has always been
interpreted as a living person born. There is no reference or
suggestion in the Scriptures that an embryo or fetus is included in
this definition of the 6th commandment. In the Jewish law tradition
of “halacha,” a fetus becomes a “soul” only after birth.
American jurisprudence has concurred with this view in the

past. In 1986, former Supreme Court Justice Stevens wrote: “No
member of this court has ever suggested that a fetus is of a ‘person
within the meaning of the 14th Amendment.’ . . . It is clear that any
justice who makes decisions based on ‘originalism’ could never
argue the INTENT [emphasis added] that the 14th amendment (the
right of a person). . . apply to an embryo or fetus . . . and the clear
expression [of the 14th Amendment] was that of an individual that
was born, independent of the other.”
Anti-abortionists, when reading the Bible, rely a lot on what is

implied, inferred, and presumed about what God wants on this
subject. There is a lot of supposition and extrapolation taking place
with a heavy dose of parsing and conjecture. There are many
biblical gymnastic contortions taking place to prove a point. What
is largely an assumption has become an article of faith. And that
belief has been turned into a righteous religious crusade. But there
is no “smoking gun” of “thus sayeth the Lord” on the abortion
question that is absolute and conclusive. It can’t be found in the
Bible because it does not exist.
Many forced birth advocates will claim equivalency between a

fetus and a newborn child. Life begins at conception they insist.
But nowhere in the Bible or around the world does anyone
celebrate “conception day” (which humorously might be tough to
pin down) instead of a “birthday.” No one gets a driver’s license at
15 years and three months or qualifies for Medicare at 64 and three
months. No one adds nine months to a death certificate anywhere
in the world, past or present. Surely if abortion was the “be all and
end all” concern of Christians, God would have been sure to add
an eleventh commandment for Moses when he came down from
Mount Sinai. Surely, he would have. Case closed. But he didn’t.
What is clear beyond a doubt is the admonition of Jesus to

look after the poor. It is a clear mission to all Christians often
repeated by Jesus in the New Testament, who talks about “the least
of these my brethren” (Matthew 25:37). Being an advocate for the
less fortunate who are already here seems lost on a lot of Christians
who are focused on the pre-born and not very much on the post-
born. Being pro-birth costs advocates nothing financially since it is
all about the coercion and control of pregnant women in their
communities. But concern about the poor (and particularly, poor
babies and children) may cost money affecting their wallets and
require uncomfortable discussions about poverty, taxes, and social
justice. That’s a whole different conversation. Trouble and conflict
are sure to occur. Jesus and the story of the “Good Samaritan” is
all about the outcast since Samaritans were looked down upon and
considered “the other” in those days. That’s what makes the story
so powerful. The story is about “those people,”. . . i.e., “them.”
A tally of the millions of hours invested by forced birth

activists between concern for a fetus and a relative lack of respect
for poor children in need in the here and now can be telling about
priorities. It stands to reason that a mother and her baby in a
bassinet, visiting a friend in an IVF clinic who was caught in a
raging fire must make a heart-rending decision. Faced with a
Sophie’s choice and only seconds to act would require her to rescue
the five embryos visibly
stored there and leave her own baby to die. Equivalency? The
greater good? More life saved? God’s blessing?
But perhaps the biggest conundrum and mystery of all is that

throughout the New Testament, the issue of a fetus is not brought
up at all as an issue of importance or even as a secondary concern.
All four of the gospels written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
on the life of Jesus would have undoubtedly featured the abortion
question as a vital and consequential pillar of Christ’s teachings,
being absolutely definitive, leaving no shadow of a doubt. In all the
parables told by Jesus during his ministry, not one featured an
abortion story. The same could be said for Saint Paul and the other
writers of the New Testament. Certainly, if Jesus had been as
narrowly focused on a fetus as a crucial, urgent, and essential issue,
he would have gone to great lengths to say something, anything,
repeatedly about it. Surely, he would have. But throughout his life
in the Scriptures, Jesus is silent.
GOD’S WILL
Who can read the mind of God? Enquiring minds want to
know! From the earliest writings of mankind, people worshipped
something, from the sun to beings in astrology to crafted idols.
Perhaps there is a “worship gene” in our DNA since most people
throughout the world believe in God. Even the vast majority of
people without any religious affiliation still believe in God.
Understanding the temporal world is perplexing at best since there
are a lot of moving parts. Trying to explain wars, pandemics,
slavery, holocausts, famines, thousands of diseases, and assorted
natural disasters is impossible. Nuclear war is a daily possibility.
Climate change seems to be speeding up worldwide with huge
ramifications and insufficient time or political will to stop a
catastrophe. Who can make sense of it all? And yet most
Americans live in a golden age today, compared to world history
when life was nasty, brutal, and short. But on another level, today’s
world, for many, feels precarious with a sense of anxiety and
foreboding, waiting for the next proverbial shoe to drop. Trouble

awaits around every corner.
On matters of biology and medicine in our modern age, a

devout, fundamentalist, religious purist could argue that any
interference with “natural law” is a violation of God’s intended
purposes as interpreted by them. Taken to its logical conclusion,
vasectomies, and tubal ligations are wrong by defeating a “be
fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28) admonition in the Bible.
Contraception such as pills and IUDs would likewise be a big no-
no as interfering with God’s plan to multiply. A C-section
intervention is not “natural,” nor is an epidural to avoid pain.
Genesis 3:16 states, “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy
conception.” Playing God with IVF games in a laboratory is not
God’s intention because it is unnatural and not conceived in “the
normal way.” Maybe it is God’s plan these women should remain
infertile, and they are obstructing God’s greater scheme of things.
Sorry.
Surrogacy motherhood is also out for being strange and

unnatural as a “womb to rent,” much like an Airbnb. Viagra and
ED products put man’s pleasure and judgments before God’s and
are not permissible. Maybe God wants some men to be impotent.
In utero surgery is also an “interference” of nature taking its natural
course. Genetic sequencing to splice out a complex hereditary
disease should not be allowed by interfering with God’s genetic
lottery of winners and losers. Even life-saving synthetic antibiotics
and vaccines could be seen as tampering with God’s original plan
by postponing death. Biology, medicine, innovation, religion,
sexuality, and freedom are complicated. Choose one or all to figure
it all out. Reading the mind of God is not easy.
But other important questions, like abortion, loom large as

well. Imagine two devout and faithful people. Each of them greatly
values their faith and would die for it if required, such is their
commitment. They pray daily, seeking God’s guidance, blessing,
and favor. These two people, men or women, exemplify their faith
in every way. They are role models and considered spiritual leaders.
They fervently seek God’s light and direction. They are examples
of all that is good and holy. They are special.
Each prays to God, asking for guidance on the abortion

question. One feels strongly that God wants to protect the life of
a fetus over and above anything else, with no exceptions. The other
prayer supplicant to God feels equally convicted that God
impressed upon them that he favors the woman in these difficult
cases by giving her free agency. God is not primarily a God of
vengeance, fire, and brimstone. The same divide can occur
between two pastors or priests. Sometimes God does not answer
prayers one way or the other. Humans hate that. We always want
to know everything and don’t like it when God often seems vague
or opaque.
So, there you have it. Two connections to God and two
different answers. But certainly, a loving God who has given
mankind (men and women) free agency is in favor of freedom over
coercion. Even in a tie, liberty should be the default choice. If
God’s thumb is on the scale, surely he favors independence and
self-determination to tip the scale. Otherwise, he would have just
created robots. Even if one assumes that sin has been committed,
God is the God of forgiveness. God is a God of mercy. God is not
the Gestapo. In a “priesthood of all believers,” each person can
approach God and follow the dictates of their own conscience.
Is it God’s will that a fifteen-year-old girl who is blind drunk

and a seventeen-year-old boy stoned on drugs pushed by
hormones conceive a child in the back of his van? Is this God’s
will? Is this God’s master plan to bring new life into the world for
two horny kids who have no business becoming parents in a “holy
union” with cosmic meaning throughout the universe? Are angels
celebrating with high fives and doing “the wave” while others are
playing their harps in the background? Is the heavenly choir quickly
called together to sing hallelujah? Or is this a curse upon an
innocent child and the devil’s plan to corrupt mankind? What
about a prostitute turning “tricks” who gets pregnant from a

“John” or a junkie selling sex for drugs? Does God sanctify this?
How about a desperate homeless woman living in a squalid tent
trading sex for food? Do all these “hookups” represent God’s
divine plan? Does this make God happy? Does God applaud? It
defies logic and reason, whether from a religious or a secular
viewpoint.
Is it God’s will that a raped ten-year-old must flee a restrictive

state because the state says she must carry the baby to term before
she enters the fifth grade? If puberty continues to fall for some girls
as in recent years, would the state require a raped first grader to
have a baby before she could even learn her ABCs? Does God give
an exclusive interview on “Heaven TV” broadcasted throughout
the universe celebrating such a blessed event? Or is this cruel and
evil punishment upon a pregnant child, bewildered and
traumatized? What if a ten-year-old raped boy was capable of
giving birth? Would gender be inconsequential? Would there be no
difference?
Shirley Chisholm, the first black female in Congress, in 1969

asked, “What is more immoral, granting an abortion or forcing a
young girl . . . to assume responsibilities of an adult while she is
still a child? On the role of being a woman and second-class status
at the time, she was quoted as saying, “I have certainly met much
more discrimination in terms of being a woman than being black,
in the field of politics.” Regarding male patriarchy, she said,
“Tremendous amounts of talent are lost to our society because that
talent wears a skirt.”
Consider the following. If a 19-year-old stepbrother tricks,

seduces or rapes his 14-year-old stepsister, does the potential of a
pregnancy have God’s stamp of approval? Does God send out an
email offering congratulations to the stepbrother along with a
crossed fingers emoji expressing hope for potential life? Is this how
God operates? Or is evil to be blamed?
A pregnant mother is told she has cancer and that she is highly
unlikely to survive her pregnancy, but it is not a 100% medical
certainty. She already has two young kids who she loves dearly and
who need their mother. She is frantic to have an abortion because
she can’t bear the thought of her kids being motherless. Surely, she
feels her two kids must be given priority over a fetus. Yet she is
told by the state to have the baby anyway since the medical opinion
is not completely definitive. If she dies, she dies, so sad, too bad.
The state says it is a risk they are willing to take a roulette spin with
her life even if she is adamantly opposed. Her desperate plea
doesn’t matter since what she wants is irrelevant. Is this God’s will?
God gave both men and women free will. They are free to defy
God’s laws and all ten commandments if they choose to do so.
This does not mean God approves. Not at all. Christians believe a
day of judgment is coming, and God will separate the “wheat from
the tares” (weeds) Matthew 13: 24-30. But God is the decider and
judge. It’s his courtroom, not some heartless state bureaucrat.
Besides, “grace” will matter more than anything else in this
courtroom. Sincere Christians believe that unrepentant sinners
cannot escape their sins and God’s judgment since “there is no
peace for the wicked.” Isaiah 8:22. But many other sinners will get
a commuted sentence of grace because the Good Book says in
Samuel 16:7 that “man looketh on the outward appearance, but the
Lord looketh at the heart.” “Amazing grace, how sweet the
sound.” God trusts women far more than any feckless puffed-up
bureaucrat or self-righteous legislator.
WHERE ARE SATAN, LUCIFER, AND

THE DEVIL?
All three of these terms are synonymous and interchangeable
when talking about evil. They are one and the same but have pulled
a fast one on mankind. If the devil represents evil and all the
world’s woes, why is he so seldom blamed for anything? The devil
gets away with murder and everything else with seeming impunity
and no accountability. He shrewdly gets humans to blame God for
everything while lurking in the shadows.
Consider a monster flood, a massive fire, an earthquake, a

tsunami, or a hurricane. It is commonly referred to as an “act of
God,” never an act of the devil. In business contracts where both
parties are bound to fulfill their contractual promises, there is an
out clause using a French term called “force majeure.” If war,
pandemic, or natural disaster occurs, making it impossible for one
of the parties to deliver, the contract can be called off. It is often
referred to or implied as an unforeseen act of God. Part of the
thinking in all this is that God, who is supposed to be all-powerful,
let this event happen without stopping it, although he could have.
For inexplicable reasons, life and limb were lost because God did
not step in and intervene; therefore, its God’s fault.
But for Christians and other faith traditions, the idea that God
has given them free agency means bad things can happen. God
does not start bloody wars, but after the first shot is fired,
everybody prays for his help to wipe out the other side. God, the
warrior king. Human failings cause enormous tragedy and
heartbreak for others who are innocent, from drunk driving to a
madman with a gun. Faith is shaken as one strives to make sense
of it, often failing. The standard lament is, “Where was God? Why
didn’t he put a stop to it?” A woman is raped and then seeks an
abortion. If God intervened against the rape, the issue of abortion
would not be an issue. There is no simple answer.
Why is there sin in the world? Why is there evil in the world?
Why is there tragedy in the world? What does God expect from
me? These are the age-old questions asked by Christians, Muslims,
Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, and everyone else of faith. All kinds of
answers are given by the Holy Men, who fall short and give mostly
unsatisfactory responses. It is at the core of a mystery surrounding
God. Keeping the faith means trusting God knows what he is
doing even when it makes no sense. The analogy is that children
will be baffled by a parent’s decision in their own interest, only

understanding it years later as an adult. If one thinks of God as
playing cosmic chess with the devil, there are bound to be losses.
Innocent pawns are among the first to go.
But personal testimony is a powerful factor in which people

would stake their lives that God was leading in their lives, and they
felt the presence of a guiding hand. These are sincere and upright
people. Unbelievers are quick to suggest hocus-pocus nonsense.
But it is hard to deny mass delusion when billions of people in
many faith traditions are drawn to prayer, worship, and spirituality
worldwide. A rational mathematician may scratch their head about
logic but will acknowledge that numbers and testimonies don’t lie.
God cannot be studied in a test tube.
Christians are often disappointed in why God permitted this

or that to occur. The eternal question of why God seems absent at
times leaves even the most faithful shaking their head in
incomprehension. Some give up their faith. For non-believers, it
proves there is no God, or if there is, he doesn’t care. For many
believers, it is part of Satan’s grand design to corrupt the human
race by promoting seduction, drugs, alcohol, rape, incest,
pornography, and lust to ruin each generation of babies as much
as he can. But Satan will surely get a pass, blaming God for all the
world’s troubles. Perhaps on the subject of abortion, there is no
right or wrong answer. There is just a woman alone, frightened,
praying for guidance, asking for God’s understanding in her own
unique situation, and following her conscience.
There is also another pregnant woman with no faith tradition

at all. She questions why a restrictive state is being so cruel to her
in a difficult situation. She can’t understand why this private matter
is even their concern instead of her doctor. But no, the state will
decide for all women, with or without faith, regardless of their
wishes or dire circumstances. No choice. After all, these women
are just “carriers,” not autonomous creatures, but mere “hosts” and
“vessels” beholden to the state as “handmaidens.” Women can’t
be trusted.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 6 BIG BROTHER IS IN THE HOUSE (YOUR HOUSE!) | 69
CHAPTER 6
BIG BROTHER IS IN THE
HOUSE
(YOUR HOUSE!)
The jubilation of anti-abortionists with the overturning of Roe

has quickly pivoted to the 50 states. There is an alarm that they
may have won the 50-year battle to get rid of Roe but may lose the
war in the long term. Now the hand-to-hand combat will be all
about enforcing laws on the books in conservative states. If women
seeking to end their pregnancy can drive over the border to a pro-choice
state, well, nothing changed except for poor women stuck without a ride.
Besides, if women are able to order abortion pills in the mail, game over.
Forced birth activists will huddle together and conclude that if they
cannot effectively coerce, threaten, and intimidate those seeking an
abortion or anyone willing to help them, their cause will have
largely failed. Abortion numbers will decline in states legislating
against it, while the abortion rate in pro-choice states will increase.
But if abortion pills administered privately at home continue to
increase, legally or not, nobody will know what the real statistics
show. Everything goes hush-hush. Women in large numbers will
just clam up to accurate polling data.
Discussions among forced birth activists are in full swing,

trying to come up with a dozen strategies to possibly prevent
pregnant women from leaving the state, but nearly everyone
recognizes that is a losing strategy. Not even the Supreme Court
will forbid travel for seven or eight months. Justice Kavanaugh, in
his concurring opinion on Roe, indicated as much. Besides, as a
practical matter, it is ludicrous to contemplate illegal enforcement
with state custom border guards asking women for sonograms to
prove they are not pregnant, even a ten-year-old and a fifty-year-

old, just to make certain. There would be riots.
But the biggest worry and battle will be over the post office,
Amazon, UPS, and FedEx. Abortion pills sent through the mail to
the home for a self-induced abortion may be the whole ballgame.
Already, over half of all abortions are performed in this manner.
That number is certain to increase. But the post office is an
independent branch of the federal government. Tampering with
the mail comes with heavy fines and penalties. States are not
allowed to censor or disrupt mail. But even assuming that they
could check the mail coming into Texas, as an example, it would
be a nightmare. They would have to open and check every package
and letter by the millions (invasion of privacy—Texans would
howl) to ensure no contraband abortion pills were sneaking in.
Huge delays with the mail would be the result, and an entire army
of “snoops” would have to be employed at great state expense.
Such a scenario is implausible. The public would not tolerate it.
The mail and packages will continue to be delivered unexamined.
Yet, Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony

Pro-life America, has stated that “everyone who is trafficking these
[abortion] pills should be in jail for trafficking.” She and her
colleagues are already meeting with governors and legislators to see
how these pills can be stopped. Wyoming has declared them illegal,
with fines and prison sentences for those involved. There is a
determination to play hardball on enforcement. One may yet see a
future Wyoming headline news story about a “drug bust” that does
not involve heroin, cocaine, meth, or opioids but mifepristone,
perhaps a priority effort. It is ironic how the term “the pill,” which
meant oral contraceptives when they showed up in the 1960s, may
become defined as “the pill” again in an entirely new context in the
heated battle over oral pills to end a pregnancy in the privacy of
one’s own home.
Battle lines are forming with new “shield laws” being passed
in pro-choice states to protect doctors and pharmacies from
lawsuits in restrictive states over telemedicine and prescribing pills

to women in other states. These laws will be contested on the basis
that out-of-state doctors are not licensed to practice in other states
and are subject to prosecution for practicing without a license. It
is all murky, and thanks to the Supreme Court will surely all end
up back in their lap. In New York, some participating doctors have
already made plans to avoid visiting restrictive states (even a
connecting flight at an airport) in the off chance of being arrested.
Judge shopping has been evident to find anti-abortion judges

to make rulings in their favor in hopes of tying up the courts and
furthering the anti-abortion agenda to burden women. This was
demonstrated in the fiasco around finding an ideologically driven
anti-abortion judge in Amarillo, Texas, named Judge Kacsmaryk
(out of 94 federal jurisdictions). He ruled against the FDAs
abortion drug mifepristone, which was approved over twenty years
ago. Such a tactic is anti-democratic and promotes ideology over
the law or the people’s will. It is an unprecedented attack on the
FDA by untrained lawyers, judges, and idealogues without credible
scientific evidence. Never before had any judge overruled the
FDAs scientific judgment or protocol process to approve a drug.
Judge Kacsmaryk’s convoluted 67-page ruling mirrored the

disinformation of forced birth advocates that these drugs are
unsafe. It is a direct contradiction of science and extensive FDA
trials. The American Medical Association and the College of
Obstetricians and Gynecologists cite “robust evidence” that the
drug is safe. Over two decades of availability and experience in the
medical field confirms it. Furthermore, more than ninety other
countries have approved the drug. Apparently, all of these other
countries’ scientific protocols are also in error. One judge’s lack of
scientific knowledge supersedes all other scientists in America and,
by implication, the entire world.
Another ruling came down in Washington State

simultaneously from Judge Thomas Rice in favor of the FDA and
current policy. The Supreme Court stepped in and issued a “stay”
that keeps the current status quo for now. But it will likely be back
before the Supreme Court before too long. The Dobbs case
overruling Roe left decisions up to the states, but the dividing lines
remain unclear. In practical terms, in the long run, if these pills are
still allowed in pro-choice states, the ability to stop the pills from
being mailed or obtained in restrictive states will prove to be
unstoppable. And even if they are banned, the black market will
pick up the slack quickly. But perhaps the biggest backlash will be
political, where women will be incensed that the courts are
involved at all and will make conservatives pay at the ballot box.
But the “true believers” will push back and insist on doubling
down in the fight to end all abortions.
Forced birth activists have other worries as well. They will be

fighting a rear-guard civil war in their own state. In Republican
restrictive red states, big city Democratic mayors or prosecutors
may simply refuse to bring cases to court. After all, the abortion
question is a yawning chasm between diverse, cosmopolitan metro
areas and rural areas. Prosecutors will argue that their mandate is
to use good judgment and discretion to go after criminals and set
priorities. Murders, rape, assault, battery, and robbery come first.
Property crimes of theft and burglary come next. White-collar
crimes of embezzlement, extortion, bribery, and fraud are also
important, along with domestic abuse and drunk drivers. Some
prosecutors will claim they do not have the time, the staff, or the
resources to add to their workload to harass desperate (and poor)
pregnant women. Neither do they want to be filmed and put on
the local news as harassing pregnant women since the optics are
terrible. Their motto will be, “We are prosecutors, not
persecutors.”
Anti-abortion advocates in newly restrictive states will also

have to contend with the many women among their neighbors,
church members, and colleagues at work who disagree with the
overturning of Roe. They will be a new “silent minority/majority”
who will mostly keep their mouth shut and their opinions to
themselves. They love their friends and neighbors who are ardent
on this issue and do not want to make waves. But they know
privately that if they or a loved one were in a compromised way,
they would head for the border “on vacation” for several days. As
a cover story, a Broadway show in New York or a visit to
Disneyland in California may be in order. How many are in this
camp? No one will ever know because women will refuse to be
polled or simply lie. They firmly believe it is no one else’s business.
Pro-choice proponents, on the other side, are also ramping up

their activities to ensure that all women who desire an abortion can
still get one, even if Roe has thrown some obstacles in their path.
Some pro-choice states are incorporating protective legislation by
statute or in their state constitution to protect residents from
restrictive state prosecutions. Graphic designers, influencers, and
bloggers are publishing YouTube video’s along with posts on other
social media outlets informing women how to go about the process
of facilitating an abortion. Pharmacy outlets are being drafted to
obtain abortion pills, including foreign jurisdictions.
But intimidation and fear of lawsuits have caused the large

Walgreens drugstore chain to announce they will not sell abortion
pills in restrictive states, resulting in its own backlash against them
for cowardly succumbing to potential legal blackmail. Foreign and
out-of-state doctors are being drafted to provide telemedicine for
patients requesting abortion information in which geolocations on
the internet are murky to avoid liability. Women in positions of
power, from celebrities to women in business boardrooms, along
with outraged college students and others, are newly awakened to
rights being taken away from them. They will organize in earnest
and counterattack in all these different ways. Everything is in flux.
Forced birth activists will be frustrated in their futile attempts to
shut down internet websites in restrictive states dispensing
information, advice, and access to abortion pills.
To combat the work of pro-choice activists and states, the

anti-abortionist groups will inevitably be forced to lean more and
more toward draconian methods to coerce and control pregnant
women who do not follow the laws of their state. But this can be
an uphill battle. Trying to control, legislate, or confiscate abortion-
inducing medication pills across state lines or from foreign
jurisdictions will be a losing proposition. One needs to look no
further than the 70-year-old “war on drugs” and see how
successful that endeavor has been. Illegal drugs and pills can be
found in every corner of the country. Deaths from opioid
overdoses have reached new record highs. If there is money to be
made, illegal cartels will be only too happy to step into a new black
market and give pregnant women willing to pay for what they want.
Everything goes underground.
At the end of the day, anti-abortionists will rally around the

idea that the only way to “win” is to make abortion illegal
throughout the entire United States. Half the country is not a true
victory. Yet, they will abandon the ballot box (and democracy) out
of great fear that when people can vote, forced birth advocates
always lose. Yes, the rich can still fly to another country for an
abortion, but the battle at home in America will be largely won as
much as possible with a national ban. Once accomplished, they
reason, they can carry the fight to other countries to do the same,
even though the trend line in other nations is clearly liberalizing
and going the other way by being more accommodating and
respectful towards women. But God is on our side. The forces of
darkness will be defeated. Pregnant women need to be controlled!
THE KGB, GESTAPO, AND STASI

In order to monitor, identify, and control women who become
pregnant, forced birth advocates will need to come up with some
clever ways of enforcing their mandates. Texas devised a plan to
encourage the average citizen to be a spy. It was originally designed
before the overturning of Roe to avoid lawsuits against
government entities when Roe was still in force. In essence, any
citizen who “rats out” a woman planning on getting an abortion
could pick up a cool and easy $10,000. Add another ten grand for
exposing anyone else who aids or abets in facilitating the abortion.

If several family members and a few close friends were involved,
someone could pick up perhaps $50,000 or more. Vigilante
hunting season would become a year-round occupation. And if you
want to see a woman go ballistic and crazy with blood on the floor,
just question a fat woman if they are pregnant (it’s harder to tell) or
even a slightly overweight woman who looks like she recently put
on a few pounds. Getting violently slapped up the side of the head,
followed by a string of profanities, is a scene to avoid. Run for
cover. Assault cases on court dockets could soar.
Most women who desire a baby, want the baby, and are fully
committed to bringing it to term, would resent any vigilantes
checking up on them periodically “just to make sure” if a woman
wavered in any way about carrying a fetus to term. All women
(both pro and con on abortion) would be under constant
surveillance by busybodies hoping to cash in. Once again, the
issues of privacy and “it’s none of your damn business” would be
irrelevant. It would be vigilantism run amuck. A “witch hunt”
would ensue where only women are suspected of being a witch
since everyone knows witchcraft is solely a female occupation.
Practicality, costs, implementation, and optics have mostly
sidelined such a financial vigilante approach post-Roe.
Such draconian laws bring to mind authoritarian states like the

German Gestapo, the Russian KGB, and the East German Stasi
police states. Their reason for existence was state control. When
the Berlin Wall came down in 1989, and German reunification
came shortly thereafter, the discovery of the records of the State
secret police (the Stasi) shocked everyone, including many East
Germans themselves. It was breathtaking for reporters and foreign
intelligence services alike to review extensive records that were
Orwellian in size, scope, and intrusiveness. The state made every
citizen an “informant,” a source against their neighbors. Every
citizen was turned into a part-time spy. Historians and researchers
were incredulous at the pervasiveness of ordinary citizens turning
on their neighbors over matters large and trivial. Some completely
phony reports were made up out of thin air as revenge for a grudge
they held against somebody.
Some pro-choice activists warn about phone apps that track a

woman’s period that could be hacked by some troll in his
basement. Others fret about weaponizing an information war to
track and monitor pregnant women. Pregnancy centers (a.k.a.
fetus-first priority centers) have large databases of women who
have come into their offices thinking they were going to get
abortion advice, not realizing that the main goal of these centers is
to talk young women out of an abortion. Their concern is far
greater for the fetus than a young woman’s long-term well-being.
These centers are designed to wear down a woman by making
them feel small, selfish, and evil for wanting an abortion with the
often not-so-subtle message that “God will get her” for this
monstrous sin. Their main weapons are guilt and shame heaped
upon a desperate woman, telling her that she is, in essence, a
criminal who wants to murder her fetus. But they will be MIA over
the next twenty years for the child and mother. Good luck! You
are on your own.
The Supreme Court, in overturning Roe, basically threw cold

water on the idea of a “right to privacy.” The Founding Fathers
probably thought basic privacy was “self-evident” and did not need
to be spelled out in our founding documents. Former Supreme
Court Justice Louis Brandeis wrote about the “right to be left
alone.” as an important part of the Constitution. The 4th
Amendment against search and seizure is often cited by those who
promote a right to privacy. It was a direct response to British
soldiers and officials raiding people’s homes, harassing them, and
confiscating various items at will with little recourse. Facebook
posts and all your other social media feeds for those under
suspicion may be scrutinized by busybodies with the clear message
that we don’t trust women.
Anti-abortionists, flush from the victory marking the end of

Roe, are now arguing over new stringent laws and enforcement
mechanisms against women. For the real hardliners, it is not much

of a stretch to imagine court-ordered subpoenas under the 4th
Amendment issued on a “tip” of a woman planning an abortion to
allow police to enter a woman’s home. The “search” of her body
would be to prove she was not “hiding another tiny person in her
belly” by being pregnant and planning to leave town. In an
alternate universe, a police car could be outfitted with a sonogram
machine to make determinations quicker on the spot. Under the
subpoena, police would also be given permission to ransack a
house to find secretly hidden abortion pills so they could be seized
as illegal drug evidence. Her phone and text records may also be
seized. She may be taken into the police precinct for fingerprinting
and required to sit for a mug shot just like any other criminal. A
police file may be started in her case to follow her around the rest
of her life and possibly affect her future employment.
If it is determined she is pregnant, she may be considered a

flight risk and required to wear an ankle bracelet so her
whereabouts can be monitored based on credible evidence she is
making plans for an illegal abortion in another state. If she is
reported missing, an all-points bulletin (an APB) could be issued
to all law enforcement officers to be on the lookout for her before
she crosses the state border line. Ridiculous? Maybe or maybe not.
Some contiguous forced birth states may sign reciprocity

agreements with other like-minded states to facilitate extradition
before a woman can escape to a state that allows abortions and
stop a murder from taking place. Those who favor punishing
women by making them an example, if not a spectacle, may subject
them to fines or the threat of jail on returning to their home states.
The whole purpose is to scare and intimidate other women who
may be thinking of following in her footsteps. Coercion is the
name of the game. Much of this sounds more like the “Taliban”
than “smaller government” conservatives. Most citizens want to
be left alone. Yes, the scenarios may be problematic or far-fetched,
but it illustrates the problem of controlling independent-thinking
women living in a restrictive state.
Susan, a desperate mother with two young daughters, is

pregnant again. Caught accessing an illegal “back alley” abortion,
Susan would have to be arrested for murder and jailed. Since the
fetus has the same rights starting at conception, Susan must be
charged, tried, and convicted for “taking the life of another.” This
is the view of a small strident faction of the hardcore anti-abortion
movement who call themselves “absolutist abolitionists”
demanding the prosecution of pregnant women who obtained an
abortion. Never mind that the mother has two other young
children. They could be placed in foster care if no relative is
available. After all, the mother is a criminal and an unfit mother by
her actions. The children can visit their mom in jail for over a
decade through high school graduation. Justice has been served.
Let it be a warning to other women. An irony of ironies would

be if one of Susan’s now grown teenage daughters got pregnant
and also got caught with a back-alley abortion. She could be jailed
as well and serve time with her mom. A family-finally reunited!
And woe be to a woman who has a miscarriage, which is not

uncommon. Between 10 and 20% of pregnancies end in a
miscarriage. It is emotional and personal, not to mention private,
for any woman. Now imagine being guilty until proven innocent,
which falls on the woman as suspect number one. She may be
subjected to intrusive questioning, with perhaps some medical tests
required. Doctor records may be subpoenaed (never mind doctor-
patient confidentiality since a crime may have been committed),
and family and friends interviewed as a follow-up. Her sexual
history and the fetus’s father may also be questioned to get the full
picture, so they are told. Cops called upon to check up on
“Stepford wives” and “handmaidens” will try to explain with a
weary sigh, “Look, I am just doing my job; I don’t make the laws.”
And to top off all the indignity, the woman suffering a

miscarriage is an ardent anti-abortionist who wanted to carry the
baby to term. No matter, we can’t trust any females; because they
may change their minds, and we must double-check everyone.
Even committed anti-abortionists can’t be trusted with a

pregnancy gone wrong. You just cannot trust women. It is pretty
simple.
Meanwhile, some abortion rights activists are considering

something similar to the “Underground Railway” that assisted
runaway slaves heading north seeking freedom. Safe houses and
code words may be established along with financial assistance to
help women escape to a place where they can get a safe abortion
and where choice is respected.
Of course, privacy may be a moot issue with the advent of the

Internet and humongous data mining sweeping up every keystroke
we make on the keyboard. Apple, Google, Facebook, Microsoft,
and hundreds more show that privacy is a quaint concept in our
wired world. In truth, a dossier on any individual can be assembled
in short order. It is already a reality in the commercial world
whereby clicking to buy one product instantly shows you more of
the same. Just click here! Buy. Buy. Buy! So much for privacy.
But while the Supreme Court argues the finer points on

originalism, textualism, or contemporary interpretations along with
privacy, the issue for pro-choice proponents is less about privacy
and more about freedom. And pointedly, all the controversy only
affects half the population, which is patently unfair. Worse, most
of the unaffected male legislators are making rulings and laws
about pregnant women in a big way. Certainly, this makes sense
that men should call the shots and be the decision-makers over
women’s bodies. Controlling pregnant women is important.
Women can’t be trusted!
FETUS INCUBATOR
With some states proposing that “personhood” begins at
conception to protect an embryo or fetus with legal rights, we must
focus on the “host” of that potential new life. Logic follows that a
pregnant woman is now reduced to being a mere “incubator” for

nine months of a growing fetus. Accordingly, as an incubator, she
should be closely monitored so that she does not “abuse” the fetus.
Taken to its rational conclusion, the state should be interested in
the “hosts” conduct. What she eats, what activities she engages in,
whether at work or play, and any bad habits she may have must be
supervised and scrutinized in detail. If her job requires strenuous
physical activity, she may be forced to quit, possibly without pay.
Appropriately, as the “host, she should be given a “sherpa

guide” (a nanny) with whom she needs to check in with every day.
She will be required to give a report on her condition as a
precaution regarding the “person” fetus. Her kitchen should be
monitored to avoid any “binges” of junk food. The state will argue
this intrusion is no different from child abuse in which a mother
fed her child Twinkies all day, along with a beer and some drugs to
keep them quiet. But the state cannot take the fetus away like it
would the child of an irresponsible mother. They can’t since the
‘host” must cooperate in her own behavior.
Of course, these rules should apply to all pregnant women,

without exception. It’s just a matter of fairness and equal
protection. It matters not who is joyful and thrilled at having a baby
and intends to carry it to term. Because the state does not trust
women and does not know what category a woman would fall in
(wants a baby or desires an abortion), they must all be watched and
monitored just to make sure. Sometimes circumstances change,
and a woman may change her mind and bolt for the border. You
just can’t trust women.
Moreover, suppose the “host vessel” refuses to cooperate. In

that case, the state should have a court hearing and put her into
“maternity jail” for the remainder of her nine-month term.
Legislators will have set aside millions of dollars to build these
“maternity jails” around the state. She can then be monitored to
ensure she has no vices, along with supervising her diet and
behavior in the interest of the “person” to be. Her appeal to
freedom and personal
rights will be denied on behalf of the fetus’s rights and personhood

that supersedes hers. Because she cannot be trusted, cameras are
installed to watch her every move 24/7 till delivery. Thousands of
state monitors at enormous expense are hired to watch screens all
day and night to monitor tens of thousands of pregnant women
regardless of their intent or wishes to prevent anyone from
becoming a “runner” trying to get to an abortion-protected state.
After the birth, she may be charged with negligence or attempted
murder if her poor conduct compromises the baby during
pregnancy. And if the baby doesn’t survive, perhaps charged with
murder. She can then be transferred immediately from maternity
jail to State prison. Justice has been served.
Far-fetched? Perhaps? Maybe, maybe not. Who knows? But it

is certainly a plausible, even if unlikely, scenario for those who want
to make a spectacle of a female in distress. Stay tuned.
SNEAKY
Advocates for forced birth legislation that have failed to get a
total abortion ban have fallen back on getting a six-week ban and
then pursued a sneaky pathway to get as close to a complete ban
as possible. As the saying goes, “The devil is in the details.” Their
tricky playbook is to put as many restrictions, hurdles, and onerous
rules and procedures in place as to deny most women an abortion
who seek one before the six-week clock runs out. Different
restrictive states with time constraints have different rules, but all
have some variation of the following strategy in how the game is
played against women.
To defeat the six-week ban, it must be recognized that many

women do not even know they are pregnant within the six-week
time frame. So, by default, these women have no recourse outside
the six-week window. Mission accomplished. The next hoop to
jump through by a restrictive state is to delay, delay, delay the
process of getting access to care. A woman who suspects she is
pregnant after a missed period at four or five weeks knows she is

up against the clock and calendar. Anyone who knows anything
about getting a quick doctor’s appointment knows that is not
reality. The average wait time for a family practice appointment is
just under three weeks. Mission accomplished.
Even a woman who can schedule a special doctor’s

appointment within a few days is required to see the doctor in
person. Telemedicine or Zoom consultations are denied. Mission
partially accomplished. This makes things tough for women living
one or two hundred miles away to see a doctor. Some states also
require a first ultrasound procedure that may have to be scheduled
at another facility. Another delay. Then a five-day waiting period is
imposed. Another delay. Then a second in-person doctor’s visit
and, in a few cases, a second ultrasound must be performed. All of
these hoops to jump through leave many women outside the six-
week requirement. Mission accomplished. Sneaky, sneaky!
In Florida, Governor DeSantis signed a six-week bill late at

night in a private signing. Critics claim he did not want to draw
undue attention since he was running for president. It is no
coincidence that on the subject of abortion, nearly all Republican
candidates and legislators are shy and want to quickly try and
change the subject. They know that restrictive abortion policies are
not well-received throughout the country. And they especially do
not want to “tick off” more women than they already have.
These sneaky six-week roadblocks are designed to treat

women as children, deny them choice, and make their life and
unwanted pregnancy difficult, time-consuming, and subject to the
state. After all, the state knows best. But that is not the end of the
story, as women in need will increasingly rely on abortion pills
(even on the black market if things come to that) to be used at
home and ignore all the obstacles thrown in their way by a
patriarchal state that is intrusive. Or they will hit the road or book
a flight. Everything goes dark.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 7 LIFE AND TIMES BEFORE ROE . . . THE GOOD OL’ DAYS? | 83
CHAPTER 7
LIFE AND TIMES BEFORE
ROE . . . THE GOOD OL’ DAYS?
Americans are notoriously bad at history. Studying about dead

people and events from long ago can’t compete with one’s social
media addiction, e-mail, and Facebook. Who cares anyway, except
for some old fuddy-duddy professors in tweedy jackets with
glasses? We will skip over most of American history and just begin
with the 20th century.
In 1900, the dawn of the 20th Century, the status of women

was nearly all confined and consumed by the home. 40% of the
country’s population still lived on a farm, and 60% lived in a rural
community. Despite the booming cities of New York, Boston, and
Chicago fed by mass immigration, America was still Smallville,
USA. A woman’s primary job was to be a mother of multiple
children to provide free farm labor and be a homemaker, cook, and
farmhand helper when needed while living in a rural setting, often
miles from a neighbor. She had few political, legal, financial, or
social rights. She was often viewed as merely an extension of her
husband.
It was an era when there was no safety net. There was no Social
Security, healthcare, unemployment insurance, or disability
provisions. Only six percent of the population graduated from high
school. No national crop insurance or government grain subsidy
programs for a bad harvest existed. Even a farm bumper crop year
could become a negative event if grain prices fell due to a surplus
of supply. Farming was always one step away from disaster,
whether drought, floods, blight, or the railroad charging high
shipping costs. Today, however, only 1% of the country is
involved in agriculture. America not only feeds itself but exports

about 25% of what we produce, with some farmers getting paid to
leave their fields fallow. It is a stunning testament to American
productivity.
A woman totally depended on her husband’s income to put

food on the table. Serious injury or sickness for either of them
could be catastrophic for the family. There was no electricity or
indoor plumbing. There was no heating except for a stove and a
fireplace. A farm ran on horsepower, and a sick or dying horse was
a crisis issue. Isolation and depression were common, and a trip
into town or church by horse and wagon once a week was a major
outing. Even that could be taken away in frigid winter weather. A
family of six or more (that may include an elderly parent) was often
crammed into a small, simple farmhouse. Privacy was problematic.
Alcohol was the drug of choice of some farmers that ruined

families over long winter months. Unsurprisingly, women led the
temperance movement in favor of Prohibition because they, and
their children, were the primary victims of alcoholics, with no
alternatives (i.e. again, no choice but to put up with the abuse).
They suffered greatly with little or no recourse. While drugs and
opioids get the headlines today, alcohol and drunk drivers alone
have killed more Americans than all the war dead in American
history. It’s true. And the kicker is that for the first hundred and
twenty years of our country, there were no cars! Even today, the
breakup of families due to alcohol is staggering. Kids always lose.
Whether single or married, women living in a big city or on a

farm in a small town in the old days had few choices. Most jobs
were menial and low paying. In nearly all cases, women were
discriminated against and paid less than a man doing the same job.
In most small towns, the telephone had not yet arrived. Radio,
television, airplanes, and automobiles in 1900 were inconceivable
except as science fiction. On the farm, access to electricity on a
large scale would have to wait till the 1930s New Deal programs.
Imagine a home with no outlet plugs and no appliances. Newly
arrived immigrants in the big cities also had rigid gender roles from
the old country. Factory work for men was ten or eleven hours a
day, six days a week. Piece labor in squalid tenements required both
parents and even children as young as five or six to do their part.
Of course, there were some women of wealth and privilege who
did not fit into these molds, but they were small in numbers and
were confined to traditional gender roles.
Sex education was rudimentary or absent as a taboo subject. It

was a discreet conversation behind closed doors among women.
Some distraught women took drastic rudimentary actions to abort
a pregnancy. Some died, and others suffered health issues for life.
Misinformation and old wives’ tales were common. It was not
unusual for many women to have miscarriages or for mothers to
die in childbirth. (Note: Childhood deaths for children aged 1−4
were nearly 50 times greater than today and those 5−14 twenty
times) Almost every family, whether directly or through extended
relatives, lost small children to various kinds of diseases and
accidents before vaccines and antibiotics became available, and
hygiene improved. Sadness, sorrow, and loss were common.
Women would seek information to limit their fertility,

especially after multiple pregnancies. Despite most state bans on
abortions by 1910, it was not a salient issue. It was spottily enforced
as women lived on farms or crowded city tenements, and many
authorities chose not to get involved. It was an awkward subject
and mostly avoided. Many of these laws were “zombie laws” on
the books but often ignored. Ironically, women of the day who
wore heavy dresses and petticoats could more easily conceal an
early pregnancy.
Despite the 1873 Comstock Law prohibiting pornography

from being distributed by mail along with contraception and
abortion advice, information cannot be locked away. In 1900, there
were no laws regulating pharmacological drugs (no FDA), and
entrepreneurs and charlatans alike sold every concoction
imaginable to make a buck. Both sellers and women caught on
quickly to the euphemistic wording of promotions of elixirs, cures,

and potions that would aid in an abortion. Word of mouth among
women swiftly spread. And it should be noted that the Comstock
Act, which is often cited by zealous anti-abortionists, was passed
47 years before women could even vote! There was no female
input or representation on such a personal matter. Men decide!
But the world would be turned upside down over the next two
generations with World War I, the Roaring Twenties, the Great
Depression, and then World War II, along with stunning and
revolutionary inventions of all kinds. America was transformed.
And so were women in such profound ways that echo down to our
present day. Machinery changed farm life, manufacturing boomed,
cities exploded, and women by the tens of millions got an
opportunity to work. For the most part they liked it in giving them
purpose, money, and limited independence in their day. More than
anything, it got them out of the house and enlarged their vision of
possibilities by rubbing shoulders with all kinds of people. But it
would be their female children and grandchildren, armed with
education, skills, and unheard-of opportunities, that would benefit
from their early labors. They could never have dreamed of such
lives.
But change from 1900 would be a slog. Women had to wait

twenty years (1920) just to get the right to vote. It took till 1960
for a woman to open a bank account in her own name and till 1968
to serve on a jury in all fifty states. It wasn’t until 1965 that married
women won the right to birth control in the Griswold v.
Connecticut decision. It took until 1974 for a woman to get a
mortgage or a credit card in her own name without a husband or
male co-signer. In 1974, in Connecticut, Ella Grasso became the
first female governor elected in her own right. Up to 1978, a
woman could get summarily fired from her job for just getting
pregnant. It would not be till 1969 that Yale admitted women
students and 1977 for Harvard to open its hallowed doors, more
than three centuries from its first graduating class in 1642. Change
indeed! Sandra Day O’Connor, in 1981 would become the first
female Supreme Court justice after 111 male predecessors and 192
years after the court was formed.
In the middle of all this ferment and progress and firsts for
women came the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, establishing a right
to an abortion and bodily autonomy for women. It has always been
controversial primarily because of two facts; religious beliefs and
the decisive power of men in all the decision-making arenas of
business, politics, and above all, the clergy.
In the past 50 years, the ascent of women in all areas of public

life has been nothing short of astounding. Most women have seen
the court’s overturning of Roe as a step back in time and a slap in
the face that women are incapable of handling their own personal
and private circumstances. They do not pine for the “good ol’
days” before Roe. Society has not heard the last word from women
about coercion.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 8 IF YOU DON’T WANT TO HAVE AN ABORTION, DON’T HAVE ONE | 88
CHAPTER 8
IF YOU DON’T WANT TO
HAVE AN ABORTION, DON’T
HAVE ONE
It is easy to understand if a woman, for religious or moral

reasons, is against having an abortion if SHE gets pregnant. She
should follow her conscience and be respected for the choice she
has made. The fight is over OTHER women having abortions. It
is about controlling your neighbor. It is about coercion, pure and
simple. Forced birth activists feel the need to bring down the
sledgehammer hard on these people who are ignorant and who just
“don’t get it” that there is zero difference in equivalency between
a bouncing baby born and an early pregnancy embryo or fetus.
Even if the embryo is not an embryo yet but only a tiny dot of cells
at conception, it makes no difference to forced birth activists.
Selfish would-be mothers demanding a right to abortion only care
about themselves more than “doing the right thing” and
welcoming with open arms a new baby into the world, their
personal circumstances be damned. These “other” women seeking
abortions are just misguided at best, sinners for sure, and baby
killers at worst. We will use new laws, the power of the state, and
law enforcement to put a stop to it.
A forced birth advocate must subscribe to the idea that they

would personally be willing to go next door to their pregnant
neighbor’s house with handcuffs and a shotgun to stand guard for
months around the clock if word leaked out in the neighborhood
that she was considering an abortion. It is their duty as a citizen to
stop a crime. However, very few, if any, would volunteer for such
full-time duty. But outsourcing the coercion to the police (who do
not want to be involved either) allows them to be above the fray.

They cowardly shy away from any responsibility of being a prison
guard for a pregnant woman.
Drafting the power of the state is essential to make the anti-

abortionist views work. Persuasion almost always fails in the face
of a determined young woman who has made up her mind. People
are not against laws that protect the community. However, on
intimate and personal matters, most Americans believe that it is
none of the government's business. They believe women and
doctors can deal with medical issues. Holy Men and politicians
should stay in their own lane and keep their noses out. Women
demand respect. Women are capable of running their own lives.
THE FAMILY VALUES PARTY

The Republican Party has always promoted itself as a “family
values” party. God, family, and country is the unofficial motto.
Core beliefs include individualism, a strong work ethic, morality,
and self-sufficiency. Capitalism, property, merit, and social
mobility through smarts, innovation, and persistence are
fundamental to what makes America great. It is all true, if
imperfectly practiced, and largely describes what makes America
the greatest success story the planet has ever seen.
But it is not a complete picture. It fails to deal with people who

fall between the cracks or come up short, or are marginalized. Yes,
some people destroy themselves by their own hands and deserve
no sympathy. But others who work hard and do their best may
need a helping hand along life’s journey. Injury, accident, abuse,
and disease disrupt the plans of the mightiest among us. Trauma,
grief, prejudice, bad luck, and varied circumstances hobble and
trouble millions more. Some individuals rise out of the ashes of
terrible conditions, while most others are crushed by them.
Hubert Humphrey, a past senator from Minnesota, said, “The

moral test of government is how that government treats those who
are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight
of life, the elderly, and those who are in the shadows of life, the
sick, the needy, and the handicapped.”
The Republican Party is a coalition party. One tiny part

supplies the money composed of big and small businesses, the
wealthy, and the rich, and the other massive part provides the
votes; social conservatives, evangelicals, military hawks, and those
for the status quo in fear and loathing regarding crime, guns, race,
religion, abortion, sexuality, and perceived creeping socialism. It is
largely a transactional party whereby the rich elites want to be
assured of low taxes and few regulations in the pursuit of massive
wealth. It works with huge amounts of “dark money” funneled
through multiple opaque and tangled PACs to avoid
accountability. It permits enormous influence and vast power that
corrupts our politics when allowing unchecked money and special
interests to set the legislative agenda.
But when it comes to family values, there is a split personality

on the issue of babies and children among Republicans. The idea
of faith, family, and home is promoted. Boy Scout codes of honor
are lauded. Parental control and guidance of their children’s
education and behavior is a given, and it all starts in the home. But
when it comes to money to support these traditional values to
assist families in these goals, the script quickly changes regarding
health care and adequate safety nets for children. There is a
reticence or uncomfortable denial to acknowledge the struggles of
working-class nuclear families and an even greater refusal to
recognize the enormous changes affecting the role of single-family
female-headed households and their unique challenges.
Republicans, when given a choice, display that there is no

contest between tax cuts skewed toward the wealthy rather than
any social issues. The main business of business is business, and
the bottom line is the bottom line. Reasoned arguments can be
made at times to support various tax-cut policies. They are not

always wrong, and fair-minded people can agree and disagree
where the line should be drawn. But tax cuts cannot be defended
in a public emergency or a national crisis. When George Bush Jr.
became president, the first order of business was tax cuts. But
when 9/11 occurred, and America went to war in Iraq and
Afghanistan, spending trillions of dollars over the years, the tax
cuts remained in place rather than being rescinded to help pay for
the war efforts. All expenses were paid on borrowed money and
added to the national credit card. Again, when the economy had
its meltdown in 2008, big banks and Wall Street got bailed out with
borrowed money, while Main Street suffered cardiac arrest.
When President Trump entered office, tax cuts were again a

top priority despite huge deficits. Cries about deficits and the
national debt among Republicans largely went silent. When the
Covid-19 pandemic hit the country, requiring trillions of dollars to
stop the economy from collapsing, the tax cuts for the wealthy
were not rescinded. The emergency was covered once again by
massive, borrowed money. With the election of Joe Biden,
Republicans would then whine, moan, and lament the national
debt and insist that social spending be cut. Likewise, even the
patron saint, Ronald Reagan, tripled the national debt without a war
or pandemic to deal with. Hypocrisy is alive and well. Both
Republicans and Democrats love to spend money. Democrats tax,
Republicans borrow.
The Republican Party has rarely been at the forefront of social

change in assisting the underclass but has fought against such
changes consistently and vigorously. It is unconscionable that a
party that largely embraces the anti-abortionist cause does not
immediately demand paid maternity leave provisions for all
pregnant women. It is unconscionable that a pro-life party does
not demand funding for child-friendly policies as a top priority
when one out of seven children officially live in poverty by low
government parameters and a more realistic one out of five
children in reality. It is unconscionable that Republicans do not
insist on an automatic universal health care standard for all children

through early adulthood. Kids are not responsible for their own
situations.
Some will argue (rightfully so) that the “official” poverty rate
is skewed since it only includes cash income but ignores
government non-cash benefits like food stamps, subsidized
housing, unemployment benefits, and other programs to aid the
poor. This is called the Supplementary Poverty Measure, which
slightly reduces poverty. But regardless of what measure is used,
one needs to consider the government poverty numbers to be
considered poor. It is $14,580 for a single person and $24,860 for
a single parent and two children. Even with a few extra thousand
dollars from governmental subsidies, living on the edge is a
tightrope with no room for error. Go ahead and figure out a budget
for rent, utilities, food, transportation, dental care, and the simple
staples of life on these numbers, with no health crisis or emergency
rainy-day funds. Good luck.
“Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.” The majority of the

country was against having Roe overturned. Yet, as the
battlegrounds shift to the remaining pro-choice states, women may
start coming from everywhere to protect what they have. They will
figure that if restrictions were imposed in some states by getting
rid of Roe, the same could happen in their state. The jury is still
out, and nothing is for sure, but there appears to be a tsunami wave
backlash forming against legislators who are not listening to their
own constituents. Nothing focuses the mind so much as being
threatened with loss. And ironically, forced birth advocates are the
most opposed to people voting on abortion rights whenever
possible. They will vigorously oppose such grassroots democracy
at the ballot box for fear of losing. The state of Ohio and others
have failed to force a super-majority requirement to change their
state constitutions because a majority rule (i.e., 51%) is so
threatening. They are trying to stack the deck.
The Republican Party, in recent years, has lost its moral

compass under Trumpism, where basic truth is denied and even
dishonored. It needs to show its heart for struggling families and
especially toward children. The country needs a new 21st-century
party that looks forward rather than just to the past. A party that
truly shows its “compassionate conservatism” (George W. Bush,
Jr.), allowing “a thousand points of light” (George H.W. Bush, Sr.)
and being “the shining city on the hill” (Ronald Reagan). Sadly, all
of these former Republican presidents are now considered old-
time fogey RINOs, replaced instead by the vitriol of the “Trump
and Grump Party!”
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 9 RAPE AND INCEST: LOONY TUNES! | 94
CHAPTER 9
RAPE AND INCEST: LOONY
TUNES!
Several anti-abortion states are making no concessions to

abortion, even in the case of rape or incest. They have gone
hardline loony-tunes crazy. Most people are incredulous that this
could be God’s will in any sense. A heinous crime is committed,
and an innocent woman must be condemned for the rest of her
life, seeing a child as a daily reminder of the worst day of her life.
The 8th Amendment to the Constitution is about imposing

“cruel and unusual” punishment upon criminals. What about
innocent victims? And what makes this even more egregious by a
hundred-fold is that an innocent woman gets the life sentence of
victim, trauma, and grief, not the evil perpetrator who is rarely
prosecuted and, if convicted, may be out of jail in a few years for
his crime. Where is justice in that? Where is mercy? Where is
common sense? And if she seeks an abortion, she will be
victimized again and treated as a criminal due to the “alleged” rape.
If she does get an illegal abortion, she risks being fined or tried for
murder for her decision. Yes, lock her up!
The word “ludicrous” fails to express how bizarre and bonkers

such a ridiculous and malicious policy this is as it applies to an
innocent victim. Perhaps the state would also like her to wear “a
scarlet letter A” (for Abortion) on all her clothing every time she
goes out in public for life.
How crazy can things get? In Wisconsin, conservative

Republican legislators read the polls that citizens, Democrats and
Republicans alike, by large margins, wanted abortion exceptions
for rape and incest. But even very conservative Republican

legislators were fought against by even more hardline pro-life
lobbyists opposed to any changes who declared that any legislation
that allows abortions “is incapable of being justified.” Matt Sande,
pro-life Wisconsin legislative director, said, “A vote to add more
exceptions to Wisconsin’s abortion ban is a vote to kill more
preborn babies. It is that simple. It is always and everywhere
wrong, regardless of motivation or consequence. It may never be
employed, even in the narrowest of circumstances, as a means to a
greater end.” Well, there you have it. Such is the worldview of Matt
Sande, a man who is eminently qualified to speak on behalf of all
raped women. He is not alone in his medieval thinking.
An innocent girl or young woman brutally raped in a park, at

a party, or in a dark parking lot should have some say and rights
about her life, including an abortion. Certainly, legislators, the
courts, and the clergy cannot all be so vindictive, mean, and callous.
Does anyone believe that God is this cruel? Surely, there must be
some compassion given to the victim for the right to have a choice
over her body that was so violently violated. She never asked for
this. She was forcefully raped, and now the state wants to force her
to bear a child. Hear her plea and cry. Where is the justice that her
husband and her children (innocent also) must bear this burden?
Should a husband now be required by the state (sorry, buddy)

to raise a rapist’s child along with their own children who are
forced to accept a baby brother or sister into their home, conceived
in violence? For the rest of their lives, family members will be
explaining the situation to all those who come into their lives at
church, work, and in the neighborhood. Just as tragic, who will
ever be able to explain it to the child born of rape when they come
of age?
Forced birth advocates will immediately declare that such a

crazy scenario is ridiculous nonsense and adoption is the solution
to everything. But the raped female is adamant that she should not
be forced to be pregnant for nine months and all that entails,
including a small risk of death, just to put a baby up for adoption.

Incensed, she will claim she should not be forced to be a baby
incubator or a mere host vessel. “Where is your God of Mercy?”
she asks, failing to understand. If they raped a man who had to
have a baby, they would be singing from a different hymnbook,
without question, she would claim. Men would then, miraculously,
“see the light.” Those legislators who did not make exceptions for
rape and incest of a woman have lost their minds. Is this a
manifestation of God’s will, she asks? What kind of God do you
worship, anyway? God forbid this evil should ever come to their
family. They won’t stand for it, the hypocrites.
In war, some soldiers often rape the enemy whenever they can
get away with it. It is used as a weapon of power and terror against
women and to humiliate their men who cannot protect them from
this terror and to emasculate them. Suppose an invading army
rapes hundreds of thousands of women resulting in tens of
thousands of pregnancies? Can anyone justify this as God’s will?
No, this is evil personified! The devil cackles.
Toward the end of World War II, it is estimated that 2 million

German women were raped by Russian soldiers (and most likely
vice versa), and perhaps the same number of forced Korean
victims at the hands of the Japanese called euphemistically
“comfort women.” It may never be known the number of
pregnancies involved on such a large scale. Is any of this condoned
by God saying to such women, “Tough luck?” What about an
estimated million or more young boys raped or sexually abused by
Catholic clergy worldwide and others over the past century? But
no pregnancy is involved in any of these crimes. Where is the
equivalency with raped women since their trauma is now further
compounded by the tragedy of a pregnancy? This is sexism and
misogyny in its rawest form.
Rape is a nightmare for any woman. Humiliated, angry, and

violated, it is a life-changing experience that will last a lifetime. It
is such a private and personal hell, and then to be told by the state
you must deliver your rapist’s baby. Is this not the definition of
sadistic evil, of trauma on top of trauma? Imagine in your mind the
most vile, filthy, disgusting, deranged, vicious, monstrous
nightmare of a human being as a rapist and your sister, daughter,
mother, or wife being the victim and being required to carry and
deliver that seed because this is God’s will, and the finger-wagging
state says so. How utterly devoid and sick of any moral code to
require this. This is evil upon evil.
It gets worse. In some states with an “exception clause,” she

must report the rape (a most private matter) to the police, thus
notifying the whole world that an investigation has begun. It is
designed as a “poison pill” to place all the burden on the female.
All her family, friends, colleagues, and church members are soon
made aware of her tragedy. And now it is open season on her
character to endure gossip, innuendo, judgment, and “Did you
hear?”
The police will grill her on who the rapist is, but she may be
afraid because her rapist has threatened violence against her and
her children “if she ever tells.” Failure to cooperate with authorities
and be dragged through the mud means her request for an abortion
will be automatically denied. Having the rapist’s baby is the
alternative from the state's point of view. If there is a traumatic
trial, it will be like getting raped again as the defense will claim it is
her word against his and attack her character and paint her as a
closet whore. They will try and intimidate her by inquiring about
her sexual history as a tactic to humiliate and embarrass her in their
plan to get her to withdraw charges to make it all go away. The
defense will put her on trial, not the rapist.
Such a requirement of reporting to the police, rather than

discreetly and privately to her doctor, is specifically designed to
discourage women, and their doctors, from deciding on abortion
in cases of rape. After all, so the state will claim, hysterical women
cannot be trusted. Everyone knows they lie and are deceitful. Nor
do we trust complicit doctors who already have too high an
opinion of themselves. If we make reporting quiet, many women

will claim rape to their doctors to get around the state ban on
abortion. Therefore, it is important to put women claiming rape
through the third degree and treating them as criminals rather than
victims. We simply can’t have a lot of lying women falsely alleging
they were raped.
In a bizarro world, a rapist could “rat out” his victim trying to

get an abortion, perhaps resulting in him being awarded “bounty”
money by a restrictive state cashing in on his own rape, or at the
very least getting revenge by having her arrested, prosecuted, and
humiliated. It would be another threatened weapon by a rapist to
“shut his victim up” to conceal his crime. Worse, the rapist may
insist on parental and visitation rights or petition the court for
shared custody of the baby and be a thorn in the side and a cross
to bear for the victim for the rest of her life. Is this all part of God’s
grand design?
A May 24, 2019, article by David Crary of the Associated Press

highlighted the fight over making an exception for rape and incest
in the South Carolina legislature. GOP state Rep. Nancy Mace, at
the time (now in Congress), objected angrily after a fellow
Republican lawmaker passed out a flier suggesting that a rapist who
impregnates his victim should be referred to as a “sperm donor.”
It gives the word “outrageous” a new meaning. Rep. John McCravy
chimed in with, “The question is whether another life (fetus)
should be taken because of a bad act,” diminishing the seriousness
of a violent act like rape. Despite GOP representative Mace and
others sharing their personal and painful rape stories, this was the
male attitude. These are not outlier expressions throughout the
country, and most divide on a male vs. female viewpoint about
rape. It is obvious that men know best!
Rape criminals on trial are often defended by sleazy lawyers

citing no witnesses or DNA. If there is a rape kit showing DNA,
the defense is automatic that the sex was consensual and not rape
at all. The victim’s integrity will be ferociously attacked, along with
possible motives of vindictiveness or revenge toward the accused.

Alcohol may be involved, which may be trotted out as an
extenuating circumstance. These are devilishly hard cases to
prosecute beyond a reasonable doubt by their private nature. All
too often, the innocent victim and her family are quickly maligned
or even forgotten in the drama of the court case. The damage to
their lives is often incalculable, and they will never be the same
again. Some families will fall apart and break up. Is it any wonder
why women recoil at being put through such a circus at their
expense? Justice is denied. Evil wins!
DOCTORS AND NURSES

It is open season on doctors and nurses, and other medical
professionals in the abortion wars. They are caught in the crossfire
and resent the role they must play in trying to be Solomon. In anti-
abortion states, they chafe at being harassed, scrutinized, or
questioned about medical issues by ignorant laymen or politicians
who did not go to medical school.
The anti-abortion police will be watching doctors like hawks.

Physicians, like women, can’t be trusted and will be under a
microscope, second-guessed, and put on the defensive at every
turn. They will be required to explain and defend any medical
decisions, no matter how dire, that result in an abortion. If it is a
close case, let the woman die. The state may deem such an
outcome as unfortunate, but it is paramount that the fetus has a
fighting chance at life.
Doctors do not want to be subjected to an ignorant vigilante

mob out to harass, intimidate, and stalk them. Neither do they
want the hassle or the grief. Medical professionals are incensed that
they may need a lawyer on their medical team to tell them what
they can and cannot do. And lawyers do not want to be on call in
the middle of the night or while vacationing at the beach. They like
bankers’ hours. And lawyers always want several months to mull

over a case.
Here is a wild scenario for you. Have you ever seen a lawyer
make a critical life-or-death decision in ten seconds? Never, not on
your life. Suppose the lawyer is in the emergency room hovering
over the doctor’s shoulder, who rapidly explains in medical terms
the best he can what the situation is for a pregnant woman in a
medical crisis. He turns to the lawyer and screams, “Decide now!
We have no time; What’s your call?” The lawyer has only a few
seconds to decide. He bites down on his fingernail, worrying about
his right or wrong call. If the woman pulls through after an
abortion, the lawyer will be pilloried along with the doctor by rabid
forced birth advocates that the intervention was unnecessary and
possibly reprimanded or suspended. If the woman dies, the lawyer
may be personally sued in a civil court by the family in a wrongful
death lawsuit for big bucks and have blood on his hands. Neither
does the lawyer want the Bar Association second-guessing him if
he really screws up.
The lawyer thinks for a split second how much he would like
a “continuance” but then gives his answer to the doctor, praying
he is right. Anyone who has ever watched a medical TV drama
episode knows that time is often of the essence and tough
judgment calls, right or wrong, must be made in the moment.
Mistakes are made and sometimes only recognized in hindsight.
No doctor wants to be subjected to Monday morning
quarterbacking by some amateur activist or, worse, a lawyer. This
was surely not one of the reasons they chose a medical career. Yes,
some women will surely die amid the hemming and hawing of
doctors (and lawyers) just trying to “cover their ass” (cya) regarding
liability. It is more than a tragedy. It is a needless, pointless death,
the worst kind.
Recent history shows how doctors and nurses got burned out
over the COVID-19 pandemic dealing with extraordinarily long
shifts and staffing shortages of all kinds. They have seen a lot of
death and have had to argue with patients at death’s door who
swear they didn’t have COVID but would like the horse medicine
they heard about on TV. Leaving the hospital, doctors had to put
up with anti-vaccine protestors in the parking lot with signs
proclaiming, “My Body, My Choice,” with protesters seeing no
irony in their word choices for their posters. Some doctors have
decided to retire early, while others have switched to less stressful
jobs in the medical field. It is reported that some doctors are not
encouraging young family members or friends to pursue a medical
career because it is too demanding, too stressful, and with too little
appreciation.
Reports are also coming in of a few maternity doctors

relocating their practices out of restrictive states citing possible
prosecution and denial to practice holistic medicine for their
patients without fear. There is already a current ongoing crisis
across rural America where up to half of rural counties have no
maternal OBGYN doctors, and patients need to travel long
distances for care. New abortion bans will make the situation even
worse.
It’s also possible that in the coming years, fewer medical

students may decide to become OBGYN doctors to avoid trouble
and legal issues. It may also be a major factor in which states new
graduates and residents choose to practice in. Others will rationally
conclude, “Who needs the grief?” They will choose to practice in
different medical specialties. Another consideration is already sky-
high medical malpractice premiums that may increase even more
for baby doctors in a newly contentious and murky legal
environment. Doctor shortages in some regions may become even
more acute.
Doctors in anti-abortion states who want to help women will

have to reluctantly tell them they are sorry, but their hands are tied.
Some laws are so written that if the doctor even opens his mouth
suggesting other alternatives for such a patient, he could face fines,
jail, or the revocation of his medical license. Doctors will wonder
how they came to live in a police state. This may mean the woman’s
health and well-being are sacrificed on the altar of coercion when
their Hippocratic oath is “do no harm.” Intimidation and threats
against doctors and nurses are designed to have a chilling effect on
them to “Watch out, we are watching you.”
But the handwriting on the wall is clear. Ken Paxton, the

scandal-ridden Texas Attorney General, came out and filed suit
against federal rules to provide emergency abortions to save the life
of the mother and said, “It seeks to transform every emergency
room to a walk-in abortion clinic,” This is a characterization of all
doctors as idiots and would-be nefarious criminals. They must be
watched and monitored very closely. Perhaps we need 24/7
cameras in all ER rooms? Big Brother and friends can monitor
from their basement, the police station, or even the Texas Attorney
General’s office. Doctors, like women, are not to be trusted.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 10 A VERY SHORT CHAPTER | 103
CHAPTER 10
A VERY SHORT CHAPTER
This chapter could be finished in only one sentence. Not even

a short paragraph is needed. But more elaboration will follow the
central thesis. Here goes:
There would be no abortion debate at all if men could get

pregnant AND were the primary caregivers of babies and
young children.
Who will disagree? There is little doubt that the overwhelming
majority of women would agree with the truth of the statement
above. Even hardline super-committed women in the anti-
abortion movement would mostly agree if they were honest. So
would nearly all men. Therefore, it stands to reason that if this is a
true statement about men, it would logically follow that abortion
is not strictly a moral matter but a private one compounded by
gender, culture, religion, and history.
Women joke that if men had to go through labor alone, the

human race would be on the way to dying out if not already
accomplished. Few men would have a second one, they reflect. As
for abortion, it would become a non-issue. Cynically, a number of
priests and pastors with connections to God would announce a
new “divine revelation” regarding abortion upholding men’s
health, free agency, and well-being, first and foremost. Free choice
for all men! The controversy is over since God has spoken! Gloria
Steinem, a renowned feminist, once famously declared that “if men
could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.” Disagree with
an ultra-liberal all day long, but some observations are true
regardless of who said it.
Men would simply not put up with the state telling them what
to do on the most private of matters. In this alternate universe,
there would be no debate. Screaming, “Freedom from tyranny,”
men would march by the millions on every state capital and the
U.S. Capitol as well. Guns, blessed by the Supreme Court, would
be ubiquitous in sending a clear warning message to legislators.
Even though there was no violence in a peaceful protest in this
fantasy, the spectacle alone would be over-the-top historic.
It is worth considering in this alternate universe what many

would consider as being absurd. However, imagine for a moment
your favorite male football sports figure (fill in the blank) whom
you idolize, one of the greats of all time, announcing that he was
pregnant and would therefore miss the entire football season. Fans
are indignant. The front office says his contract stipulates that he
will not be paid his 50-million-dollar salary for the upcoming
season in case of pregnancy.
Wow, sports pundits exclaim in astonishment, “that’s one

heck of an expensive kid. That kid better never screw up their life.”
Tabloid headlines scream, “The 50-million-dollar baby.” Las Vegas
oddsmakers recalculate their betting lines. Some fans cancel their
season tickets in anger. Advertisers demand concessions since a
main sports star is not playing. Lucrative TV contracts are adjusted
lower under these circumstances. The internet is ablaze with
millions of comments about contraception and dumb athletes
getting pregnant during the sports season. Others on social media
are flat-out telling the sports star to quit being selfish and get an
abortion for the sake of the team and his mega-money. Fans have
no patience or sympathy.
Marcus, another male player on another football team,

announces that he has postpartum depression and is seeing a
therapist. He is blaming his poor play this season on his condition.
He also has trouble getting rid of baby fat and getting back in
playing shape. Marcus says his sleep cycle is off, and he feels
fatigued. He gets no sympathy from fans who tell him to “suck it
up” and get his butt back in the game. Alex, yet another male
player, announces he has nursing issues and is consulting with
doctors but will miss a whole month of games. Fans are angry and
bummed out again.
Next, word comes down that a favorite male rock star named
“Flair” is pregnant and is canceling half his rock tour out of an
“abundance of caution” regarding undisclosed pregnancy issues.
Also, a top male action movie superstar, Rocky, announces that his
much-awaited action film will have to be delayed a year in light of
dangerous stunts to protect the pregnancy. The studio shuts down
filming and lays off a hundred people. Insurance companies
announce higher rates for upcoming projects. Bruno, a
heavyweight boxer, withdraws from his latest heavily anticipated
fight due to undisclosed “personal medical issues revolving around
procreation.”
Crazy, ludicrous, ridiculous scenarios? Maybe, but think about

it. Gender and biology have absolutely nothing to do with
abortion. Of course not! There would be no difference in the cause
of forced birth activists if men could get pregnant. Zero! Does
anyone believe that?
THE COMPANY YOU KEEP

Around the world, the trend has been moving consistently in
favor of abortion rights and giving more rights to women over
their own bodies. Different countries have different rules and
qualifications, mostly after the first trimester of a woman’s
pregnancy. America, the land of the free and proclaimer of liberty,
has often led the charge in expanding human rights in many areas,
but the abortion issue is different.
However, thanks to the Supreme Court, anywhere from a

third to a half of all females in America may share in the proud
company of such role-model countries as El Salvador, Nicaragua,
Madagascar, Honduras, the Philippines, and Senegal. This does not

mean abortions do not occur in these countries just because the
laws are on the books. Rather, enforcement can be haphazard.
Instead, tens of thousands of women turn to illegal “back street”
abortions or travel to another country. As always, it is the most
marginalized of women who suffer the most.
America is the outlier when considering that more than fifty

countries in recent years, including often heavily Catholic ones,
have been liberalizing, not restricting, women’s choices. In recent
years Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico have made accommodations.
And strikingly, even that citadel of historical Catholicism, Ireland,
changed its laws to be more favorable to women, shocking many
that such laws would be enacted.
Catholic Poland has been a backslider with its retro-

conservative government. Still, it has also brought out some of the
largest demonstrations in the country’s history, protesting harsh
policies on abortion. It does not mean Polish abortions have ended
despite questionable state statistics. Rather, women have had to
resort to subterfuge and deception, getting pills from the
Netherlands or traveling to another EU country. Clerics and
conservative politicians may want to turn the clock back on
abortion, but the public around the world, when given a choice
about abortion, wants a voice and a choice. In a letter to the United
Nations in New York, some 200 human rights groups petitioned,
saying that U.S. abortion bans violate international law and urge
intervention.
In America, the war rages on, with anti-abortionists promising

not to rest until the entire country abolishes any choices for
women. As the Economist magazine reported not too long ago, “In
the most doctrinaire pro-life American states, the abortion regime
will be more austere than that of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, which
permits the procedure to preserve the health, not just the life of
the mother.” The company you keep can say a lot about a country.
America, the outlier.
MICHAEL LEE PART II WOMEN: MOVIN’ ON UP | 107
PART II
WOMEN: MOVIN’ ON
UP
A stunning overview of the changing roles of
women in the 21st Century and their quest for respect,
fairness, opportunity, and free agency.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 11 WOMEN ON THE MARCH | 108
CHAPTER 11
WOMEN ON THE MARCH
See if you agree with the following statement. Nothing in the

Western world over the last hundred years has had a more
profound impact on society than the changing role of women,
perhaps in human history. It’s a brand-new world from the home
to the workplace, from business to politics, from college campuses
to the professions. It is also a big adjustment for many people,
especially men, who do not like change. It makes them
uncomfortable.
For young people today, it is nearly impossible to imagine the

“way things were” for their great-grandparents or even their
grandparents. It was a completely different mindset around the
roles played by men and women in those days. It was just a given
that men were breadwinners and women were mothers and
housekeepers. Nearly everyone accepted the status quo. Even in
the early days of television, in shows like “Leave It to Beaver” and
“Father Knows Best,” Dad ruled the roost as a mostly benign
CEO while Mom was at most a secretary in charge of logistics,
maintenance, and operations (certainly not a vice President to the
CEO in her own home), reinforcing a patriarchal society from the
beginning of time. The only professions open to women were the
“helping professions” of nursing and teaching. That was the
ceiling.
But education, technology, and birth control changed the

world for women. Technology opened the world of possibilities to
women who did not need brute strength so common on the farm
or the factory floor as in the past. Education allowed freedom from
husbands who were drunks, abusers, cheaters, lazy, or
domineering. Birth control gave women control over their own
fertility. Factory work was transformed by machines and

automation when millions of women went to work during World
War II to replace the men who were being drafted into military
service. The gains made by women since those days in all fields are
simply astonishing. College enrollments soared. And this
transformation is continuing today in a big way. Women are not
waiting around; they are on the march demanding to be taken
seriously in all facets of modern life. Revolutionary! The world has
never seen anything like it in recorded history. And women are
demanding to be taken seriously in defending their autonomy and
personal privacy rights over their bodies. Women are on the march!
I AM WOMAN, HEAR ME ROAR

“In numbers too big to ignore,” women are increasingly
impacting decisions, from the boardroom to academia, media,
politics, voting, and even the bedroom. Women are saying, “We
haven’t yet arrived, but we are well on our way,” and that the status
quo will be a moving target going into the future.
Feminism is a dirty word to many. It is seen as a threat by a

subset of macho men who do not want to be challenged or lose
any of their privileges simply by being born male. Status and class
have been an enduring feature of the human condition since time
immemorial. It crosses all cultures, religions, ethnicities, and
nation-states. Moving up the hierarchy, however defined, and in
whatever context, is an aspirational force seemingly ingrained in
the human race. Reaching for the next rung on the ladder, deserved
or not, is desirable for most. Even in the animal kingdom, rank has
its privileges and is jealously guarded. Animal competition over
food, mates, and rivals requires constant vigilance.
For some men, status competition among males is tough

enough, but to double the competition to include women, half the
human race, makes it even more daunting for men to “step up their
game” to meet these new challenges. Many men feel they are
slipping behind and resent it. Some turn to drugs and alcohol, while
others lash out or drop out. Troubled relationships become more
problematic while many men try to parse what it means to be a
man in the 21st century. Even the traditional role of the family
breadwinner is undergoing change. Nearly a third of married
women earn more money than their husbands.
Feminism is often portrayed by many men and some women

as females who hate men, just want to be guys, and wear the pants
in the family all the time. The late Rush Limbaugh, a shock jock
talk-show radio conservative, famously derided them as feminazis,
a favorite putdown of his that survived in the echo chamber of
right-wing media and even made real feminists leery of using the
word because of the negative connotations. But a proper definition
of feminism that all women will embrace, left and right, old and
young, among all ethnicities the world over is this; Respect,
Fairness, Opportunity, and Free Agency. That’s it, no more and no
less. Feminism in five words. And when it comes to the abortion
question, most women are demanding free agency over their
bodies, not state coercion.
GIRLS IN THE PASSING LANE

It is striking what is happening on college campuses these
days. Over the last two generations, a quiet revolution has been
taking place outside public view. Professors and administrators are
quite aware, but the general public may have only a fuzzy idea of
what is happening and fail to appreciate the dynamics involved for
the future of the country. The gender imbalance on campus is
striking. Generally, women represent about 58% of all students on
campus working towards a degree, while only 42% are men. This
16% gap is wide and partially explains how women are moving up
in the workforce over time, while the non-college male may be
mostly stuck in status and position without additional schooling. It
is even more challenging on predominately black campuses
(HBCUs), with women outnumbering men about two to one,

roughly a 30% gap.
In the recent Supreme Court ruling denying affirmative action

for college admission due to race, another factor, hiding in plain
sight, was hardly mentioned at all. With gender imbalances on
campus already skewed, there is an invisible effort to not make it
worse. Consequently, men with lower academic scores and fewer
qualifying criteria for admission, compared to females, are often
admitted. Without saying so, a form of affirmative action takes
place in favor of male students on many selective campuses.
All these numbers across the board do not make many men
happy. Men will increasingly have a woman as their boss or
colleague. Some men will not care and adjust to the new reality.
Others will chafe and be resentful about the new world order of
business and opportunity. They will view women’s gains as their
loss down the pecking order. The relationships between men and
women will become more complicated. Nationally, the gap
between those who finish their degree is even wider, with a 25%
differential in favor of women.
Not too long ago, essays and articles were concerned about
the welfare of adolescent girls growing up with confusion over
mixed messaging pertaining to potential careers and the desire for
home and family. It often seems to many (especially men) that this
needs to be a binary choice. Despite the quest “to have it all,”
something usually has to give. And the unwritten rule is that if a
woman is too ambitious, she will be a bad mom and can’t be there
for her kids. Guilt springs eternal.
It is still true today that many young girls feel sad, lonely, and
unsure of themselves in an age of confusion regarding body image
and status in an unforgiving social media world. Many young
people (girls and boys) struggle in the twilight of COVID-19. But
many girls are resilient and see more life choices available to them
in comparison to their moms and grandmothers.
Now the shoe is on the other foot. Articles, books, and

speeches dwell on the raising of adolescent boys, lost between
toxic masculinity, femininity, and great expectations by parents and
friends. Girls generally do not want to date a nerd or a geek (Note:
What does one call a geek fifteen years after high school?—Boss!),
but neither do they want to date a macho guy that is neither kind
nor considerate or who is self-centered. For a small subset of
young men, becoming mature and responsible seems elusive, stuck
in permanent adolescence.
Affected parents lament a “failure to launch” for some young

men into adulthood and all that entails. From kindergarten all the
way through college, girls get better grades in the classroom than
guys, who are more easily distracted by sports, video games,
hanging out, and hormones. For far too many young boys on the
cusp of manhood, it is not easy to find their way. It is even more
tragic when one considers the high divorce rate and single mothers
who are often at a loss raising rebellious teenage boys without male
mentors or role models outside of TV and social media that send
the wrong messages. Keeping a 15-year-old boy cooped up in a
tiny apartment with only a mom and a sister for company is a losing
battle, and the lure of the streets will not enhance his character.
Moms always get blamed.
When a young male, who has neither a daily father present

(some ten million boys) or a mentor figure who models mature
behavior, it is understandable they are more likely to struggle to
find their way. When they fail to see responsible males doing their
fair share in marriage nor see such virtues displayed on television,
it is easy to see how he views all domestic responsibilities as
“women’s work.” Boys who never see a man operate a vacuum
cleaner, do laundry, sweep the floor, cook and clean in the kitchen,
or attend to changing a baby’s diaper have a distorted view of their
role. Women are increasingly rebelling and saying to men, “Wake
up, grow up, smell the coffee, and get your act together. Welcome
to the 21st century.” And since women are smarter than men in the
classroom and making great strides in the workforce, it stands to
reason that these men should make the rules regarding female
choices regarding female bodily autonomy. Of course, men know
best.
YOU’VE COME A LONG WAY, BABY

Answer this question in five seconds . . . quick. What is the
first image that pops into your head when you hear the word
doctor or lawyer? Overwhelmingly, for both men and women, the
picture is of a male doctor performing an exam or a male lawyer
grilling a witness on the stand. We have been acculturated with
visual stereotypes of how the world was meant to be. But as an old
song goes, “The times they are a changing.” If anything, change is
moving faster than ever. Many people are losing their bearings,
longing for a perceived simpler time (mostly nostalgic—never
simple) when there seemed to be norms, ethics, rules, and a simpler
rhythm to life.
But women are on the move big time. Consider this: In 1950,
only 6% of all physicians were women. Even less representation
was in the ranks of female lawyers at only 3.5%. But today, over
half of all medical students are female as are all law students.
Change indeed! While numbers in engineering and computer
science are lower, they are still up from close to zero just two
generations ago. Women are making strides in the military, small
business formations, and higher education. Glass ceilings are
regularly being cracked or broken.
Women (unthinkable until recent years) are running for

president. In the 66th Congress in 1920 (131 years after the
adoption of the Constitution), out of 535 positions combining the
House and the Senate, there were zero women representatives in
Congress. A big fat zero. (Note: Jeannette Rankin of Montana was
the first woman elected to serve in 1916 and did not run for re-
election in 1918).
But 1920 was also the year that women’s suffrage was passed,
giving all women the right to vote. Fast forward thirty years to
1950, and the number of women in Congress was 10, or 1.8%.
Thirty years had passed, and the number went from zero to a
staggering less than two percent. Progress!? In 1980 (another thirty
years later), the number rose to 17 or 3.1% (Note: women did not
even have dedicated bathrooms—men simply did not think of
them). By 2000, 65 women served in Congress (12.1%) after 212
years (more than two centuries!) of Congress. But the pace has
risen remarkably over the past several election cycles to 27%. If the
numbers double again over the next 20 or 30 years, parity will be
achieved with huge ramifications over policies and priorities. The
world is moving at warp speed, not only in technology but in the
role of women in all fields of endeavor in America.
However, in other parts of the world, the role of women is

under assault. Perhaps the worst case is Afghanistan, where the
Taliban is hell-bent on taking the country back a thousand years,
where men rule, and women cower in fear over the slightest
infraction. There again, the role of women is the central issue. In
Iran, female protests and riots proclaim, “Women, life, freedom.”
It is a modern rejection of geriatric geezer clerics trying to control
women’s lives and a quest for “free agency.” Women are fed up
with a suffocating theocracy keeping women under their thumb.
But the Muslim clergy will go to the mat against the women. It is
existential for them. It is all about power and control.
Jewish Israel is going through some of the most sweeping

challenges since its founding in 1948. The fight over the authority
of their Supreme Court is really a contest between modernity,
secularism, democracy, and the rise in power of the Orthodox
branches of Judaism. The Orthodox community is the fastest
growing segment of Israel, and they are intent on a theocratic state
where the men rule, and women are segregated and sidelined.
Orthodox parties do not allow any women to run for office in their
party structure, so they are without representation. New proposals
in the Israeli Parliament, if passed, to increase the power of
rabbinical courts (all men, no women) over family matters (only

men can ask for a divorce with control over child custody and
support) and public life (more segregation of the sexes in transport
and education) will all come at the expense of women. According
to the World Economic Forum, the gender gap in Israel as to
women’s political empowerment has dropped from 61st place to
96th place, just behind Pakistan.
One could argue that if, historically, half the representation in

the halls of government from Parliament to dictatorships, to
republics, to monarchies were women, perhaps half of the world’s
wars would never have been fought just because of not being
drunk on the drug of testosterone and charging into battle with the
middle finger held high. The American frontier was originally
discovered, explored, conquered, and exploited by men. But it was
the women who followed in their wake who tamed and civilized it
so a great country could be built. Women have a big stake in the
country and feel passionately that their voices must be heard and
respected. They expect to be trusted to make the best decisions for
themselves, by themselves, especially over their own bodies.
VIRTUE
Such a word as virtuous seems to be almost out of vogue. It is
a pity. The Bible says in Proverbs 31:10, “Who can find a virtuous
woman, for her price is far above rubies?” Essentially, it speaks to
a woman’s exceptional character and all the good things that
emanate from it. But today, too many young girls are more
concerned with vanity. They would much rather be rich, beautiful,
cool, and have a zillion followers on social media. On one level,
there is nothing wrong with this as desire has no limits. But on
another, higher level, it is pretty shallow. Reaching for a stellar
character is boring and takes time and effort. Everyone is looking
for shortcuts. The joke about getting a boyfriend among women is
they would mostly choose beauty over brains because,
unfortunately, they complain most men can see better than they
can think or evaluate. For some, the fastest way to get rich is to
“marry it.”
Still, in the character department, women outshine men

without a contest. Pick a hundred women at random and a
hundred men at random out of any crowd or online, and the
women win hands down in integrity, responsibility, purpose,
compassion, loyalty, and self-improvement. Yes, of course, some
women are selfish, contemptible, without morals, disgraceful,
scheming, and shameful. And there are many men who are noble,
exemplary, and fine role models. But in totality, out of a hundred
random men and women, women still beat the men on character by
a mile. One only needs to look at who the criminals are in prison,
on parole, and on probation. The pro-choice crowd on abortion
will argue that “trusting women” is rational and common sense
since they are more virtuous, responsible, and academically
superior to men who still dominate in making the laws. Therefore,
women do know best.
A DIFFERENT ROAD
Women need to be respected for the choices they make. Those
who choose to be “homemakers” should not be disparaged. It is
unfair. There is way too much condescension by men and women
for those who are following this path. Women in a social setting
can feel small when someone asks, “And what work do you do?”
as if they do nothing valuable. It hurts, even if it was unintended.
The toughest job in the world is that of a parent raising decent
human beings. It is a noble calling that needs to be respected,
lauded, and, most of all, financially supported for struggling
mothers by politicians and legislators.
Some women don’t have the ambition gene (as do some men)
to punch the clock from 9 to 5 in the business world if they don’t
have to. Some may feel untrained and inadequate, but many
women are smart, capable, and exceptional. They simply desire a
strong family life if they are in a financial position to make that

choice. Many try to have the best of both worlds of career and
home. The dream is to live in Lake Wobegon, “where all the
women are strong, all the men are good-looking, and all the
children are above average.” There is nothing wrong with that.
The American dream endures of a nice house in suburbia, a

white picket fence (optional, slightly dated—perhaps a Tesla
instead in the driveway), a fine husband who does his part at home,
and healthy, well-adjusted children all living a happy life. Yes, it’s a
dream, but no more exceptional than another woman who wants
to be an astronaut, politician, or CEO. What a wonderful life if one
has choices. Of course, the flip side is that millions of women don’t
have that luxury since they must work out of necessity for financial
security for their families. And millions of other women will have
their dreams denied because they are refused the right of bodily
autonomy merely because they are female and live in the wrong
state or country, a prisoner to geography and patriarchy. How
unfair it is for dreams to be limited or denied.
BEST ADVICE TO EVERY DAUGHTER

Men in the past craved sons far more than daughters. Stoic
fathers of old felt they could relate better to a son. On the farm,
sons were valuable as free labor. But today, attitudes have shifted,
and we no longer live in an agrarian nation. Largely because of
smaller nuclear families, generally just two kids, as opposed to large
families many generations back, girls will get more attention and
opportunities simply due to fewer siblings and less competition.
Many families are composed of only two daughters and no sons.
More fathers are stepping up to champion their daughters to be all
they can be.
The best advice for daughters at an early age is to learn how

to make their own money. It gives agency and a world of choices.
The simple truth is that women have it harder than men due to
biology and raising children. In the workplace, sexism and

discrimination have not vanished. While the #MeToo movement
has highlighted a serious problem, sexual harassment has not
disappeared. Men need to see their behavior in light of how they
would like their wives, mothers, sisters, and daughters to be treated.
For every daughter pondering her future, two keywords must

be front and center, death and divorce. Life has no guarantees, and
that wonderful love-of-your-life dream of a man you married may
die on you. Tragedy is no respecter of persons. You and your kids
may be in a world of hurt if you lack education or special skills in
the marketplace. Sadness and depression from your loss will be
compounded by looking at an uncertain and potentially bleak
future.
Becoming a single parent and primary role model requires big

shoulders and having a plan. But if you have an education or a skill
set to fall back on, you can hopefully pay the mortgage. Having life
insurance is important, but it is common to hear most young
families express, “We can’t afford it right now,” and “We don’t like
to talk about death,” and “We are too young and healthy to buy
it,” and “Maybe sometime in the future when we are older,” so it
always gets put off. But women must also consider their education
and skill set as a more important form of insurance. It’s critical in
life and arguably the best life insurance of all. Those with nothing
to fall back on often get stuck on the on-ramp of life with lots of
potholes and a flat tire. Any hoped-for destination on the freeway
of life may be just a mirage.
Divorce is all too common in the world we live in. A daughter

may think that nothing will ever happen to her after she marries
Prince Charming. Yet, here is the story nearly all newly married
couples are never told. It takes two people to fall in love and get
married, but only one to get divorced. Every morning, a married
couple unconsciously decides to stay married. But if one of them
wants out, for whatever reason under the sun, the other spouse has
no say in it at all. Perhaps an innocent bystander or not, they are

just as divorced as the spouse who initiated the divorce. You may
be the unwilling partner in such a scenario. Devastated and angry,
you will still need to pick up the pieces of your life, and being able
to make your own money is critical.
In life, houses can be destroyed by fire or swept away by storm.

Illness and injury may be your lot. Tragedy for those you love may
come your way. Life may produce hard knocks, but through it all,
education or some other skill set can never be taken away from you
till the day you die. It is a hoped-for ticket to resilience. It is your
ace in the hole. Without it, the future could be tough with a run of
bad luck. And it may make all the difference for your children and
their hopes and dreams.
Every daughter (and son) should also learn about passing the
BIG TEST in life. No one likes tests, but this one is an essential
life test. First of all, academics and formal education are not for
everyone. There are other avenues to success, but degrees and
credentials are helpful to open doors that may otherwise be closed.
If college is not for you, you will then need to find a niche that
pays well and has a future. So here are the four parts to the BIG
TEST in life. They are T (Trade), E (Education), S (Skill), and T
(Talent).
Without one of these four companions in life, the only other

alternative is, “Sir, would you like fries with that burger?” While
there is no shame in this, it should be seen as a steppingstone in
life that most all go through in some like manner at some early
stage of life. But if you can pass the TEST, it will never be your
final destination.
The concept of lifelong learning is vital in the 21st century

regardless of age, occupation, or accomplishment. Constantly
learning can make all the difference in one’s life because the world
is not standing still. And the earlier it is taught to a daughter (or
son), the easier their life will be with more opportunities. The
essence of lifelong learning is “show me how you did that” and

“tell me more about that, it sounds interesting.” Learning is pro-
choice, opening up hundreds of possibilities. Connections,
networking, and luck are important, but having a skill set is
essential. Success occurs when preparation meets opportunity.
The world is slowly moving beyond the “haves and the have-
nots” to the “knows and know-nots.” Smarts, ambition, and
capabilities are the calling card of business that largely favors
brains, skills, and aptitude over brawn and repetitive types of work
that are increasingly being replaced by computers, robots, and
artificial intelligence. Race and gender are still relevant, but
increasingly less so when the concern is about “green” money.
A daughter needs to know that even if she ends up in a fairy

tale romance, lives in a McMansion, and never has to work by
choice, stuff happens. The importance of having an education or
special skill set and making her own money should be made crystal
clear to every daughter before starting a family. All parents should
encourage their daughters to make good choices by planning
ahead. Daughters should also be reminded that in the games of
dating and potential marriage, having no one is preferable to
having the wrong one. Many dreams and hearts are broken by
being willfully blind to red flags. Being single by choice or
circumstance is not the equivalent of having cancer. Happiness
comes in many forms. Heartbreak is heartbreak, and regret is
regret.
Daughters should also be taught about life beyond the

discussion about the birds and the bees. If daughters want to be
taken seriously as a female, a professional, and even in their private
associations, cleavage and short skirts are out. No woman should
want a man talking to her boobs instead of her face if foolishly
wearing a “platter bra” with plunging cleavage to match. It is
sleazy, trashy, and unbecoming.
There should be no cheap distractions for a young lady to be

considered a mere sex object. Mothers and fathers should remind
daughters that sex may get a man but will never keep one.
Personality, character, humor, and values are the traits that will
demand respect and attract the right kind of man in the long run.
But these traits take time and hard work. Many young women who
want attention are impatient and sell themselves short in looking
for a shortcut, which often means a skirt cut short. It is not about
being prudish or old-fashioned but being smart and not selling
yourself short. It is about self-confidence and self-respect.
When it comes to dress; attractiveness, stylishness, fashion,

and fitness should be in. Blatant sexuality is only for shallow
bimbos who sadly have nothing else to offer and do not know the
meaning of the word modesty. They only capture eyeballs and lust,
not love and respect. The type of men these women attract will
rarely be there for the long haul. Heartbreak is often in their future.
Don’t be one of them.
Daughters should be reminded to strive to select a better circle

of friends and associations that are positive and uplifting. Friends
in one’s circle can either bring you up or bring you down. Every
Mom and Dad of every generation wants their daughter to be
classy, not trashy. The motto that should be displayed on every
daughter’s dresser should be “think better, speak better, behave
better, do better, be better.” The most important keyword for
daughters (and sons) to memorize and practice is “elevate.”
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 12 MEN JUST DON’T REALLY WANT TO KNOW | 122
CHAPTER 12
MEN JUST DON’T REALLY
WANT TO KNOW
Outside of sex, men don’t want to know much, if anything,

about female plumbing, a.k.a. female biology. Most men are happy
to be ignorant. And the less they know, the better. After all,
“female problems” should remain private with them. Men prefer
to “be out of the loop” on these matters. Trying to understand the
complexity of female anatomy seems a heavy lift, and men don’t
want to go there if they can avoid it.
Despite having wives, mothers, sisters, and daughters, men

still find women sometimes confounding. Many women also feel
this way in reverse about men. The standard joke regarding the
battle of the sexes is that there is just too much socializing with the
enemy. Most men will go through life not dealing with a single
biological male issue. Zero. But a small minority may have to deal
with, at most, only one or two issues. The first is ED which ranks
up there with a cancer diagnosis. Trauma time! Then there is the
possibility of prostate cancer, but only, so they figure, when they
are old and already slipping on a banana peel. Not a big concern
for most men until they are old, so they hope with crossed fingers.
Men, on the other hand, do not want to hear about menstrual

cycles, pads, and tampons. Nor do they want to know about heavy
bleeding, bloating, and debilitating cramps that can last for several
days. Bummer! PMS is a subject they do not want to dwell upon
and is often thought of as a curse upon women. They will also
certainly take a pass on vaginal creams or douching. Yuck. Men do
not want to hear about the reminders of daily birth control pills,
ovulation, IUDs, or any side effects of medication or treatments.
Talking about uterine or ovarian cancer is frightening. The less

men hear about it, that’s fine with them. Breast cancer is scary as
well. Mammograms where the breast is squished and squashed to
get “a good image,” hoping a lump or tumor does not show up on
the resulting X-ray, is a woman’s business, along with her anxiety
and fear something may show up. Men try not to dwell on any of
it and just strive to put it all out of their minds.
Discussions about bra sizes, types, and comfort pre-and post-

birth (or just weight gain), men are more than happy to skip all of
it. Visits to a gynecologist on the table in stirrups is a visual most
men don’t want to even think about where a doctor invasively
pokes and prods to ensure there are no health issues. Pap smears
are not something men wish to give any thought to either.
Do men want to hear about yeast infections, endometriosis,

fibroid polyps, or STDs? No, thank you. Please suffer in silence in
the other room or talk to a girlfriend. Fertility issues? Nope, except
it certainly can’t be me in that department. What about the personal
psychological grief over a miscarriage? How about pregnancy
complications, an ectopic problem, weight gain, preeclampsia,
body image, and stretch marks? How about a sympathetic ear
about nausea, morning sickness, vomiting, and lack of quality
sleep? Yeah, all these issues are a downer, men will exclaim. What
about the nine months of concern about diet, exercise, and limited
activities to protect the fetus from injury? Men will reflect, “Wow,
that’s a long time to give up booze and drink health shakes every
morning, eat salads and vegetables for lunch, give up playing
sports, and see the doctor every month. No thank you.”
What about the pros and cons of a Cesarean (C−section) if

needed? Needles and sutures? Ouch! What about epidurals and
possibly a home birth with a midwife? Or how about awkward and
embarrassing stories of when their water broke in public? Want to
hear female war stories of 10 or 12 hours of agonizing labor
followed by squeezing out the equivalent of a small watermelon?
Eehww, yuck, bummer. That sounds painful. Men do not jump up

for joy to get a tutorial about baby formula, diaper changes, baby
sleep cycles, and teething, never mind a colicky baby. Neither do
they want to be constantly reminded of a wife complaining about
baby fat after giving birth and having no time to go to the gym to
get back in shape, nor about being nagged on how he should be
helping out more and coming up short once again.
What about all the methodologies and strategies related to

potty training? Do we have to? Breastfeeding can also be
problematic and inconvenient, especially for a working mother.
Crying babies have their own feeding schedule, even in the middle
of the night. Do men want to hear about all the issues surrounding
a breast pump? What do you think? On top of all the matters
expressed so far, hormonal issues and mood swings can cause
personal and relationship problems, not to mention a newly
complicated sex life with a crying baby monitor on the nightstand.
Particularly for working mothers of an infant, the stress of

childcare can be nerve-racking since not just anybody will do or
will have high enough standards to care for her precious little one.
Worry can take a toll on a new mother’s performance at work.
Guilt abounds at not being a superwoman. Post-partum
depression for some women is a mystery for them, and even more
so for men who just want women to “snap out of it.” Then there
is menopause later in life, dealing with hot flashes and sleep issues
that could last for several years and range from mild to severe.
Similarly, if any of the above impacts a daughter or a sister, men
want to be out of the discussion. The less they know, the better,
preferring to be in their man cave watching the game.
In medical school, there is an entire specialty surrounding

female biology. An OBGYN physician gets to spend four years in
a residency learning the thousand and one nuances, complications,
and variations affecting or afflicting women, pregnant or not.
There is no male counterpart specialty or residency related to male
biology, which is simple compared to women. But male ego,
vanity, or denial has also caused many unnecessary deaths among

men simply by giving excuses not to see a doctor for a medical
issue until it is too late.
Sympathy, it is said, is feeling sorry for another’s loss or

predicament. But empathy is much deeper and means more. It
requires trying to identify and “feel” another’s pain and troubles.
In reality, no one can truly understand someone who is different,
usually as it relates to gender, race, religion, or sexual orientation.
Trying to view the world through the eyes of a short person who
is too often overlooked is a different perspective. Someone who is
unusually tall that everyone gawks at upon entering any room is
also a stretch. Imagine never being able to just blend in with the
crowd, always being a foot taller. Seeing the world as a fat person
or skinny person takes work unless you are one. One can also look
at the advantages in the lives of beautiful people and the real, but
often unseen, obstacles encountered by unattractive people.
For men to contemplate the challenges of being a woman and

feel empathy for their unique challenges, being just a matter of
biology, requires some reflection and deep analysis. The old Indian
expression that one must walk three days in another’s moccasins
to understand them applies here, although it is not necessary
(tongue in cheek) for men to imagine it in high heels! Another
“ouch.” Men need to be more empathetic that women have more
challenges than they do but are often oblivious.
The reality is that most men do not dwell on any of this

touchy-feely stuff. Younger men today may be more inclined to
marital partnership as a team, especially for the college educated.
However, it is still more of an exception than the rule. The
downside is that men in positions of power, especially older men
from an older generation, fail to appreciate differences, not
because they are mean, but mostly because they don’t relate and
are out to lunch.
One simple example is in the construction trades, which are

all dominated by men from design to actual construction. In large
and small public venues, they put in the same number of bathroom
stalls for men and women. Equal, right? Yet they fail to ring the
bell in their head about biology, resulting in desperate women
queuing while men wait for them in the hallway. New building
codes are rapidly changing this, but it is just one small example
among many where men, even well-intentioned, are just oblivious.
Nighttime parking lots and street lighting are important safety
issues for women, while it is sometimes more of an afterthought
for men. Now we come to the bottom line. When it comes to the
subject of abortion, these men should decide that too. Right?! After
all, men just know better about all the challenges regarding female
biology.
GUYS AND DOLLS

It can often seem that the bane of many women’s lives is men
who disappoint them and want to make choices for them. But
times are changing, and more and more men “do get it” that
women have arrived on the scene, which is a positive addition to
the workforce. Men who are managers or supervisors often prize
women as workers. They recognize that women are more
responsible than men and an asset to any organization. There are
still chauvinistic attitudes, but this is becoming more of a
generational issue. The “Mad Men” generation is fading into
yesterday. Yet, sexism is still alive in society and can be found
anywhere. Some of it is overt, while much is implicit, locked in
gender roles, past history, and customs. But it is changing, even if
slowly.
More men are willing to stand up for women and support

them with new work policies that can accommodate women’s
work life and home life. Remote work from home is a blessing for
some mothers when multi-tasking between work and children.
More men are also appreciating women’s roles at all levels of an
organization. Women tend to be better at collaboration and

problem-solving than men, who are more prone to jockey for
positions or engage in one-upmanship. More men, generally
college educated, but not exclusively, see wives increasingly as joint
partners rather than just a junior partner. More men also appreciate
that two incomes are always better than one, affording more
opportunities in life.
Younger men are ever more aware that in the dating game,
competition can be fierce. It is not just men “swiping left or right”
on a dating site. Young women feel that in the dating game, they
have power and choice as well but are also more selective and often
disappointed in the crop of available options. Most dating sites
have far more men signed up than women. A lament from many
women is, “The odds are good, but the goods are odd.” But there
is an even greater problem for more accomplished women. In years
past, mothers and grandmothers would size up a new beau and
declare he was a “good catch” after meeting the family. There were
usually only two criteria, he was stable and had good prospects to
be financially secure for his family.
Men are under the microscope. A new boyfriend brought over

to meet a girl’s family is often given the 3rd degree behind her back
when she is not in the room. After the boyfriend leaves, the first
impressions are shared around the room, solicited or not.
Grandma bluntly speaks first, right to the point. “Honey, he
seemed nice, but you can do better.” Mom, trying to be more
diplomatic, tells her daughter, “Just go slow, dear; there’s plenty of
time to get to know him.” Dad then chips in with, “Remember,
there are a lot more fish in the sea, don’t settle.” Next comes a
review of his ambition, future plans, looks, manners, and how
serious of a relationship this is.
Many women complain about men. Life should be less

complicated, they contend, if men just followed a half dozen starter
rules right from the get-go. 1. Be kind, thoughtful, and helpful. 2.
Put your best foot forward. 3. Practice the Golden Rule.
4. Have a positive attitude. 5. Strive for self-improvement. 6. Be

classy, and don’t dress like a slob. All the women of the world
chime in unison, “Duh!”
But for any activist lamenting the gap on the inequality issue
as it relates to poverty and class distinctions, there is a joker hidden
in the deck, and this is where everything begins to fall apart. It is
called “assorted mating,” whereby the smart and gifted marry one
another, combining education, resources, and opportunities for
themselves and eventual children, usually compounded by
inherited wealth. The relatively new term “power couple” over the
last generation is a reflection of the advances made by women.
Financially and culturally, such a couple pulls away from the
working class and lives in a different world. There may be no
solution to this increasing fact of life regarding inequality. And
DINKs (double income, no kids) who both have an education and
career, financially and intellectually, live on another planet than the
working class, much less the poor.
In generations past, young women were encouraged to “marry

up” beyond their station in life. Today, many professional women
worry about possibly having to “marry down” since men are not
keeping up. Today, accomplished women who want to meet
someone on their intellectual and professional level complain that
the desired pool of men is in short supply. On the abortion
question, since more and more women are increasingly succeeding
in life than ever before, it only makes sense that men in power
should decide about a woman’s body. Makes perfect sense.
IN PRAISE OF MEN AND DADS

It has been observed that any fool can be a father, but what
children need is not a father but a dad. Big difference. Ideally, it
implies an entirely different mindset that hopefully includes
commitment, responsibility, dedication, sacrifice, and love. Men
sometimes do not get the credit they deserve. Most men are
honest, hardworking, and try to do their best. They love their kids
and want what is best for them, even if they do not feel they always
have the best parenting skills. This is also the case for many
immigrant fathers with families. They will become the self-
sacrificing generation played throughout America’s history.
Committed fathers will work extra jobs for their families to try
and provide the extras for their kids if they can. Dads will
sometimes commit to a crummy job or put up with a cranky boss
to ensure a paycheck for the family. Whatever it takes. They will,
in essence, lay down their life for their children to chase the
American Dream that may not be within their reach in their
lifetime but may be possible for their kids. It is a noble sacrifice
that often goes unsung and underappreciated.
Caring fathers will be helpers to their children in whatever

endeavors they are interested in. Whether it be sports, music,
dance, computers, or even homework, many dads will try to be an
encouraging presence, giving validation and mentorship wherever
they can. They know they are an imperfect role model with failings
common to all humans. But they try to balance out great love and
affection with “tough love” to instill grit, resilience, morals, and
determination so that one day, as adults, their kids can face the
world unafraid and be ready to take it on. A dad’s job is then done,
except praying for his grandchildren, who he worries may be too
soft, spoiled, and lacking in grit.
For kids from comfortable middle-class or privileged lifestyles,

dads also have the job of steering kids away from taking life for
granted, coasting on their parent’s success, and having false
expectations. Dads also need to instill a work ethic and ensure their
kids display empathy for the less fortunate that did not have their
opportunities. Kids need to recognize they won the egg and sperm
lottery in life and already got to second base without even having
to swing in the batter’s box or attending training camp. Instilling
the attitude of gratitude is one of the toughest things to impart for
anyone growing up with advantages.
It is important to constantly remember because we always

focus on whatever we don’t have (fill in the blank). It could be
more money, a position, work recognition, relationships, or a host
of other desires. Perhaps, as the Founding Fathers foresaw, it is the
pursuit of happiness because it seems to be always out of reach, a
mirage on the horizon. Americans should never be a contented lot,
that’s not who we are, but we should show more gratitude than
complaining all the time.
Americans should contemplate that we are only 4% of the

world’s population and that most of us are born in this great
country simply by chance, pure dumb luck, a 1 out of 25 longshot.
Dads and moms must remind themselves and their kids to show
thankfulness beyond just Thanksgiving dinner. And to share with
those less fortunate.
Single dads raising kids on their own are often invisible. The
focus is so often on single mothers raising kids that dads get left
out of the conversation. They become an afterthought if thought
about at all. But over 3 million dads are also trying to do the best
they can with their kids. Single dads also struggle with childcare,
single incomes, and the common perception they lack the
nurturing skills of a woman. Right or wrong, there is often less
sympathy for men in their situation. But just like single moms, they
would welcome some extra help.
The great tragedy is that with 23% of all homes headed by a

single female, dads and male role models are in short supply. Some
kids are just luckier than others. And with so many boys growing
up without a dad, they lack the life skill sets for their own children
someday. The pattern repeats. And so it goes.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 13 OLD GOATS: (MIA−MISSING IN ACTION) | 131
CHAPTER 13
OLD GOATS: (MIA−MISSING
IN ACTION)
You see them on the sidewalks yelling at young women.

Mostly older men, half of them retired, are manning the barricades
outside an abortion clinic. These anti-abortion old goats are
required by law to be so many feet away from the entrance to the
building. They shout and scream at a young pregnant woman 30
and 40 years younger than them to get their attention, pleading to
let their fetus live.
These old goats want to intimidate the frightened young

women, who must endure running this gauntlet of angry men with
the implied message that they are going to hell, and to think twice.
Some try to use a bullhorn to amplify their message if they can get
away with it, despite some municipal codes. These old goats hold
up homemade signs of graphic pictures of aborted fetuses and
perhaps a Bible verse. Some have little chants, and one or two may
pray aloud in a loud voice. Some old goats turn their attention to
passing cars, asking them to honk in support. Other old goats are
more relaxed in a lawn chair with their posters, providing moral
support for their more active and vocal comrades.
But then they are gone. In a flash. Done. These big-time

hypocrites, sanctimonious no less, are clueless. You will never find
any of these old goats volunteering to babysit for any of these
women who did decide against having an abortion. These old goats
are never on call for childcare on weekends or holidays if the
mother must work or just needs an evening break. Nor are they
available any other days of the month. Zip, Zero, Nada! These old
geezer goats never leave their phone number with the mom. No
way. They are never around to teach the child six years later how
to ride a bike. They never attend even one birthday party. They
don’t even think about sending a present in the mail each year for
the next 18 years. They will never show up a few nights a week to
come over and help the ten-year-old with homework. Are you
kidding?
Are these old goats available for doing a little housework or

doing the dishes occasionally for an overwhelmed single mom?
Hell, no! Take the kid to the movies? Forget about that. Old goats
are completely AWOL for teaching them to swim, going to the
beach or lake, organizing a weekend camping trip, or bringing
popcorn for game night. They are never around to play catch with
a young boy or drive a young girl to a sleepover with friends. Old
goats can’t be found shuttling kids as a chauffeur to sports
practices or showing up to games to be a cheerleader.
You can’t find an old goat even with GPS sixteen years later
to teach a 16-year-old to learn to drive or later showing up for their
high school graduation. And hell will freeze over before you find
an old goat offering $500 a month (or even a nickel) out of his own
pocket for 18 years just to help a little with expenses for a
struggling single mom who works full-time for low wages. Fat
chance. Can you even imagine hundreds of goats marching into
trailer parks every week, much less the “hood” or the “barrio” for
decades? It’s laughable. Not on your life. Or how about going into
middle America suburbia, maybe in their own neighborhood,
where single mothers struggle daily with the demands of
motherhood on their own? Nope! Perhaps these old goats are
really sheep.
The truth is that old goats see their mission as just to ‘get em’
born” and then forget about them. It is “Hasta la vista, baby.”
“Hope you don’t have a crappy life. Sorry, your mom will struggle
all her life, but “Thems the breaks.” She was stupid for getting
pregnant in the first place. Just remember, don’t either of you call
me, ever! Oh, and by the way, I have just written to my
congressman not to raise my taxes to help you. Sorry, but I am

saving up for a speedboat and a trip to Hawaii.”
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 14 FAMILY MATTERS | 134
CHAPTER 14
FAMILY MATTERS
The ideal family is a mom and a dad who love each other and
love their kids. A stable family, not perfect, but who face life’s
challenges in a mature way and serve as role models to their
children. Modern society often fails way short of the mark. Nearly
everyone laments the breakdown of the nuclear family with high
divorce rates and the stresses and distractions of modern life. All
types of families, traditional and not, try to muddle through and do
their best to raise decent and capable kids. Parenting is the hardest
job of all, combining genetics, environments, and personalities.
Parents often marvel at how different their own kids can turn out
despite the same parental gene pool, upbringing, rules, values, and
expectations. It is a mystery.
The breakdown of the family always starts with adults, but

children often pay the highest price. Childhood trauma can stalk
them as an adult later in life. It is much like an unseen shadow that
they can’t get rid of. While kids are remarkably resilient even under
duress, many others are broken by the upheaval and dysfunction
of their childhood and never fully recover. A child who is abused,
mistreated, resented, or simply neglected is among the greatest
tragedies of all since they have no agency and no choices at a tender
age. Many children wonder what they did wrong to deserve their
troubled circumstances. They blame themselves when they are
blameless. Nearly all their troubles lie at the feet of adults who can’t
get their act together. Even in amicable shared custody
arrangements, kids are bounced like ping-pong balls between
parents and often must deal with a new stepparent and stepsiblings.
Kids lose through no fault of their own.
So, what does the current state of the family look like in
America? According to the Institute of Family Studies, only 58%
of children live with both birth parents, plus 4% of cohabiting but
not married couples. A staggering 23% of kids live with just their
biological mom (single moms), and 4% with their biological single
fathers. The remaining kids are split between stepparents (5%),
grandparents (3%), adoptive parents (1%), foster parents (1%), and
others (1%). In raw numbers, some 20 million kids live in a single-
parent household, exceeding the entire population of New York,
the 4th largest state in the country. The financial and psychological
stresses are much greater on a single mom (or dad), often doing it
all alone.
Education and money are crucial factors. 86% of children with

college-educated parents live with their biological parents,
contrasted with less than half of children whose parents did not
finish high school. The higher the parents’ education, the better
off for the children, not just financially but for their mental health
and well-being.
Despite tax money set aside for K-12 education, children are
usually short-changed when the government pie is divided up.
Retired seniors have the money, the time, the influence, and the
connections to always come first. Social Security and Medicare are
sacred. The military must be funded to the max, and big business
has its finger in every pie while milking the government for as many
goodies as they can get. Formal lobbyists outnumber members of
Congress by five to ten times, and indirect “influencers” of
activists, NGOs, state politicians, and others multiply it even more.
The rich hire whole armies of lawyers to pay fewer taxes. The
middle class demands their mortgage deduction and IRA tax
breaks that the poor cannot afford. Money can also be salted away
with the help of deductions for their kids’ (529) college education,
health care accounts, and charitable deductions. A Roth IRA
account can escape all taxes. Careful estate planning allows

fortunes to be passed on to children, most often paying no taxes.
But for poor children, outside of a small parental child tax

credit (not all qualify) and possibly some SNAP (i.e. food stamps)
benefits, that’s pretty much it. Kids, because they can’t vote,
generally come in last because they are not even at the table. Some
low-income parents can get a modest Earned Income Tax Credit
depending on their income, which is often problematic. Every
voter and politician will wax eloquently about kids being “the
country’s future.” Yet, when it comes to the money being passed
out, it’s mostly a lot of talk and grandstanding. Politicians will
always say there is only so much money to be allocated. Let’s talk
next year about family values, forced birth babies, mothers, the
working class, the poor, and the importance of innocent children.
Perhaps, in the distant future?
THE FAMILY: PAST AND PRESENT

The most important thing in the world a baby can do is to
choose their parents wisely! A newborn could argue that they
demand a say in being pro-choice in the selection of their parents.
After all, every baby wants to start out life with as many advantages
as possible. Yes, this may sound silly as a joke, but inequality and
life trajectories are largely determined before a newborn has left
the hospital. Was this baby wanted and planned for? Are the
parents psychologically and emotionally stable? Are they
committed to each other in a mature relationship? Are the parents
loving, attentive, and kind people? Do the parents possess a moral
compass? Are these parents blessed with a good education? Are
the parents financially capable of providing for a child? What kind
of environment will the child be raised in to improve the odds of
becoming a decent human being?
In the race of life, it’s always helpful to get a head start.

Inequality starts at birth if not conception. Babies would certainly
prefer to be pro-choice about selecting their own parents to get a

jump start on the competition in life right from the get-go.
The foundation of all societies revolves around the family. It

is the bedrock upon which civilization has depended. Family, clan,
tribe, and nation are nearly all determined by the relationship of
adults and the raising of young children. Customs, culture, beliefs,
and attitudes are all shaped by our parents and extended family. In
large part, both positively and negatively, we are greatly affected by
our upbringing.
The nuclear family of old was pretty much straightforward.

Marry young, with many children coming along, and sadly, with
high infant and child mortality rates. Religion in life was important,
and divorce was rare and frowned upon. Primitive medicine,
primary education at best, no safety net, and few opportunities to
improve your lot in life were common. And there was no
retirement plan, except to hopefully move back in with your adult
kids before you kicked the bucket. So much for nostalgia and the
good ol’ days!
Over the last couple of generations, thousands of articles and

speeches have bemoaned the rise of single-parent homes and the
nation’s moral decline. Abortion issues? Blame the family. Sexual
promiscuity? Blame the family. Gun violence? Blame the family.
Drug and alcohol tragedies? Blame the family. School dropout?
Blame the family. Lazy and no ambition? Blame the family.
Teenage pregnancy? Blame the family. It is a common belief that
if those young children and teenagers were taught properly in the
home, all of these problems would go away. Some of this is true,
but life is more complicated. It is easy to cast stones.
But forget society for a moment. Just consider your own

family and extended family. You are guaranteed to have a brother,
sister, daughter, son, parent, aunt, uncle, cousin, niece, nephew,
brother or sister-in-law, daughter or son-in-law that is a total and
hopeless screw-up. A disgrace in never getting their act together.
An embarrassment to the whole family clan. You may be lucky to
have only one or two. Some families have cornered the market of
losers who just make one bad decision after another. Now multiply
by millions of families, and you have social issues and problems
that defy easy solutions. Is it any wonder that schools, workplaces,
and neighborhoods have issues? Even churches are not immune.
Go to a church board meeting with lay members, and you can see
disharmony, division, and clashing personalities among God’s
people.
We often forget that conditions in the past from the beginning

of time were far from ideal with a host of problems. If given a
choice of a time to live in, nearly everyone would choose today,
despite all its challenges and shortcomings. Everything is relative.
It must also be recognized that all families are different. And
certainly, all the females in an extended family will desire to make
their own personal and private choices in life, including their own
bodily autonomy. It is called freedom.
NO LICENSE REQUIRED
Can you imagine that having a baby does not require a license?
Yes, any two idiots can make a baby. The most profound human
act requires no permission of any kind at all. Amazing.
Imagine that every prospective adult had to get a license

declaring them fit to be a parent. The birth rate would fall even
more rapidly than the years-long decline in the baby department.
Of course, this would smack of elitism, class superiority, and, most
certainly, discrimination toward the poor. It would focus almost
exclusively on finances, education, maturity, and psychological
profiling. Aside from a thought bubble as a mental exercise, it is
ludicrous and impractical to suggest the state regulate procreation
in such a manner. Yet, in another sense, this is exactly what forced
birth activists are doing by enlisting the power of the state to
regulate procreation. They demand that every pregnant woman,
regardless of class, race, age, capability, circumstance, or desire, be
forced to have a child. And then the state largely tells them they
are mostly on their own. Our job is done here.
America is consumed by credentials and licensing. Individuals

are denied practicing medicine or law without credentials. One also
needs a license to open a business or to pursue a hundred different
categories of work, from selling real estate to a beauty parlor.
Everything is regulated, scrutinized, and bureaucratized. All of this
makes some sense to protect the public at large from harm or
injury from someone incompetent who does not know what they
are doing. It is a safety-first mentality. All well and good and
rational, if at times overzealous in rulemaking. It is largely spurred
by a litigious society ready to sue someone at the drop of a hat.
Yet, making a baby, the most important decision in the world,

is left to chance and fate. No license or training of any kind is
required. Any two fools can make a baby, even if drunk or high on
something. But there is a world of difference between a mere
biological mother and father and the sweet sound of the words
“Mom” and “Dad.”
It is a common experience to hear nearly all first-time parents

express some variation of “I didn’t have a clue” about the
challenges, joys, and adjustments needed in one’s life. But there are
no universal high school or college classes that teach the skills and
resources needed to become a parent. There are some scattered
programs here and there, but school districts and parents shy away
from anything related to pregnancy, sex, birth control, and
certainly not the minefield surrounding abortion. This is as it
should be on such emotional and private topics. Leave it up to
parents in their own homes. But the truth is that many parents do
not want any of these conversations with their kids. It’s awkward,
touchy, preachy, and resisted by offspring. Many kids are exposed
to online images, information and misinformation. The default is
usually silence or threats directed mostly at daughters. Some
teenagers can often have a cheeky attitude and turn the table
quizzing their parents on their sexual history. Most parents

certainly don’t want to go there, delving into their private past.
Perhaps, in jest, parents should have to get a license that attests

to having covered everything with their own kids and hope they
don’t flunk. While sexuality issues are always contested by many
with different views, schools should focus on the finances and
capabilities of would-be parents. Most young people and parents
vastly underestimate what raising a child in the real-world costs.
Beyond finances, many have no clue as to what it takes to raise a
child in time, psychology, patience, or temperament.
It is estimated that roughly 45% of pregnancies were

unplanned. Surprise, the test shows positive! Even if the pregnancy
was unintended, emotions can run the gamut of a pleasant surprise,
a joyful surprise, ambivalent resignation, depression, and worry.
Those in the latter group will panic if they live in the wrong state.
They just remembered they don’t get a choice because the state
says they don’t. Location, location, location applies not only to real
estate but to those with access to reproductive care.
In some sense, every parent, no matter their station in life or

background, is an amateur when raising kids. All kids are different,
even under the same roof. There is no manual that applies to all.
Most parents make it up as they go, hoping they do not screw up
by damaging their kids. It is often a tightrope between tough love
and permissive love. No one has the secret sauce. It is just that
some parents are lucky, lucky, lucky to have great kids despite their
own personal trials and screwups along the way, while other
parents who have done most everything right see a child struggle,
accompanied by lots of drama, to find their way.
The forced birth advocates must be admired and respected for

their dedication to their cause. Yet, they spend little time, effort,
money, influence, or concern on the period from birth to turning
22 after college graduation. They are nowhere to be found. Maybe
they are the ones who can’t be trusted to do the right thing.
DOUBLE STANDARD
Double standards are everywhere. Women complain that men
say they believe in equality but treat them differently in practice.
Minorities also claim they do not get a fair shake. Students
complain about preferential treatment of the “teachers’ pet.” Older
children will complain that younger siblings get away with stuff and
vice versa. In the workplace, favoritism by the boss for some co-
workers breeds resentment among colleagues. And on it goes.
Unfairness has not gone away.
But when we look at the differences between men and women,

even the language is loaded with dynamite. A woman can be called
a bitch, slut, whore, ho, prostitute, harlot, tramp, hussy, hooker,
call girl, working girl, pussy, cunt, Jezebel, a loose woman, and even
a dog. Locker room talk and guy talk expressions are always a “son
of a bitch,” never a son of a bastard. It is always a mothef—er,
never a father—er. Women are mistresses, gold diggers, or a “kept
woman.” They are “knocked up” or have a bun in the oven. All of
it denigrates women, even if men are oblivious.
Contrast these with the double standard for men. Casanova,

stud, player, ladies’ man, smooth operator, lover boy, and Romeo.
They all have a distinct ring to them and a completely different
vibe. They are all viewed with a wink and a nod that these
characters have a special way with the ladies in seduction. Men are
just sub-consciously defined by a different standard. Even the
more benign words men use, like cutie, doll, babe, hottie, looker,
knockout, dish, and a “ten,” have connotations. Not one word is
linked to a woman’s character or smarts. They are all tied to male
sexual expressions.
For women, a completely different set of considerations are

evident. Generally, innocent expressions about men are few: good-
looking, hot, hunk, babe. That’s pretty much it. But the scathing
anger of duplicity for women is palpable when it comes to men
“who done them wrong.” Words like bastard, animal, snake,
monster, player, scumbag, lyin’ cheat, good for nothing, scoundrel,

two-timer, weasel, devil, and dirtbag are expressed.
But here is the major difference in double standards for

women. None of these words are sexual in nature, but all revolve
around poor conduct, behavior, and a lack of character and
integrity on the part of men. It is about betrayal and
disappointment, with hearts and trust being broken. It is about
men who have let women down and shattered their dreams. And,
of course, when it comes to abortion, these are the men who have
positions of power that should be making the decisions for
women. Right? Certainly! Perhaps, men are the ones who can’t be
trusted.
THE 30--YEAR CHALLENGE

Because of biology, women must figure out how to avoid
getting pregnant. If a woman is fertile for roughly thirty years,
producing an egg each month means she could have as many as 20
children or more if you throw in a set of twins or triplets. Talk
about a population explosion! Most women who desire to become
mothers these days want two children, preferably a boy and a girl.
So now the math means she only must worry about another
pregnancy for 28 years.
It has been joked that men think about sex several times a day.
But for a sexually active woman, married or not, it’s no joke. She
must think about sex every day. Her health, emotions, finances,
relationships, and future depend on it. This is something that
cannot be ignored, delegated, or postponed. Unless she has an
IUD, it must be part of her daily routine. She can’t forget.
People are quick to be judgmental against women who have

unplanned pregnancies as promiscuous, irresponsible, or ignorant.
While all three can sometimes be true, it is not the whole story.
Women who are responsible and do everything right can still get
pregnant despite their best efforts. It should always be

remembered there is no 100% effective birth control, barring
abstinence or sterilization.
While there are different types of birth control, each has its
own shortcomings. Even a promised 99% effective rate still leaves
an error rate of 1%, which, compounded over a thirty-year time
frame, always leaves room for concern. For all women, even
among the most responsible, it is the luck of the draw of who will
fall into the one to five percent fail category. They are now faced
with a difficult question they never anticipated. Whatever the
circumstance, it is estimated that nearly one in four women will
have an abortion sometime in their lifetime. And the odds are high
that someone in your family tree is included.
That is why the abortion question looms so large as an issue

of concern. Every person, male or female, can count how many
other females are in their lives, whether through family, work,
church, or neighbors, and do the math. Out of a hundred women
that cross one’s path in life, the idea that nearly twenty-five women
have gotten an abortion seems incredibly high. But abortion is such
a personal matter that few people outside a spouse or a confidant
will ever know about it. Some women will never tell anyone. It is
treated as a private matter.
Many controversial state laws limiting abortion to less than six

weeks have been heavily criticized because many women may not
even know they are pregnant. Many women vary in their menstrual
cycles, which may take several months before some realize they are
pregnant. That is how biology works, although nearly half of
abortions are done in the first six weeks. If a woman does not
know right away, well, she does not know. Women are different.
The thirty-year challenge should be acknowledged by men as

another burden placed upon women that most men never take a
minute to even contemplate. The whole purpose of a discussion
around the 30-year challenge is to acknowledge that in life, plans
can go awry even with the best of intentions and precautions. No
one is immune from the law of averages. Every woman’s walk-

through life is different, and she should be respected and trusted
to do the very best she can to make her own choices. Determined
women will always find a way to do what’s best for them when
considering their own circumstances. Women, unlike the state,
trust themselves.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 15 SEX, SEX, SEX | 145
CHAPTER 15
SEX, SEX, SEX
Made you look! Got your attention, right? Bazinga! A chapter

heading about sex is a subject that people always slow down to
view. Sex sells, and sex titillates. It even has its own “drive,” much
like a car, and when it is out of control, it can propel itself right
over a cliff. Many people, when reviewing their own sexual history,
wish they had left their “drive” in neutral at times, thus avoiding a
lot of drama and sometimes a lifetime of regret. They mentally
compartmentalize and try to practice selective amnesia on the
subject of sex. But any discussion about abortion must include the
uncomfortable landmines surrounding sexual intercourse because
the impact falls most heavily on women due to biology.
Sex captures one’s attention and is unavoidable in our day and

age. In earlier generations, sex was largely confined to the bedroom
and in private, discreet conversations. In television’s early days,
even couples like Lucy and Desi had single beds, and they were
married! Lucy could not even use the word “pregnant” on
television.
Over the last several generations, every soap opera and most
movies have had several sexual plotlines built around who did what
to whom. Sex and betrayal are central drama storylines in some
form or manner. Television comedies no longer waste their time
on innuendo but thrive on in-your-face explicit sexuality for cheap
laughs. In the movies, one thing that is nearly always missing in all
these sexual situations is that no man interrupts and asks, “Are you
on the pill?” Or a woman saying, “Did you bring a condom?” No,
it ruins the mood and the pace of the show. When things are hot,
they’re hot. There are no consequences in fantasyland. Today, in
the public square, from movies, billboards, and ads of all kinds, sex
permeates nearly everything, and pornography is in great demand

on the internet. There is no abortion controversy without sex. Yet,
it is often left out of the conversation as all the attention is paid to
the embryo and fetus.
Sex is even used as a promise and recruiting tool for Muslim

terrorists. They are told they will be rewarded in the hereafter with
70 virgins in Paradise. They are not told that they will also get 70
mothers-in-laws in the package deal, which will become,
deservedly so, their own private hell!
In the movies and general media, sex is often coarse and

cheapened in its portrayal. In the movies, it is sometimes
gratuitously used to escape a PG rating by writers. It is often
reduced to gender power games or just horniness of two people
on the make. It is less about “making love” than “making lust.”
Yet, like the sex drive, it drives ratings and sales. Indeed, the only
difference between cable TV and streaming services from standard
network television is that actors are allowed to swear like drunken
sailors and flash a lot more skin. It’s pretty shallow and
manipulative, but whatever sells, sells. Rude, lewd, and crude are
prevalent, with Madison Avenue pimping out anything if it can
make a buck. The peddlers of the lowest common denominator
dropping F-bombs like confetti is a sad commentary on
contemporary values. Many decry the coarsening of the culture
while, at the same time, enough of the public tunes in to make it
pay off.
Modesty is seen as a quaint relic, while overt female sexuality

in dress (or lack thereof) and style is designed to attract eyeballs,
cameras, and men’s attention. Red carpet events like the Oscars
compete to be as provocative as possible. Some dinner parties and
fancy events display some women showing off their sexuality. But
women can’t then claim sexism for being treated as a sex object.
Much of the rest of the world that condemns, and fears, Western
decadence will point directly to varied sexuality in all forms as
Exhibit A, and in particular, female immodesty. Many women are
defiant, claiming they can dress any way they like and are not
responsible for men’s attitudes. They may chafe at the “male gaze”
but can’t have it both ways by dressing provocatively. Modesty is
not a dirty word. It does not mean being a prissy Puritan but
“elevating” one’s game to a higher level. Having “class” means so
much more than just money. How one presents themselves to the
world is important. Regardless of position or status across the
socio-economic spectrum, a woman should always be classy in
presentation, style, and dress.
On the abortion issue, sex is where it all begins but the fight is
all about post-sex. It is all about the sperm and the egg introducing
themselves. The backstory of how this came to be and the
circumstances from A to Z are irrelevant to the fight from an anti-
abortionist’s point of view. It is a backstory that is almost always
missing from the conversation. It is of no consequence and beside
the point to a forced birth activist. It is God’s will.
WHEN PENIS MEETS VAGINA

This is where all the joy and excitement begin for a couple
intentionally starting a family or adding to one. There is already
anticipation of what this new addition will bring to their lives. It is
natural to hope for a boy or a girl, but most parents don’t mind
and just pray for a healthy child. Parents will talk over supper about
fixing up the spare room with a new paint job and the back-and-
forth dance of considering baby names. Discussions will follow on
the new baby’s impact on a working mother or how other siblings
will need to adjust. There can be some humor and good-natured
ribbing over whose family traits and looks the baby may have.
There will also be some nervous laughter in hoping the kid does
not take after Uncle Louie, the black sheep of the family. Joy and
expectations are the dominant feelings, and wondering what this
new life means for the family and what kind of future awaits this
new arrival. A newborn baby who will live to see the calendar
change to the 22nd Century. Wow, what will the world be like then?
And then there is Jack and Jill, another couple with a rocky
relationship. There is shock and dismay over learning she is
pregnant. This meeting of the penis and vagina was about sex, not
procreation. It was about pleasure and hormones, nothing else. It
was certainly not about visions of cooing and singing lullabies,
diapers, and midnight feedings. This was a mistake, pure and
simple. “We did not plan for this. We are not ready for this. This
was not part of the deal. Help!”
Jill is desperate. Her boyfriend, Jack, has just told her, “I’m
outta here, good luck.” Jill is bewildered, scared, and frightened
when contemplating her future, which will largely be on her own.
How unfair. How does a guy get to skip out while she is left
stranded? How sexist. There will be lots of crying and self-blaming
for getting into this jam. Jill talks to herself and says, “It was a
mistake, and mistakes should be able to be fixed. I should not be
forced into a lifelong lesson by having no choice in this situation.
I am not prepared for a baby in any way, shape, or form.” She also
hears that tiny voice in the back of her head from her younger days
of some preacher warning about pre-marital sex and abortion and
that God is going to get her. She wonders if hell is truly in her
future. More crying ensues with her self-worth in the toilet.
Jill now becomes all too aware of what it means to live in an

anti-abortion-restricted state. This only adds to her trauma,
knowing that the state will come down hard on her as if she is a
member of the mafia or a common criminal. She is also stressed
over what may happen to her mom or best friend, who are both
helping and advising her. She worries that they may have to pay
large fines for aiding and abetting. She does not want to cause
trouble for them. She feels depressed and trapped like a caged
animal. She has little money but decides to “run, baby, run” to
another state to fix her mistake and have an abortion. Not overly
religious, she does say a little prayer in her own way, hoping that
the God of Mercy will understand her predicament. Plus, given her
present circumstances, she knows her situation would be
profoundly unfair to any baby starting out in life behind the eight
ball.
In the end, she is trying to do the best she can. She is also
thankful there are places to go, even by traveling where people are
less judgmental and letting her make her own choice. She is also
more than a little angry at how the world works. Jack, the would-
be father, did not lose any sleep, and she has not heard a peep from
him since he learned of the unwanted pregnancy. She reflects and
shudders thinking of what kind of absentee non-father and
potential troublemaker he could have been for herself and a baby.
She begins to de-stress and gains confidence that she did what was
right for her. She appreciates and fully understands that others may
have taken a different path. But she reflects that this is what having
a choice is all about.
CONTRACEPTION
Imagine no abortion issue at all. Hooray! Everyone wins. If
only everyone practiced “safe sex,” the issue would just go away.
But life throws curves into everyone’s plans sooner or later.
Human nature, religion, and conflicted views over sexuality
muddle the whole discussion. Gender problems arise in which the
general consensus, especially among men, is that this is a female
problem due to the consequences of a pregnancy that may occur
and should have been prevented on her part, therefore, it’s her
fault.
What seems to be a straightforward issue is disputed because

of religious beliefs. The Catholic hierarchy opposes contraception,
but not most of their membership. The all-male leadership has not
changed its position on this issue, although many priests often look
the other way. But Catholic members, who may be participating in
mortal sin according to Pope’s past, have just ignored it. Over 95%
of Catholics practice some type of birth control in their homes. It’s
just part of life. It does not define them or their faith. Surprisingly,
most Catholics are also opposed to abortion bans. In a 2023

Washington Post-ABC poll, 74% of white Catholics believed
abortion should be between a woman and her doctor. They do not
feel they are going to hell for taking either of these positions. 58%
of Republicans in this poll also agreed about a woman’s decision
with her doctor.
Ironically, in recent years, on the abortion issue, more hardline

Catholic bishops have come into positions of authority. Bishop
conferences have become more heavily dominated by
conservatives who have doubled down on making opposition to
abortion a top priority, in contrast to the Catholic laity. Of course,
these are all men. No contradictions here!
In 1930 Pope Pius XI declared that “contraception was

inherently evil and any spouse practicing any act of contraception
violated the law of God and nature and was stained by a great and
mortal flaw.” On the issue of contraception, there is no nuance on
where the Catholic church stands. It is a no-no. Pope Paul VI, in
1968 re-confirmed it in an encyclical titled Human Vitae that the pill
or any other contraceptive device would constitute mortal sin,
calling it “intrinsically wrong.” Interestingly, this came after a large
Catholic commission to study the issue found a majority favored
dropping the ban, but the Pope overruled them.
Not long ago, with the controversy over the Affordable Care
Act (ACA), commonly referred to as Obamacare, one of its
provisions was that employers had to offer contraception access to
their health insurance package for all employees. No employees
were required to use the benefit. It was just there for those who
needed it. But conservatives who objected to the provision as a
violation of their religious beliefs took it to the Supreme Court.
With a conservative court, the ruling came down under the
umbrella of religious freedom that such employers did not have to
comply with certain health requirements. It became known as the
Hobby Lobby ruling, although some like-minded business owners
also objected. The Hobby Lobby objection surrounded Plan B, a
morning-after pill, and certain IUDs. These were seen as abortion

issues and were opposed.
Activist supporters of contraception saw this as anti-female

and the imposition of religion on an employee who may not be an
evangelical Christian or of any religion at all. They did not see
religious freedom but discrimination against women and non-
believers. They felt strongly that a religious value judgment on such
a personal issue applying only to women should not be a condition
of employment to access benefits. But Hobby Lobby does provide
men with condoms, vasectomies, and Viagra. Women see a double
standard. The Supreme Court decision was decided by five men
who, of course, know what’s best when it comes to women. The
three Supreme Court women (at the time) all dissented. Obviously,
there are no gender problems here!
However, big changes are afoot. Recently, the Food and Drug
Administration took a major step in approving the over-the-
counter birth control “Opill,” which could have a positive impact
on reducing abortions. Still, it may take several years to assess the
impact on woman’s reproductive health care. Since about 45% of
pregnancies are unplanned, it is hoped that easier access to
contraception will reduce these numbers.
Many poor and younger women do not have a regular doctor,

and navigating the medical bureaucracy is sometimes daunting.
Contraceptives should soon be widely available in retail stores and
may soon be obtainable online. With half the country passing
restrictive abortion laws, a silver lining may be a renewed focus on
contraception. But the abortion issue is still relevant since
contraceptives are subject to failure. Nothing is perfect.
One of the under-reported stories is the ongoing crisis in

Africa and its inability to slow its explosive population growth. Its
lack of universal access to contraception and limited female
education often results in entrenched poverty. Logistics in rural
areas, inadequate contraception funding, and varying local political
commitments all play a role. Male chauvinism, tribal and

patriarchal culture, and the second-and third-class status of women
can also hinder effective outreach. Women’s relative lack of
education and opportunity directly correlates to their higher
fertility.
In two-thirds of the richer and middle-income countries,

women’s options correspond to lower birth rates. A poor country
even with natural resources (that are exploited and hoarded by the
top one percent) will struggle to keep from falling further behind
with more mouths to feed, educate, and provide jobs for their
citizens. A poor country that doubles its GDP and population at
the same time is standing still economically and remains poor. Yet,
in relation to other countries’ higher growth rates, it becomes a
failed state. It is only one war or a famine away from disaster.
One example among many is the country of Tanzania, whose

population has gone from 10 million in 1960 to over 60 million
today, a five-fold increase (in contrast, the U.S. only doubled its
population, boosted by large numbers of legal and illegal
immigrants). Tanzania is adding a million more babies each year.
It is projected to hit over 100 million people in a little more than
another generation.
Likewise, large population increases in Egypt, Iraq, Nigeria,

the Congo, and many others will be a serious handicap for these
nations to thrive. In Niger, the average woman has seven children.
Sub-Sahara Africa alone, with the fastest population growth among
all continents, is projected to go from 1.1 billion to 2.7 billion
people by 2060. This increase of 1.6 billion people is equivalent to
five times the entire current U.S. population. Imagine five more
Americas in just over one generation! Political instability, poverty,
and conflict will heavily impact Africa and spill over into the rest
of the world.
African migration to Europe, far greater than current flows,

will explode on a massive scale pushed by poverty, too many
people, no work, climate change, and overwhelmed governments.

Millions of migrants will make the long journey hoping to improve
their lot in life. Armed with smart phones and social media, they
will head to richer, more advanced countries seeking a better life.
Richer countries will feel under siege, overwhelmed, and even
more angry than they do today. Governments will fall for failure
to control immigration. As Winston Churchill famously observed,
“Refugees vote with their feet.”
Most of the international attention is focused on food aid and

nutritional insecurity in poor countries. Yet, the United Nations
needs to make contraception available to all women around the
world free of charge, especially in poor countries so that girls and
women can have a better shot at an education and a decent life,
along with their babies. It needs to be a priority effort. Many poor
countries will be lucky just to tread water but will fall further
behind with exploding populations where starvation can only be
avoided by outside aid. Trying to hold off civil strife at the same
time will be a losing battle.
One great mystery is why there are no effective oral

contraceptives for men. Over 60 years have passed since female
oral contraceptives came on the market. Since then, modern
medicine has invented CAT scans, MRI machines, and proton
cancer machines, among many others. Heart transplants, stem
cells, LASIK surgery, and all manner of hip and knee surgeries are
taken for granted. Vaccines against the flu, cocktails against AIDs,
and a one-year crash course to fight COVID-19 all testify to the
miracles of modern medicine.
Why male contraception is not a high priority for politicians

and medical researchers is perplexing. It would not solve all
unwanted pregnancies for irresponsible men who place all the
blame and burdens on women. However, for many men, it would
be another option to avoid an unplanned pregnancy, and it could
potentially help to reduce the demand for abortions. Just its
availability would require men to be more accountable for doing
their part. Researchers are dragging their feet on a partial solution

to the abortion controversy. Funding and attention both need to
be addressed to make it a reality.
And any tampering by limiting contraception, as suggested by

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, would be a political
death wish for any candidate who even talks about going there.
Furthermore, any such foolish court decision would require
justices to enter the witness protection program and work
exclusively on Zoom from an undisclosed location. Women
marching with pitchforks and “packing heat” would be unnerving.
GOOD NEWS
Nearly everyone agrees that a baby has the best chance at a
good life being born into a loving two-parent household that is
stable and welcoming. A father and a mother bring different
complementary strengths to the table, much like milk and cookies
or peanut butter and jam. But today, there are more family
configurations that allow child psychologists to be employed for
several lifetimes. Most people also agree that a woman having a
baby too young before they are financially, psychologically, and
especially emotionally mature is not an optimal situation. All things
being equal, a child has a pronounced advantage if the mother is
married, educated, settled, and in her late twenties or early thirties.
But unfortunately, this is often not the world we live in.
Still, there is some good news to report on teenage pregnancy.

According to the Pew Research Center, teenage births have
crashed to record lows. In just ten years, they have declined by half.
Rates have declined over five-fold since the 1950s. A huge sea
change. The reason most cited by scholars is that teenagers are
much more likely to use birth control and are surprisingly having
less sex.
All this does seem a little counterintuitive since the culture is

marinated in sexual imagery, and porn rules part of the Internet.
But these statistics are very encouraging, and we should take good
news wherever it can be found. The mainstream media, along with
the far left and far right media, seldom tout any positive news. It’s
all doom and gloom.
Even the abortion rate has declined significantly over time. In

2019, the C.D.C. reported about 630,000 legal abortions, down by
over half from 1980, when some 1.3 million abortions were
recorded. This is positive news that things are pointed in the right
direction.
With the overturning of the Roe decision by the Supreme

Court, anti-abortionists are elated and expect the number of
abortions to decline at an ever-faster rate and to eliminate them
entirely if they can abolish it throughout the entire country. But
according to a Brookings study, it was found that around the
world, more restrictions on abortion do not necessarily correlate
to a direct decline in abortions. In essence, women find a way, even
if it’s illegal and putting their health and life at much greater risk.
But most of the evidence in studies indicates that everything just
goes underground for procedures or women trying to obtain
abortifacients. Others will travel to foreign countries or
jurisdictions, while some try to induce an abortion by crude
personal methods resulting in self-harm. Desperate women will go
to desperate lengths, just with riskier choices.
On another positive note, there may be an unexpected silver

lining in the anti-abortion cause. It could be that women may
become extra careful about birth control to avoid an unwanted
pregnancy by being hyper-vigilant, even more so than before. Men
also may become more responsible as well, even if marginally.
Early reports indicate a tiny uptick in inquiries regarding
vasectomies. It may not be known for several years in the U.S. what
the impact will be on women and birth control. So, if all of this
turns out to be the case, unwanted pregnancies may somewhat
decline along with the need for an abortion. Everyone would agree
that would be a positive win-win in the shadow of a post-Roe
world.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 16 WHAT DO WOMEN WANT? | 157
CHAPTER 16
WHAT DO WOMEN WANT?
No, this is not a commentary about the old movie, What

Women Want, starring Mel Gibson and Helen Hunt, with the
premise that Mel Gibson can read women’s minds. It was a
comedy heavy on sexual innuendo and played for laughs.
However, in real life, it’s a good thing that men don’t have this
ability as they would get an extra earful from women (mostly
thinking, not saying) about what they really think of men. It’s better
for men to be in the dark.
But humor aside, it’s quite simple what women want more
than anything else is HELP. Especially a working mother of young
children, single or married. She finds herself stretched in ways that
men do not. In particular, being a single mom is even more
stressful, with all the heavy burdens falling on her shoulders alone.
She needs extra courage and must develop unusual stamina, grit,
and patience just to keep things from completely falling apart. An
emotional meltdown, on occasion, can significantly have adverse
effects on young children.
At home, she worries about her job and precarious finances

and fears most getting sick, injured, or laid off, even more so if she
has meager or no job benefits. At work, she worries about her kid’s
well-being and not getting into trouble as latch-key kids after
school at tender ages. For teenage boys (or girls) getting into
trouble, she will be pilloried and bullied for being a bad mom, not
being present, and not controlling her kids’ behavior who are
“running wild” when she must work to stay off the street. She
wishes she had a reliable mate, partner, or just a good friend who
could help out. There is no downtime. It’s a merry-go-round that
never stops 24/7. She needs help, and her kids need help.
Even for married women, the complaint is that men do not

pull their weight around the house in chores or in childcare. Many
books have been written about “the second shift,” whereby a
working mom leaves a tough day of work, exhausted by trying to
please bosses and co-workers, just to walk in the door to a cluttered
house. She faces kids screaming for dinner, playing referee for
earlier fights, being a medical triage nurse for scrapes and bruises,
and facing a load of laundry. She quickly pivots towards the kitchen
to prepare supper. Multi-tasking, she must also be a reluctant
disciplinarian, TV and internet monitor, dog poop sanitation
officer, teachable moment instructor, schedule maker, list maker,
child cheerleader, bathroom attendant, “time out” supervisor,
housemaid, and cookie-making queen.
Later, after supper has been made, eaten, and then cleaned up,
mom gives a weary sigh in trying to calm down hyped-up,
uncooperative kids so they’ll attack some homework, followed by
baths and facing the drama of getting kids settled down and ready
for bed, along with a quick bedtime story. Otherwise, there is hell
to pay in the morning with sleepy and cranky kids. The old saying
“a man works from sun to sun, but a mother’s work is never done”
still applies in most households.
Even the most committed, responsible, and loving dads have

on more than one occasion called their wife at home and said they
had to work late, or attend to something important, just as an
excuse to escape the bedlam at home, bailing on their wife and
hoping to sneak in after the kids’ bedtime. Nearly every single dad,
at one time or another, will plead the 5th. They try to rationalize
that they occasionally need a little downtime between work and
home to catch their breath, but working moms rarely get that same
choice. A clueless dad who walks in late after the kids are asleep
and expects a perky wife by asking how her day went will be lucky
to get away with only a tired, dirty look from the couch. In nearly
all surveys, men consistently overestimate their time contributions
in childcare and housekeeping. Moms are tired, but there is no rest
for the weary.
A staggering statistic is that wives initiate 70% of all divorces.

Even more stunning is the statistic for women with a college
education who file for divorce. They account for a stunning 90%
of initiated divorces of failed marriages. There is a message for men
in these statistics that they need to help carry the load, not only in
the division of labor, but in emotional support for their wives and,
even more so, their children. They need to be not only more
present but also more involved.
Parenting has its joys but is seldom a walk in the park, and too
many men are, unfortunately AWOL. High divorce rates
notwithstanding, divorce rates could be even worse as many other
troubled marriages contemplating separation only stay together
because of financial considerations, the sake of the kids, religious
convictions, social connections, fear of a failed marriage, or a
simple and genuine fear of being alone.
Marriage and children require a full-time commitment that

always brings challenges. A newly divorced man has more money
in his pocket and more free time on his hands, while the ex-wife
raising the kids has even less of both. Life is unfair. And clueless
male legislators who don’t relate are not quick to provide financial
help to moms and kids needing help. For full-time working moms
of young children, the opportunity for peace and quiet, some alone
time, is a luxury that must be stolen a few minutes here and there.
Even superheroes get some downtime. No question, mothers of
the world shout, we know what we want, and we want some more
HELP!
MICHAEL LEE PART III CHILDREN | 160
PART III
CHILDREN
The obligations and duties by government to do
right by children who have no voice, no vote, and no
agency. To respect women and mothers for the choices
they make and for society to always pay the price in
dollars and commitment in favor of kids.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 17 THE ADOPTION OPTION | 161
CHAPTER 17
THE ADOPTION OPTION
Anti-abortionists often bring up the idea of adoption as a

solution to unwanted babies of pregnant women who are coerced
into giving birth. The fetus is saved, and the baby can be placed in
a loving home. Everyone lives happily ever after. After all, it is
widely assumed that there are many would-be parents who would
like to adopt. Problem solved.
Not so fast. First off, a pregnant woman’s coerced birth is 14

times more likely to result in her death due to pregnancy
complications than having an early abortion, putting the woman’s
life in potential danger. A forced-birth mother objects she must be
coerced to accept this extra risk, even if small, to her life. There are
also considerations of other medical conditions, job loss, education
compromises, and strained interpersonal relations with the father
of the child. Additional concerns can impact family and friends,
possibly enforced bed rest, finances, and life plans. Nor are
morning sickness and weight gain trivial issues. For an unwanted
pregnancy, there are also profound extenuating issues surrounding
guilt, image, peer pressure, and expectations. Nothing is simple or
happens in a vacuum. The idea that adoption solves all problems
for unwanted children is a false assumption.
The second problem is that few women, after giving birth, give
up their child. The psychological and emotional factors are often
just too strong after a nine-month pregnancy. Natural bonding is a
fact of biology. About 1% give up their babies. Plus, the stigma of
an unwed single mother has lessened over the past couple of
generations. Forced birth activists will trumpet a victory that the
woman came around to keeping and loving her baby. They will
claim that it is a testament against abortion in smug self-
satisfaction. But this is not necessarily true. The pregnant woman

is conflicted and without a choice but becomes resigned to making
the best of a bad situation. Or rather forced to do so by the dictates
of the state. For every subsequent happy outcome, there are many
others filled with resentment, troubles, and neglect. Nothing is
simple.
Adoption is a complicated process that can take many months

or even several years to find a match. Preferences are for a
newborn, and most are adopted through private agencies. Agencies
are required to go through a very long list of vetting procedures,
questionnaires, hearings, meetings, home inspections, background
checks, and financial and psychological evaluations.
Agencies do not just hand out babies at the baby factory door
to whoever comes by. Meanwhile, despite protocols, a baby often
loses the bonding process in the early months after birth unless a
pre-birth match has been agreed to in advance. But if there is a
delay, a baby may be placed in an institutional system of varying
quality from state to state. Some states are woefully short on
process, funding, and bureaucracy, where babies and children are
just warehoused. The baby continues to grow, and neo-natal
doctors emphasize the importance of immediate mother-to-baby
bonding, whether the natural mother or a surrogate adoptive
parent. There is little time to lose. Toddlers are also in great need
of love and affection.
On the flip side are the adoptive parents. They are picky. They
have their wish list also as if they could order the baby with a few
clicks from Amazon, and it shows up tomorrow on their doorstep,
delivered by the Amazon stork. In a surprise to many, less than
five percent of infertile couples adopt. But any potential adopters
quickly learn that the adoptive process can be smooth or
bureaucratic depending on state jurisdiction rules. For newly picky
adoptive parents, there are usually four basic hurdles to cross on
their wish list. They are gender, baby or child’s age, race, and any
disability or drug use by the birth mother.
Potential parents may also want to know the baby’s genetic

profile, whether there is any mental illness in the birth family, and
inquire about other traits from possible height to potential IQ. The
role of a birth mother, from continuous contact with the adopting
parents to being completely out of the picture, must all be sorted
out. One break from the past is that today most adoptions are open
adoptions. The more demands by the adoptive parents, the longer
the wait to match a child within the desired parameters. It may
never happen.
It is regrettable, but some minority and disabled children may

never leave the program and will be shunted over to long-term
foster care. The same is true for compromised babies. Few
adoptive parents are interested in a “crack baby,” an autistic child,
or one suffering from fetal alcohol syndrome. Cross-racial
adoptions can also present unique challenges. Babies with mental
or physical challenges are often left behind. For disabled children,
it takes extraordinary adoptive parents who wish to take on a child
with “special needs” into their home. Except for a few, zealous
forced birth activists are not stepping up to the plate to adopt
them.
During arguments before the Supreme Court about Roe, Amy

Coney Barret, the newest member of the Supreme Court, brought
up the idea of adoption, implying this may be the magic bullet to
solve the issues surrounding the fetus. It is naïve, despite the fact
that Barrett adopted two children. It is a given that Amy Barrett, a
proud mother of seven, is an amazing woman. She also
acknowledges a huge amount of credit owed to a helpful husband
(also a lawyer) in a family with millions of dollars at their disposal.
They can hire all the help they need. So, Justice Barrett may have a
huge blind spot in relating to a poor woman struggling on her own
without resources.
Consider Kayla, a marginalized young woman of 19, without

resources or money and using drugs. Kayla comes out of a
dysfunctional and troubled home life and a has a toxic older
boyfriend who disrespects her, mistreats her, and threatens to leave

her. She is now pregnant and told by the state she cannot have an
abortion under any circumstances. She is adamant she does not
want to carry the baby of her abusive boyfriend, as that relationship
is going down the tubes. She cannot imagine being tied to him in
some way for the rest of her life. She has no one she can turn to
for help. She knows that she will be homeless next month with an
eviction notice and nowhere to go. Any hope to get or keep a job
while pregnant is out the window as is any training or education to
better herself.
Feeling hopeless and trapped, she contemplates suicide. Kayla

shoplifts to get money to buy more drugs to deaden her pain and
despair. She is not mentally, emotionally, psychologically,
financially, or temperamentally prepared to have or raise a child.
But Amy Coney Barrett is fine with “forced coercion” and the idea
that adoption should be the easy solution and somebody else will
take the baby off her hands. It is a denial of reality. This comes
from a female super-achiever judge with immense privilege who
can, of course, easily relate to someone like Kayla and her
circumstances.
Adoption is not one size fits all. Every situation is different,

and every woman should have choices, not commands and
mandates from state governments that know nothing about her
life. Not even from another female Supreme Court justice wearing
a skirt under a black robe.
Despite anti-abortionists who promote adoption for forced

birth pregnancies, it is not the answer to their hopes. If it were,
there would be no foster children and no babies in institutions,
regardless of their situations or conditions. Unfortunately, there
are not hundreds of thousands of other remarkable Amy Coney
Barrett’s with the love, commitment, and vast money resources to
do the same and adopt children of all ages. Not in the real world.
After all, it doesn’t affect or impact her, a devout woman.
Apparently, this is God’s will. But Barrett sided with her
reactionary male colleagues to decide against geographically

trapped women by taking their choice away and ruling in favor of
the all-knowing, all-powerful, wise state dominated by male
politicians. She is complicit.
WHY FOSTER CARE?

It is a great mystery. Where are the anti-abortionists when it
comes to America’s foster care program? Indeed, those who claim
to be champions for the unborn with protests and vigils seem to
have a blind spot for those children who are already here. Logic
would follow that each child who came into the child welfare
system would be immediately whisked away to be cared for, loved,
and raised by pro-life advocates. With roughly 400,000 kids in
foster care, it would be amazing if every church in America (over
380,000 of them according to the National Congregational Study
survey), made it their mission to take in just one child with a
responsible member stepping up. Mega-sized churches could take
in a dozen or more. Every child wants love, security, and someone
who cares.
The impact would be phenomenal. There would be no need

for a government foster program except for administrative
purposes to facilitate the paperwork, background checks, and
quick transfers. The adoption process by these churches could be
streamlined and efficient. No one would benefit more than special
needs babies, toddlers, pre-teens, and high schoolers. It would be
life-transforming. While forced birth activists fight for the fetus,
they rarely look over their shoulder at the hundreds of thousands
of children in dire straits in foster care. Yes, it is a mystery. Perhaps
those antiabortionists concerned so passionately for the fetus are
not pro-life or pro-child after all? But negative passions will run
high in a city council meeting in opposition to a “group home” of
foster adolescents residing in their neighborhood in fear of lower
home values, crime, and assorted “troubles.” Some of those
opposed to such a group home will be anti-abortionists and strong

believers in NIMBYISM (not in my backyard).
It is true that a portion of those children in foster care are there

temporarily (so it is hoped) for eventual family reunification with a
parent who has a substance abuse problem, has been incarcerated,
or is going through some medical or psychiatric challenge. The
median age of a foster kid is six and a half years old. It is also true
that many kids are taken in by extended relatives with varied results.
Unfortunately, many kids are recycled back and forth and shuffled
between foster homes causing major developmental issues. The
average stay is about 16 months. Over 20,000 kids will age out of
the system every year, most at the age of 18 and mostly left on their
own with no support. Half of them will show no earnings four
years later. Only 3% of all foster kids will ever obtain a college
degree.
Consider that one in five former foster youth nationwide is

homeless at the age of 18, and 70% of female former foster youth
are pregnant by their 21st birthday. 50% will never finish high
school. 25% will become involved with the criminal justice system.
They are seven times more likely to suffer depression and five
times more likely to suffer anxiety. A recent report from
ReadyNation, a coalition of business leaders, estimates that
insufficient care in the United States costs 122 billion dollars
annually in lost earnings, productivity, and revenue.
If ever there were a mission field for Christians, anti-

abortionists, and others, the challenges of traumatized foster kids
in the here and now should be a pressing priority. Some churches
preach what is known as the prosperity gospel, promising God’s
blessings, mainly financial and good health, in return for
supporting the church with their tithes and offerings. Perhaps they
could share their prosperity by fostering and adopting kids in great
need. But then again, that’s not their focus. Yet, they may be able
to volunteer and squeeze in an afternoon or two picketing an
abortion clinic. We did our part. Our work is done! We will pray
for God’s blessing upon all forced birth children and foster
children.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 18 CIVIL RIGHTS | 168
CHAPTER 18
CIVIL RIGHTS
Could abortion become a big civil rights issue? Since money is

always pro-choice, it could be argued that the denial of abortion
for poor women is a denial of their constitutional rights against
discrimination based solely on their financial condition. The
argument would be that the middle class and the wealthy are not
subject to the rules of their own restrictive states against abortion
because they can just travel to other states or out of the country to
access the reproductive health care they need.
Civil rights are popularly conceived in the public’s mind as the

struggles of African Americans and other minorities for equality,
along with women’s historical second-class citizenship. Perhaps
poor women can argue that Roe was a basic right taken away from
them that disproportionately affects them due to past historical
economic bias, whether based on class, gender, or race.
Due to financial status alone, they are denied fairness and

justice. Their argument that money talks, b.s. walks, sums up their
dilemma. They will argue not in the abstract but in reality, that if
they had access to a few thousand dollars, they too could afford to
travel out of state. They could pay for hotels and travel expenses,
take time off from work, pay for abortion services, and return
home just like all the other women with resources can do. It would
be an interesting civil rights issue based not on race, not on sex,
not on religion, but purely on class, on socio-economic realities
affecting a most private, intimate, and personal issue.
Some will correctly argue that this line of reasoning based on

“class” could apply to a range of issues dealing with inequalities
across the American experience and is not a recognized protected
group under the law. If so, it would open up a whole can of worms
arguing over housing, education, and health care based on money
alone. Such a counterargument is true, and courts would reject
such a line of reasoning based solely on money.
However, bodily autonomy and reproductive health care

based solely on gender and biology are so fundamentally different,
private, and personal as to call for an exception. Pushing unwanted
“forced births” only upon poor women and no one else is
inherently unfair and unjust since the money to travel can make all
the difference. For many marginalized women, forced birth is a
financial death sentence stuck in intergenerational poverty.
Another argument could be that the Supreme Court denies

equal protection of the law based on sex and biology by completely
exempting all men from the discussion because they cannot get
pregnant or have an abortion. The court is singling out women and
unfairly targeting them. Men are not even part of the discussion.
In this case, the word “equal” in equal protection only applies to
half the population. Therefore, it arbitrarily discriminates against
women based solely on their sex. The same rationale would apply
to any law that only applied to short people under five foot two,
exempting everyone else who was taller, which would exclude
nearly all men. This would be patently unfair.
One strange irony for racists, who fly the “you will not replace
us” flag opposing immigrants and minorities who are also
conservative anti-abortionists, is that it is white women in better
socio-economic circumstances who are more likely to get an
abortion. Poorer minority women or recent immigrants who often
lack financial resources due to past and current discrimination are
at a distinct disadvantage. It should also be noted that none of
these bigoted militant men are having ten children with a wife or
partner, much less being able to provide for them. The main reason
is that they can’t find a woman who will comply and breed a brood!
In such fringe circles, that alone speaks volumes about a woman’s
desire to be in charge of her own fertility and not be a baby factory.
Some of these strident tough-guy males, full of bluster, struggle

with maintaining their own shaky personal relationships and will,
ironically, fail at even replacing themselves!
Supreme Court Justice Alito quickly dismissed an equal

protection argument with less than a minimal cursory defense by
saying that abortion laws should not carry a higher standard of
“strict scrutiny” based on sex and said Roe was not decided upon
it. He obviously does not want to go there. He hastily brushed away
an equal protection argument with a wave of his hand as
inconsequential. But this is sophistry on his part, grounded in
patriarchy, and a weasel argument to avoid the reality that only
women get pregnant and everything about abortion deals with sex
and women, not men, who get a pass. It does not pass the smell
test or the fairness test about equal protection. It does not treat
women equally nor protect them from an intrusive and
overbearing legislative state dominated by men or male Supreme
Court justices.
A FAIRY TALE: A SIGHT YOU WILL

NEVER SEE
Imagine in your mind for a moment a scenario of 500,000
conservative anti-abortionists flooding into Washington, D.C., to
protest against Congressional Republicans who do not adequately
support children. In this fairy tale, these committed Republican
protestors are demanding the reinstatement of enhanced childcare
monthly checks allowed to expire after the Covid-19 pandemic,
paid maternity leave for four months, universal 15-day paid sick
leave, universal health care for all children and young adults to age
26, including all pregnant women for three years (pre and post
pregnancy) who are not covered, and ample funds for paid
childcare for working mothers along with extra funds for children
with special needs.
These protestors also call for a minimum wage of 50% of the

median worker’s income in each state (note: state costs can vary
significantly, especially for housing) as a floor for struggling
mothers to provide for their kids and an annual COLA (cost-of-
living adjustment). Like most Republican protestors, they insist on
work with dignity, so they want the EITC (Earned Income Tax
Credit) tripled. They also demand more tax money to fund after-
school activities to keep kids off the streets. It’s all about babies
and children and America’s future that everyone pays lip service
to. The bill they want to be passed is called “The Children’s Pro-
Life Priority Act” on behalf of family values.
Many of these provisions would cost the government little if

demanded of employers, just as payroll taxes are required to be
shouldered by employers. Yes, employers would cry to high heaven
about inflation and the government trying to run them out of
business. They will point out (correctly) that prices of some goods
and services would naturally rise to offset their higher costs. But
equity for children is the end goal, conservative protestors
proclaim. Opponents would claim that employers would be forced
to lay off some workers to cut costs causing more unemployment
for working-class people. This is also true.
Large businesses will also threaten to offshore more jobs

abroad to cheaper countries and increase automation wherever
possible. This is also partly true. But these real threats to the
bottom line are also a bogus red herring excuse to do nothing.
More crying ensues with “We are businessmen, not social workers
raising money on behalf of kids. It’s not our problem.” Meanwhile,
conservative legislators will chime in unison, “We have no money!”
In response, these protestors are demanding that specific
“dedicated taxes” be raised to benefit children, paid mostly by the
rich and corporations that evade and duck their tax obligations by
weak IRS enforcement.
The issue is pro-life money for innocent children, not socialist

money for irresponsible adults. Organized leaders estimate such a
partial package to cover some of these costs to run over a hundred

billion dollars a year (roughly 1.65% of the federal budget and just
.04 of GDP) as a starting minimum and perhaps three times that
to be adequately funded.
Protest leaders demand meetings with Republican leaders,

firmly saying that family values must be the top priority. Babies and
children must come first, even before old people or defense
spending. Republican Congressmen begin to circle the wagons.
Calls from nervous Wall Street CEOs flood Congressional
switchboards crying over their bottom lines. Billionaires call in,
complaining they are overtaxed already and oppose such nonsense.
Pundits claim these protestors will bankrupt the country facing
huge deficits already. All of them will argue that capitalism is under
attack and rail against the idea of an adequate social safety net for
children as pie-in-the-sky-socialism. “I am not my brother’s
keeper,” taxpayers of all stripes will argue. Dark money flows into
mass advertising that is heavy on misinformation and disingenuous
in opposition. Power protects power.
Republican leaders will try to slow-walk a response and show

fake sympathy by shedding crocodile tears while arguing the
country cannot afford it and whining about deficits, inflation, and
the national debt. Their mantra favors less taxes, smaller
government, and fewer regulations. There simply are no funds for
bleeding heart programs that help children in a more meaningful
way. Sorry. Besides, parents should be personally responsible for
the children they bring into the world and not rely on the state,
despite forced birth mandates in many states that impact the lower
classes the most.
Behind closed doors, conservative legislators smirk and laugh

about a 100 or 300-billion-dollar price tag for children and mothers
as socialism running amuck and a budget buster that will wreck the
country. Not one of them will mention the more than 27 trillion
dollars (yes, trillion, with a T, and counting) of added debt to the
nation’s credit card that was approved by both Congressional
Republicans and Democrats on a host of other priorities just since

the year 2000. It should be noted that when Bill Clinton left office
in early 2001, at the dawn of the 21st Century, the national debt
was 5.6 trillion dollars, with a budget surplus no less. America has
quintupled the national debt. Taxes are anathema to everyone. No
one wants to pay taxes. Everyone wants a credit card they are not
responsible for.
Anti-abortionist protestors will push back on the political

excuses that the country does not have the money but still has lots
of money for big tax cuts, pandemic rescues, tax subsidies, tax
loopholes, and incentives for rich people and corporations. In
addition, special interests manipulate an incomprehensible IRS tax
code riddled with holes like Swiss cheese and sweetheart deals, all
on borrowed money. But now, suddenly, the cupboard is bare.
Pro-life advocates and others will also ask how other countries can
provide more for their kids than we do, the greatest country in the
world.
Again, in this fairy tale, anti-abortionists are demonstrating to

show they are pro-life, pro-woman, pro-mothers, pro-children,
and pro-babies. Evangelicals are leading this crusade for the
“Children’s Pro-Life Priority Act” in trying to raise serious tax
funds to help children, especially those “forced births” they have
championed with restrictive laws on abortion. In a shocking and
surprising show of force, ten thousand pastors and priests are
leading the charge proclaiming Christian values and leading prayers
on the steps of the Capitol. They want to show that after getting
Roe overturned, they want to spend the majority of their time
protecting all children, not just a fetus. They raise their Bibles in
the air by the thousands believing this is what Jesus would approve
of by caring for the children and mothers who cannot do it alone.
OK, you can wake up now. Remember, that was just a fairy
tale. It’s a sight you will never see.
SHOW ME THE MONEY

People in the anti-abortion movement hate talking about
money. It is a personal affront that makes them very defensive
about a sensitive topic. They fervently argue that on a moral issue
like abortion, there should not be any discussions or distractions
about money. Don’t muddy the waters with such trivial
considerations when stacked up against the killing of innocent
fetuses. How a baby born into poverty will survive, much less
thrive, is a question for the future and for others to figure out. Not
my problem.
People will fight tooth and nail over money. Everyone,

without exception, has an opinion about money. How money is
spent, no matter the amount, is often a fight. Determining between
wants, needs, desires, and priorities is a minefield of conflict,
negotiation, threats, and resentments.
But it is exponentially more difficult if my money is taken from

me and then given to help “them,” regardless of whoever the
undeserving “them” group may be. “I am against redistribution of
my money, including helpless newborns, that have nothing to do
with me. Those women should not have gotten pregnant in the
first place. I will not support dumb and irresponsible mothers.”
A song by Darrell Bailey, a singer-songwriter, features lyrics

about living paycheck to paycheck, which is a reality for millions.
Recession or depression
It all sounds the same to me
On TV the experts try to tell us
It’s temporary for you and me
But in the meantime, there ain’t no money
For the little man in the Land of the Free
When you’re living paycheck to paycheck
The hard times, they come free
But the song lyrics talk about “the little man,” an average Joe,
struggling mightily to keep his head above water. Instead, try
imagining the same words in light of a single woman who has just
learned of her unplanned pregnancy. If she does not have family
or resources to fall back upon, she really knows what hard times
are all about. She is stranded and on her own. But let’s not talk
about money. Nor the fact that her newborn baby, with meager
help, is disadvantaged in a hundred ways from their start in life on
the highway of life. An innocent baby cries out to the deaf
politicians in restrictive states to “Show me the money. Show me
you really care.”
WHY? WHY? WHY? EXPLAIN!

EXPLAIN! EXPLAIN!
People love a good mystery. People like solving puzzles and
riddles, while a mysterious enigma attracts others drawn to
conundrums. Millions of people enjoy trying to solve crossword
puzzles. Math geeks love complicated math equations that actually
work and make sense.
But here is one of the biggest “why” questions when

considering the abortion issue. Outside of a few exceptions, why
are nearly all the states with the most restrictive abortion laws
providing the least government support for children? This is an
indictment against their pro-life credentials. These stingy state
legislators rail against abortion but act like Scrooge regarding
financial support policies for children. They should be the leading
engines of change but are more often the caboose. But this is not
a discussion they want to have about money and financial support
for children. They hide.
You would think that the self-proclaimed pro-life advocates

would demand their state to be one of the most generous in
support of forced births and their mothers. You would think that
they would insist that their state be a role model in benefits,

outreach, care, and concern for all their babies and children. You
would think that “baby bonds” would be demanded to provide for
a college education down the road for forced birth babies of
working mothers. You would think that state legislators who
deprive women of free agency over their bodies would be
clamoring to provide extra revenue for children and vie to be
among the top five most generous of all fifty states. You might
even think there would be pride in being in first place in the entire
country to show their true devotion to the young and vulnerable.
But you would be wrong. One should never confuse harsh rhetoric
with money.
One could also imagine that following the overturning of the

Roe decision, such a restrictive state would show its authentic and
genuine concerns for its young by righteously demanding that they
can’t wait and must pass new state taxes immediately. New laws
protecting the mother, the fetus, and the baby are urgently
proclaimed, and it must be done now. It is the right moral thing to
do. Well, don’t hold your breath waiting for this to happen.
The A.E. Casey Foundation publishes an annual list of all fifty

states regarding the status of child welfare, comprising health,
community, poverty, education, and various state programs that
benefit children. The top ten best states for children’s welfare are:
#1. Massachusetts, #2. New Hampshire, #3. Minnesota, #4. Utah,
#5. Vermont, #6. New Jersey, #7. Connecticut, #8. Nebraska, #9.
Iowa, and #10. Wisconsin. Post-Roe, only in Wisconsin was
abortion considered illegal, but a significant change election
composition of their Supreme Court appears that Wisconsin will
soon uphold abortion rights. Utah moved to phase out clinics in
favor of hospitals with new regulations. Nebraska has gone to a
12-week limit. Iowa passed a six-week limit but is in a holding
pattern with court challenges. These top ten states (a majority of
pro-choice states) are doing their best to aid children.
The bottom ten worst states for children’s welfare were: #41.
Alaska, #42. West Virginia, #43. Arkansas, #44. Arizona, #45.
Texas #46. Alabama, #47. Nevada, #48. Mississippi, #49.
Louisiana, #50. New Mexico. Only Alaska, Nevada, and New
Mexico were pro-choice states. Of these “bottom ten states,”
seven are in restrictive abortion states. The real question is, why
are these seven states hiding in the national basement with the
lights off and failing to prioritize proper financial support for
children a priority? Why? Why? Why?
You would think these state legislators would wear their hearts
on their sleeves and challenge one another to do everything
financially possible for “the little ones” and their mothers whom
they profess to champion. Wrong again. They are not increasing
taxes, changing policies, or re-ordering priorities to drastically
increase funding for children. A few lonely voices promote some
tokenism funding, so their state does not look so bad, but nothing
substantive or revolutionary. Rather, their primary concern is
coercion over women and passing new laws extending police
powers (potentially with possible additional funding) to harass
women and demand prosecutors bring cases against the most
vulnerable for intimidation purposes.
As humans, we all like explanations for WHY questions. But

in this situation, we are still left with the question of WHY, with
no answer. Except perhaps, hypocrisy has no limits.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 19 WHO IS HAVING ABORTIONS? AND WHY? | 178
CHAPTER 19
WHO IS HAVING ABORTIONS?
AND WHY?
We live in an age of statistics and analytics. Sports,

demographics, polling, and policy decisions are sliced and diced
when considering a mountain of data. Still, misconceptions and
misinformation abound in the public mind.
It is not uncommon for many people, when thinking about

abortion, to conjure up in their mind a young teenage girl who
unintentionally got pregnant, is not married, and is in no position
to care for a baby and decides to have an abortion. But they would
be wrong. Rarely, if ever, does the visual of a woman who is already
a mother come first to mind. Yet, over half of all abortion requests
come from mothers with children. This comes as a shock and a
surprise to many who do not have this mental image of a mother
being the most likely candidate for an abortion. Yet, mothers
already know the score when they take stock of their current
situation. As mothers, they have no illusions about the challenges
children bring to a family, married or single. They are experts
already.
Statistical information surrounding abortion is always open to

some interpretation. Because of its personal nature, reported
information can often be incomplete. Most of the polled details on
this subject come from the government CDC (Centers for Disease
Control) agency, the Pew Research Center, a polling outfit, and the
Guttmacher Institute for reproductive rights. Most of the
information presented here is a general composite of the “big
picture” when profiling the varying aspects of abortion. It is not
comprehensively definitive and can change over time.
So, what is the profile of women seeking an abortion? Over

half of all abortions are sought by mothers who already have
children. Of all abortions, close to 60% are women in their
twenties, and about 30% are women in their thirties, with less than
10% being teenagers, a huge drop from the past. About 4% are
obtained by women in their forties. (Note: All rounded numbers
do not add up to 100%). 92% of all abortions take place in the first
13 weeks of pregnancy, with another 7% in the 14–21-week
gestation period. The main reasons women cited for having an
abortion were (Note: More than one answer often given)
40% financial/affordability
30% in a bad or unsupportive relationship
25% wanted to focus on their current children
20% worried about education or career opportunities
20% felt they were emotionally unprepared to bear a child
12% cited they wanted a better life for their baby than they
could provide at their current stage of life.
5% influenced by friends or family
2% of abortions can be attributed to medical issues such as
ectopic pregnancies, stillbirths, or compromised health
factors of a pregnant woman
The ratio of unmarried to married women having an abortion

runs about 6 to 1, which attests to the difficulty of single
motherhood. Most women were considered poor, with class being
the dominant theme since higher-income women had better access
to health care and contraception. As many as 45% of all
pregnancies are unplanned. The estimated ratio of abortions to all
pregnancies is about 20%.
This overview of abortion data should humble anyone trying

to decipher the puzzle of cause and effect, rationale, and reality. It
is easy to moralize and make blanket judgments from an easy chair.
The truth is that life is messy, and everyone’s life journey is
different. Grace, humility, and compassion are in order with the
profound recognition that no one has all the answers. But surely,
when all is said and done, women should be given respect and
agency over their lives. Yet, many states claim they cannot trust
women and must control any woman who gets pregnant. The state
knows best, and women don’t.
ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIPS
Domestic abuse is the number one way a woman can get
murdered, by far. No contest. Husbands and boyfriends are far
more deadly to women than random attacks on the street. Even
cops hate going on no-win domestic family calls since one out of
every twelve police deaths result from a family situation in crisis
gone terribly wrong.
Ask any family law judge who sits on the bench and does
family law cases. Do they have stories to tell! They will relate stories
of such dysfunctional individuals and families so as to cause
people’s hair to stand on end. “Really, that’s hard to believe,” some
will utter in incredulous amazement upon hearing such stories.
They will try to wrap their heads around plot lines so “out there”
that they would be rejected for a soap opera or movie as being
completely implausible and incomprehensible.
Nearly every family judge has had the experience of a battered

and abused wife or girlfriend with two kids begging the judge not
to put her partner in jail for assault and battery on her. The
victimized woman even tries to take some of the blame off of him
to hopefully get the judge to go easy. She promises with as much
sincerity as she can that there will not be a next time and things
will get better. She promises they will go to court-appointed
counseling, even though her husband has continuously skipped
out and failed to go in the past.
Despite being beaten up so badly and being in the hospital for

serious injuries, she will plead with the judge not to impose a
restraining order on him. She expresses her desire to be able to go
back home with her significant other because, “Yes, judge, I know
he is bad for me, but I love him.” This is surely her desire for hope
over experience considering the trauma of their past and present
history.
The judge has all too often seen this movie before, and the
ending is not good. Yet, each case is different in some ways, and
trying to bring some semblance of order out of a chaotic family
situation is challenging, to say the least. Dealing with a man who
cannot control his anger and rage and is often under the influence
of alcohol or drugs is a recipe for disaster.
Life and death could hang in the balance. It boils down to a

balancing test. First and foremost is the duty to protect children
from danger. Then the female’s welfare is next. The abuser comes
in last, with the hope of change, help, and reconciliation, even if
unlikely. Encompassing all these factors is the goal of society and
the law to keep families intact as much as humanly possible. All
things considered, the judge tries to err on the side of the family,
despite serious flaws.
Often a judge will pick up in the wife’s voice the abject fear of
being abandoned and being completely incapable of financially or
emotionally supporting her kids on her own. She rationalizes she
has no choice, and so it is a request to go back into the fire pit of
a family nightmare that does not work.
All the pathologies are plain to see. Mental cruelty,

psychological manipulation, demeaning humiliation, and no self-
worth are evident even without physical violence. It is like a
straitjacket that a woman cannot free herself from such an
oppressive man. She is so traumatized that she comes to believe
the lies that all the troubles in the relationship are her own fault,
blaming herself, which perpetuates the cycle. It is often observed
that some dysfunctional people live in a world so convoluted that
they do not know what normal reality is.
The wife then reveals to the judge that she is pregnant and
pleads with the judge to grant her an abortion despite living in a
restrictive anti-abortion state. She is worried and distraught. She
says she is about seven weeks along and can’t cope at all. The judge
muses to himself that these are among the last people on Earth
who should be raising another child. It would be tantamount to
child abuse in a dysfunctional home on steroids. It’s highly
questionable whether they have the skills or temperament for the
lousy job they are doing with their current traumatized kids. The
judge rolls his eyes and gives a deep sigh, asking himself how
Solomon would attempt to rule on what is best for all parties
involved, especially the children living in a nightmarish home.
The judge then speaks to her in a deep, authoritative voice

regarding her request to grant an abortion and says, “I am so sorry
I cannot help you. The state has decided that I am not allowed to
even utter a word about what course of action you may want to
consider. I do not want to lose my judgeship or possibly be
disbarred, so your request for an abortion is denied. So, with that
said, good day to you. Please try to have a good life. I am referring
you to child services and will await their report on the issue of what
is best for your current kids. Your husband will be remanded for
three weeks’ jail time for assault until our next hearing.” The
woman starts shaking and sobbing uncontrollably, begging the
judge to reconsider her abortion request. The judge ignores her
and barks, “Bailiff, call the next case on the docket?”
COST OF RAISING A CHILD TODAY

Planning for a baby is expensive. Set aside all the time, energy,
worry, sleepless nights, and challenges a baby or child brings into
a parent’s life, finances are always relevant. According to the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, the cost was $236,000 to raise a child
to age eighteen in 2015. Since then, with higher inflation, a more
recent Brookings study showed that the number has crossed over
$300,000 today and continues to rise. That’s a lot of dough, anyway

you look at it.
An additional child comes in at a lower cost with shared

resources such as housing and hand-me-downs. Lower-income
households can’t compete and are forced to spend far less simply
out of necessity and circumstances. But even at half this amount
struggling families still spend a far greater proportion of their
income on their children. And it should be noted that these figures
do not include a college education just to keep up with the 21st
century, which is a whole other financial discussion. Nor does it
figure expenses for a young adult who may still be living at home
past the age of 18, who is either in school, working to save money
to move out, or another young adult playing video games in the
basement all day. Ka-ching. Ka-ching.
Roughly 40% of young adults between 18 and 29 still live at

home with their parents. Then there are the complicated finances
of divorced parents who remarry and start a second family (mostly
fathers) who are financially pressured trying to support two
families and often fail. Kids are invariably short-changed, and
emotional baggage for all involved is not easily managed. Money is
always an issue. In the 18th and 19th centuries, kids were a financial
asset on the farm. They could work and contribute. Today, they
are the opposite, a huge financial liability to a family with many
needs, much less wants.
Make no mistake. Money alone should never be THE factor

when a pregnant woman is considering an abortion. Otherwise,
only the rich, wealthy, and middle class could afford a child. But
while money should not be the deciding factor, it most certainly is
A FACTOR. This is called reality when living in the real world.
And the majority of women seeking an abortion already have
children. They understand simple math, that with stretched,
meager resources, they can provide more for one child than for
two, two kids better than three, and so on. In running the race of
life, no matter where parents are on the socio-economic spectrum,
they know they can put more love, attention, resources, and money
into fewer rather than many offspring. Their kids will have an
advantage.
A COMMON STORY
The following is not about what is right or what is wrong. It is
just the unvarnished truth about the facts of life. So, get out your
calculator and make the numbers work. You are a 21-year-old
white female with a high school education working full-time in a
restaurant for $15 an hour, including tips. You take no government
assistance because you have your pride, despite not qualifying
anyway. You are not lazy, but you quickly realize that society labels
you “the working poor.”
Despite being employed and working full time, you struggle

financially. Your yearly income is about $28,000 after payroll taxes,
or about $2,350 (net) a month. You receive no paid sick days or
paid holidays and have no retirement plan. And of course, there is
no paid maternity leave for any of the predominately female staff.
There is no health care benefit either, which is a nightmare you
must work out on your own. You vow to yourself you just can’t
afford to get sick. Your shift work can change all the time,
including nights, weekends, and holidays. There is little rhyme or
reason to scheduling, making it difficult to plan ahead.
School was never your thing as a bored C+ student in high

school, but now you are having second thoughts about your future.
But you quickly put those thoughts aside as you don’t have the
money to attend college even if you decided to. Plus, you are
unsure about choosing a college major and don’t want to make any
mistakes.
Likewise, taking on huge college debt scares you. Dave, one of

your cousins, never finished college but owes over $30,000 in loans
that he can’t pay back. He is stuck. You figure that even if you can
qualify for some special program for low-income students and

your tuition is covered in full, it does not cover living expenses.
How would you live? Even a free night class you took at the local
community college caused problems with missing classes because
of your changing job schedule.
You come from a single-parent home with two younger

siblings in a crowded two-bedroom apartment. Your divorced
mom is a good person and loves you but is overwhelmed with
work, life in general, and younger siblings with their own demands
and challenges. Your dad is not in the picture and lives in another
state, remarried with two kids, and is not in a position to help. You
are 21 and need to get your own place for your own sanity and to
relieve some of the stress for your mom, which will allow extra
room for your fast-growing younger siblings. Housing prices are
through the roof these days, and you are sure you will never be
able to afford one in your lifetime, considering you have no special
skillset or higher education.
Presently, it looks like being a waitress until you die is your

future or until you are unemployed when the robots start serving
the food. It is depressing to think you have hit the ceiling already
at 21. This may be as good as it gets. You are a white girl and have
heard stories among minority girls you work with at the restaurant
in much tougher circumstances than yours. Life is not fair.
Tasha, an African American girl and good friend you work

with, is just like you but started college right away after high school.
She already completed her first year before dropping out because
her mom has been diagnosed with cancer and couldn’t work while
going through chemotherapy. Tasha has a younger brother, and
her mom’s health future is uncertain. Her dad passed away four
years ago. Tasha started a GoFundMe page for her mom to help
with medical expenses. (Note: One-third of all GoFundMe
requests are for medical costs and two-thirds of bankruptcies are
due to crushing medical bills).
You and Tasha are both 21 and feel trapped. However, both
of you can dream and each of you buys a lottery ticket every week,
believing it is the only way out and up, even though they say your
odds are many times better being struck by lightning. You asked
your boss for a raise, and he said times were tough, with thin
margins in the restaurant business and still trying to recover from
COVID losses and high inflation, which may take many years to
stabilize, or so he argues. He offered you a small raise of fifty cents
an hour in three months, nervous he may lose you. With inflation,
you figure over the next year that you may be earning less even
with the token raise.
OK, calculator in hand as you set about your budget. You live
in a midsize town in the Midwest and make $2,350 (net) a month.
Rents have been skyrocketing in recent times. You rent a modest
one-bedroom apartment for $1,200 a month and consider yourself
lucky to have found it.
You can’t believe that in New York or L. A., the rent may
require your whole check and you would still be short. Your 25-
year-old apartment building is nothing fancy or special, but it is a
gated complex and seems safe. However, the rumor mill in the
apartment complex is that the landlord will soon be raising rates
by $150 a month to keep up with inflation and other costs and to
be more in line with market rents since housing is at a premium.
Ouch! But nobody really knows. It’s still just gossip.
You are still stuck if you decide to move with rents rising
everywhere around town. You could save a little by moving to the
wrong side of town in a crummy neighborhood, but it would not
be safe or smart for a young single girl. Getting a roommate and a
two-bedroom apartment can cost around $2,000 a month in the
surrounding area, and so you are not much better off splitting the
rent, finding a compatible roommate, and losing your privacy.
Besides, you know of girls who got married or moved out

quickly, taking another job, leaving the remaining roommate stuck
with a signed lease she can’t afford to pay. Throw in utilities of $50
a month that you try to use sparingly and another $50 for a cell
phone plan that is bundled with home internet service, and you are
at $1,300 in monthly expenses for the month.
You buy a new but modest and relatively inexpensive car with
a $1,000 down payment, paying $350 a month on credit on a
longer-term finance plan. By buying new, you do not have any
maintenance issues, as friends have related horror stories about a
thousand-dollar repair bill and are still stuck driving an old junker
jalopy kept together with wire and duct tape running on a prayer.
They then pray they never get stranded with a breakdown at night.
You can only afford a bare-bone limited liability car insurance

policy that costs you another $100 a month. Gas prices are up and
down, and you try to bum rides off friends when you can, but you
still spend about $150 a month on gas. You considered forgoing a
car to save money on payments, gas, and insurance, but public
transportation is spotty where you live, and it’s scary late at night
for a swing shift. Having to make one transfer at a lonely bus stop
is stressful. Plus, you must walk nearly two miles from your
apartment to the bus stop in rain, snow, and heat, even late at night.
It does not seem practical or safe.
On the bus, you have already experienced sexual harassment

and verbal profanities from a few belligerent homeless men who
smelled of alcohol, body odor, and urine who were really scary, if
not crazy. On one occasion, you were propositioned, and another
time someone tried to steal your purse, which was only prevented
when another kind male passenger intervened and came to your
rescue. Some homeless men ride and sleep on the bus all day as
their own personal shelter. You have $450 left. You need to eat to
stay alive and try to budget at the grocery store. You can get a few
free meals at the restaurant where you work as a small perk but can
spend no more than an average of $5 dollars a meal on food (30
days x three meals a day or, 90 meals a month). If you treat yourself
to one meal at McDonald’s on the weekend, that is your daily

allowance.
You are a good person and do not smoke, drink, or do any

drugs. You laugh to yourself, contemplating the fact that you have
no money even if you want to take up these vices. You realize you
are dead broke. You even gave up coffee. Your money all went to
rent, utilities, car, and food with nothing left over. But what about
some clothes, toiletries, furnishings, odds and ends, maybe even a
movie or the small miscellaneous items that come up in life
common to everyone? The basics. Nope, can’t do it. You start
talking out loud to yourself, repeating several times, “I have no
money! I have no money!”
Even though you are single and have no other obligations

except taking care of yourself, you seem to struggle to even do that.
In addition, you keep popping aspirin because of a painful tooth
that needs a root canal that a dentist says will be around $1,000
upfront. You plead with the dentist and feel lucky he will take
payments. Still, the last thing you need is another $100 monthly
bill you can’t afford on your already overdrawn credit card. You
have already lost three days of (unpaid) work this month because
of a bad flu bug that kept you in bed, and your car payment is
coming due next week.
You do not have family, immediate or extended, that you can

call upon to help out since they are financially struggling
themselves, even though you are lucky they love you. You have no
other resources. Even the bank sends you threatening letters about
closing your account because your balance is below $500. You are
depressed. You are worried you may become homeless if the
landlord follows through with the rumored rent increase. You can’t
burden your mom further who is already in credit card hell.
Working an extra shift at the restaurant is sometimes possible, and
the extra money comes in handy, but other girls with more
seniority mostly take them when available. They need the money
too. Besides, you are running on your feet all day, and it is
exhausting.
Older co-workers in their early forties are always complaining

about foot and leg problems. One was fired for being hobbled and
not keeping up. You tried to console her when finding her crying
in the ladies’ room, terrified about finding another job. You envy
an office worker who has a chair, a simple thing like a chair. You
have a lot of anxiety. Life is tough, and the future is certainly not
bright. You are only 21, and already you feel like a hamster on the
wheel going nowhere. You start looking for a second job and can’t
stop constantly thinking about money. It crushes your spirit, but
you are young and soldier on.
Then, later that day, you learn that you are pregnant. Now you
feel like the whole world has collapsed in on you completely. You
know it was not planned at all! You are not promiscuous and have
values. It just kind of happened out of the blue by mistake. An old
boyfriend you hadn’t seen for a while came by for a visit. You were
lonely and started gently making out on the couch while watching
TV, and one thing led to another. You regret it tremendously.
You dreamed about having a family someday, but not like this.
You are angry that you let this happen. You blame yourself while
heaping on the guilt. But the state you live in says you can’t get an
abortion. A tiny part of you may even sympathize with that
position. But reality is reality, and talk is cheap. No way is your
home state going to give you $300,000 to raise this baby. No way.
The state where you live is so cheap that there is not even any
standard childcare available. How will you work? You can’t sleep.
You cry a lot. You mutter to yourself, “What kind of a life can I
offer a baby when I can’t even take care of myself working full
time? Whatever am I going to do?” You figure the state does not
care about you, only the embryo you are carrying. You worry that
if you express any reservations to anyone, the cops may show up
at your door. The clock is ticking every day. At work, morning
sickness has a few of your observant female friends asking what’s

going on. You don’t want your boss to find out and can’t afford to
take any more days off without pay. Depression and anxiety are
your new companions all the time. You begin to look for solutions
out of state.
WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE

ROAD
Across town, there is Jennifer, married, struggling with four
kids already, and now surprised to learn she is pregnant with a fifth
one. Working full time, she can barely keep up working the
proverbial “double shift” of work and home. She is tired and
exhausted all the time. She is mentally tired of a demanding job
and being a mom and wife. She would love to have just a little
break away from the circus of life. But that is a fantasy. She loves
her kids dearly and appreciates her husband, Sam, who tries to
pitch in wherever he can. She knows not all men are like that, but
the burdens still fall more on her. She feels lucky knowing that
other couples and single moms she knows personally from church
and work have things far worse than she does. She feels blessed.
But she still shakes her head, wondering how other women,
especially single mothers, cope without losing their minds and with
some not having anyone to lean on.
Adding an infant to all her work and parental responsibilities

may be the breaking point. She would have to quit her job to
maintain any sense of sanity. However, her husband, the good guy
he is, can’t support a family of seven on one salary. Finances are
tight already. They would probably be forced to sell their home and
move to a cheaper place in outer suburbia, with him commuting
long distances to work in horrible traffic, affecting his mental well-
being, which is another stressor. Money would be such a squeeze
that a lot of comforts and safety cushions Mom’s salary provided
would be gone. Many of the promises they made to their
four kids would have to be denied. Keeping her job and affording
childcare for a newborn is expensive and makes no financial sense
considering the financial needs of her other four kids. Jennifer
refuses to even think about funding college for her 13-year-old in
the near future. She is constantly encouraging him to keep his
grades up in hopes of a scholarship.
On top of all this, she is at a loss to explain how her birth

control failed her. Yes, she contemplates; nothing is 100%
effective, but she is a highly responsible person and mystified
about how this happened. Jennifer recognizes she lives in an anti-
abortion state which means no choice, which complicates matters.
Jennifer and her husband Sam are keeping this recent news
hush-hush between themselves. She knows that in her church,
which she loves, gossip can travel faster than a speeding bullet.
And she knows there is no place more judgmental than the pew or
a church potluck. There are always a few older hens in the church,
God love em,’ who are always more than happy to tell everyone
else how to live their lives. But she and her husband agree this is a
private matter and will tell no one else, not even close family
nearby. They make a private decision that she will travel to New
York to visit her sister for a week. No more is said.
Now consider the thousands of stories about spouse and child

abuse, drug addiction, mental illness, unemployment, disability,
teenage considerations, and physical and emotional maturity that
would fill up an entire library. Women who are facing every
condition and circumstance you can think of. Everyone in America
knows of stories like these, many of them personal first-hand
accounts or of close family members or friends. If, by bad luck or
fate, one is living in the wrong state that believes the paternalistic
state should control a woman’s body on these momentous
decisions, not herself, simply for being a female, it demonstrates
that an adult woman is not a responsible adult, but a child that
cannot be trusted. Big Brother needs to step in, take charge, and
decide for her. It makes sense, protecting herself from herself!
NOTHING SADDER IN THE WHOLE

WORLD
Is there anything sadder and more heartbreaking in the world
than an unwanted baby? Neglected, resented, or potentially abused
by frustration or ambivalence by a parent or others, such a baby
has no agency and is totally dependent on a distracted parent with
other problems of their own. Deprived of proper bonding, love,
care, and adequate attention, a baby’s future is already clouded and
troubled at the least and devastated at the worst. Baby bonding is
time that can never be recaptured. Child abuse or neglect may be
the ultimate sin.
Millions and millions of adults today are damaged goods

themselves, not all their own doing. Infanticide, some will be quick
to cry. Should we not just kill all children in distress or miserable
circumstances? Murder, genocide, and death panels will be the
knee-jerk response. Certainly, everyone recognizes that would be
immoral and criminal.
No child requested to be born. Not one of us among the eight

billion people on Earth got a vote. Two other people made that
choice for us. We were never consulted. We were never asked.
Whether we were conceived in love, lust, or by accident, it makes
no difference. Conceived by loving parents or the result of a
drunken one-night stand between two strangers in a cheap hotel is
beside the point. Whether planned, a surprise, or an afterthought,
every person in the world owes their existence to the merging of
sperm and egg by two adults they never met before, regardless of
the best or most appalling circumstances. That’s Biology 101.
Yet, everyone needs to be humble and acknowledge that major

life decisions are complicated when it comes to abortion. Morality
is sometimes relative. Is it moral to have twenty children? Is it
moral to have children that you do not prioritize with time,
attention, and love? Is it moral to have a child you cannot provide
for or don’t want? Morality separates a thief from a rapist. Both

are charged with felonies, but they are far from equal. Contrast a
burglar and a murderer. Both are wrong and sinful, but hardly in
the same category. Morality has its own issues of how we judge.
And in an imperfect world with imperfect people, each woman is
best placed to make her own call regarding abortion and her
situation. It should never be the impersonal and clueless state.
But in the abortion debate, little consideration is given by

forced birth advocates to the life trajectory of a fetus. It is
irrelevant. As long as they are born, that is all that matters, even if
they are abandoned or left to a miserable, depressing, and stunted
life as a baby, toddler, young child, and young adult, often leaving
trouble and drama in their wake. Some drug babies or alcohol
babies never recover from the actions of a mother during
pregnancy. Some children endure suffering in a hundred ways,
physically, emotionally, and mentally at the hands of dysfunctional
and troubled adults. There are no easy answers. It is hubris to
suggest all circumstances are the same.
Yet, many will quickly recite Horatio Alger’s stories of

individuals who overcame immense life struggles with Luck and
Pluck to make a meaningful life for themselves against all the odds.
We all love stories of the underdog being triumphant. These
storylines are always uplifting and inspirational. It is finding the
lucky four-leaf clover out in the field, which is why such stories are
told in the first place. But many also overlook the role luck plays
in life. Having an exceptional parent, even if poor, or a special
teacher, mentor, relative, or friend who opens doors is critical to
success. But these heartwarming stories are rare.
Others will be quick to point toward adoption and foster care

as an answer, but these have their immense challenges and
drawbacks and often fail far more than they succeed. There are
never enough parents for all the unwanted children who, in one
manner or another, all have special needs. Sadly, committed anti-
abortionists have failed to step up by the hundreds of thousands
to adopt or foster troubled children, thereby closing down the

foster care system.
Conservative forced birth advocates are not at the forefront of

demanding significant state financial responsibility for little ones.
It is an afterthought to them when considering life as a fetus.
Having sex is having sex, and conception is conception, and the
result is the result, and birth is birth, and sin is sin, and the law is
the law, and abortion is murder. There is nothing else to discuss.
End of story. Parenting issues and tax money for the long haul are
not our concern for poor mothers and their babies.
But each situation does not argue one way or the other about
whether an “unwanted” baby deserves to be born. It is just a
recognition of reality that nothing is clear-cut, and one rule does
not fit all. No one can refuse to acknowledge that the world is
complicated. We are not God. Some humility is required. God
certainly does not approve and sanctify every act of sexual
intercourse, much less celebrate. Surely not. But for such an
unfortunate baby, nothing in the world is sadder. A woman knows.
Who is better at making a tough and difficult decision about a
pregnancy? A woman or the “state?”
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 20 THE COUNTRY CAN’T AFFORD IT | 195
CHAPTER 20
THE COUNTRY CAN’T
AFFORD IT
Haven’t you heard? We, as Americans, can’t afford anything.

The country is broke! The national credit card is maxed out.
Financial Armageddon is just around the corner. Buy gold. Buy
more guns. Start prepping and hoarding food for the coming
mega-depression. We do not have any extra money lying around
for babies, children, and struggling mothers. So don’t even ask, as
we have other more pressing priorities. Kids and moms will just
have to muddle through the best that they can. Sorry, continue
praying for them.
According to the Poverty Center at Columbia University, in

2022, 3.4 million more children were in poverty than in 2021, when
the American Rescue Plan’s Child Tax Credit (CTC) expired. The
United Nations UNICEF report in 2020 showed that out of 38
advanced countries, the U.S. came in 36th regarding child poverty
and wellness. Almost dead last. That’s a sad commentary about
America since we think we provide generously to all our citizens.
It is even more tragic when considering innocent small children.
Every politician and organization have their list of priorities

and pet projects. The problem is always that there is never enough
money to go around to make everyone, or anyone, happy. It leaves
almost everyone grumpy and mad. Those funded programs always
feel short-changed and that it is never enough, while those who get
left out feel strongly that the system is rigged and blind to their
urgent needs. Arguing over who and what gets funded is further
complicated by ambitious politicians trolling for money from
special interests to turn into votes to stay in power by favoring

groups that will assist their fundraising campaigns.
The result is that Congress can’t (or rather won’t) balance a

budget and runs huge deficits year in and year out. When the
musical chairs of increasing debt (40, 50, 100 trillion-dollar national
debt?) will end, nobody knows. We all hate and oppose higher
taxes, so we add to our national credit card and cross our fingers.
It is like our own plastic credit card in our wallet or purse that
somehow does not feel like real money. I’ll pay it later someday.
Or, more likely, maybe leave all the bills to the grandkids.
The last president to reduce the national debt was Calvin

Coolidge. However, there is a common feeling among
irresponsible and lying politicians that whenever the music stops
sometime in the future, “I’ll be gone,” so don’t blame me. And
don’t be misled. It’s true that Democrats believe in taxing and
spending, while Republicans, who are allergic to taxation, instead
believe in borrowing and spending, just on different priorities.
When in power, hypocritical Republicans are bigger supporters of
tax cuts than balanced budgets. Republicans have never balanced
a budget in nearly a century, but they talk a good game. And the
American public is also complicit in wanting big government, but
on the cheap.
But there is another story about America. Despite the

pessimism among the public, America is still an amazing country.
An April 2023 Economist Magazine report points out that the
American economy is leaving the rest of the world “ever further in
the dust.” and that “America remains the world’s richest, most
productive, and most innovative big economy.” The country
suffers a labor shortage with historically low unemployment
(including minority unemployment).
Despite higher short-term interest rates, long-term rates are

lower, showing faith in the future. Recent reporting from
Bloomberg News and Foreign Affairs echoes these facts that
America is incredible on so many levels as to defy all the
handwringing about American perceptions of decline. America is

dominant in military might, technological innovation, cultural
influence, business entrepreneurship, world finance, and is still the
leader of the free world against authoritarians and dictators.
During the COVID pandemic, middle-class and upper-

middle-class families just socked away their stimulus checks since
travel, entertainment, sports, and stores were either closed or
greatly curtailed. Critics argued (correctly) that this wasteful
windfall without a “means test” that just showered “helicopter
money” to everyone regardless of need was a mindless boondoggle
giveaway and would help fuel inflation.
Both Presidents Trump and Biden were complicit with the

help of Congress. In addition, recent reports regarding tens
(perhaps hundreds) of billions of dollars lost to scammers and
fraud are exhibit number one for mistrust in government that
proves they struggle to organize a two-car parade. But it is also
used as an excuse to do nothing in the future. The correct answer
is to fix it. Why the government can’t temporarily borrow the best
and the brightest techies from the top fifty tech firms to stop
scammers is unfathomable. Such an idea is not rocket science.
But the most notable checks of all were the ones issued to
poor and working-class parents with minor children. With schools
closed and childcare unavailable, millions of moms quit their jobs
because they needed to stay home with their kids. They had no
choice. Plus, front-line workers, predominately working-class,
feared bringing home the virus to their families during the height
of the pandemic scare before vaccines became widely available. It
was a scary time. Over a million people died.
However, a remarkable thing happened. Child poverty was cut

nearly in half by most estimates. The most vulnerable part of the
population saw an uptick in their physical well-being. The main
difference, without getting into the weeds, was that checks were
sent out monthly, were fully refundable, and included everyone.
When Congress did not extend the program, 27 million children
would not qualify for the “full maximum” CTC because of income
requirements. This is because of low wages and unstable or part-
time jobs for those at the bottom of the income scale. Kids lose
out.
Attempts by Democrats in Congress were made to reinstate

the CTC checks, but in a gridlocked political standoff in
Washington, nothing was done. Incredibly, 448 economists,
including Nobel Laureates, signed a petition asking Congress to
retain and extend the CTC checks. Their letter included the fact
that robust research indicated that the expanded CTC positively
impacted the lives of millions of children in the U.S. by reducing
child poverty. They also cited an Urban Institute study that it
would reduce child poverty from 14.2% to 8.4%, a 40% decrease
representing 4.3 million children.
It should be noted that it is not easy getting economists to

agree on much of anything. The standard joke is to put three
economists in a room, and any two of them will only agree that the
third guy is an idiot. However, the Republican members of
Congress, who in lockstep opposed the childcare credit extension,
are classically trained in economics and are analytic savants, so they
easily dismissed the sage advice of 448 pesky economists. No
contest. Kids lost.
The old status quo was back. Ironically, despite rising

paychecks, many of the working poor are at risk of having less
purchasing power due to inflation than before the pandemic. With
rising rents, gas, and food prices, low-income workers are still
stressed over their future. And their children’s future.
The biggest mystery is where are the forced birth activists

proclaiming their pro-life bona fide concerns for the poor mothers
who struggle every day? Why are they not lobbying relentlessly on
behalf of Republicans to restore enhanced child tax credits and
monthly allowances?
Where are the protestors with signs, speeches, and banners

demanding that legislation supporting children be a top priority?
Where are the demands for higher taxes to pay for vulnerable
forced-birth babies and children? Where is the demand that
previous tax cuts that went mainly to the wealthy be rescinded and
instead be shifted to fund America’s babies and children? Where is
the demand to close sweetheart loopholes like “carried interest”
for hedge fund bigwigs and private equity to be shifted and used
to fund childcare? Where is the demand to end “step up”
inheritance rules sheltering billions of dollars from the rich to their
heirs who did nothing for it except win the egg and sperm lottery?
What happened to the “family values party” when it comes to
children?
94% of all members of Congress have a college degree, and

over half are millionaires. They just live in a different galaxy far, far
away in their cozy little bubble. Except for a small minority of
Congressional members, none of them struggled that much in life
for lack of money. Relating to the “underclass” in a real way,
requiring real understanding, much less empathy, is difficult, if not
impossible, for most of them.
A NEW ATTITUDE
There is a strong narrative that helping kids makes their
parents lazy and dependent on the state. So, to punish loser
parents, conservatives punish innocent kids as well. This would
especially apply to poor kids in the trailer park, the ‘hood, and the
‘barrio, mostly lost causes anyway, it is widely assumed. Yet not all
of these concerns on the part of conservatives are misplaced.
Conservatives are right to point out that there are selfish and
lazy parents who do not put their children’s interests first. It is true,
and it is tragic. But these people only represent perhaps 10% of
scofflaws. These are the stories that are highlighted on TV as
outlier examples of the pathologies of the underclass. Yes, they

deserve to be pilloried and mocked for aberrant behavior.
The average viewer is angry and upset (rightly so) that taxpayer
money is going to these takers, moochers, and losers. The natural
feeling is that these people, who are just ripping off those of us
who are responsible, don’t deserve a dime. As taxpayers, we are the
suckers for letting them get away with it. We will not stand for it.
We also intend to vote that way, even if these losers are a small
minority. It is a rational response.
Of course, shady backroom deals shielding corporations and

the wealthy from paying hundreds of billions of dollars in owed
taxes occur mostly out of sight behind closed doors. There is far
less outrage. It is the same difference between the con man who
tricked an elderly widower out of a million dollars in her spacious
living room and a street punk who assaulted a street vendor for
$100 bucks. We are often more outraged by the street punk
scenario on the evening news.
Republicans often preach about the value of having a work

ethic. They are right. Work has dignity, and those who are able-
bodied without dependents should not get government handouts.
Time out of the workforce erodes work skills, is harmful, and risks
creating dependency. The old maxim, “Idleness is the devil’s
workshop,” still rings true. But there is a world of difference if
children are involved. Privileged conservative politicians often fail
to appreciate complications.
There are two problems here. The first is lack of childcare,

which makes the work issue often a struggle, if not impossible, for
single working mothers. The second issue is when a mother works
a forty-to-fifty-hour week for very low wages, living paycheck to
paycheck and doing the best they can and still coming up short. It
requires a new mindset regarding the “safety net” for kids coming
from a rich and powerful country like the United States.
All children are stuck with the parents they have, for good or
bad. Yes, put in more oversight managers to weed out fraud and
abuse and structure plans with insight and accountability to stop
waste. However, innocent children who have no agency should
come first. It evokes an old Karen Carpenter song, Bless the Beasts
and the Children “For in this world they have no voice, they have no
choice.”
Republican Senator Mitt Romney of Utah did make several

proposals along the lines of checks sent to parents on behalf of
children after Covid. Among Republicans, it went nowhere.
Previously, Ivanka Trump also tried to promote more child-
friendly policies. No luck—not interested. Some will correctly
point out that there are already a host of government programs to
help the lower classes, from housing vouchers to food stamps. But
few things in life are simple. The waitlist for housing vouchers can
take years in some states before their parents (parent) can get a
place, if ever.
Rent-controlled apartments in many cities have long waiting

lists. And food stamps pay so little that a family is reduced to a
couple of dollars per meal (90 meals a month). Food banks are
often swamped to provide for families in need. School lunch
programs also help, but not during summer or school holidays.
And all parents know a growing teenager can eat one out of house
and home and is seemingly always hungry. Yes, things have
improved from generations past in governmental assistance, but
kids, in particular, need more help.
Yet, the 21st century has brought new challenges to an ever-

changing world, moving at warp speed. The nature of work itself
is undergoing great change, and the nuclear family unit is under
stress, even more so for single-parent households. A two-tiered
labor market is more evident every day. The educated and the
skilled are in demand with salaries and opportunities to match
while widening the chasm with the poor, immigrants, and much of
the working class. Meanwhile, a two-parent income family often
leaves a single-parent household in the dust in the rear-view mirror

across the economic spectrum.
For compassionate conservatives, they have no excuse not to

help the “working poor,” even if the accent is on working, which
jives with a coherent philosophy against creating dependency. It is
a reasonable and defensible position of “He who does not work,
does not eat,” in that, everyone can contribute to society no matter
how large or small. Like a young child, no one should get a free
allowance without doing any chores. But it is complicated, and the
devil is always in the details, especially when children are involved.
There is also a denial among conservatives of “making work

pay” when wages are too low to cover even the basics of life. Many
low-income families pay more than half their income on housing
and food alone, with no emergency funds for a family crisis. They
are stressed by constantly living on the edge. Big and small
businesses always favor low-wage labor, often with few or no
benefits. Off-shoring is also attractive, with cheaper labor and
fewer regulations. Automation and robots are even better. No one
goes on strike, demands a raise, or takes a lunch break. Robots can
also work around the clock with no benefits. Best of all, nobody
talks back to the boss! A perfect employee.
The concern for babies and child support is further challenged

by reality. The opioid crisis, alcoholics, incarcerated parents,
mental illness, parental COVID deaths, and dysfunctional parents
who can’t get their act together all result in millions of innocent
kids being raised by non-working grandparents, disabled relatives,
and others trying to step into the breach. Work requirements for
them make no sense. In a 2023 AARP magazine article entitled
“Called to Parent Again,” some 2.3 million grandparents are raising
their grandchildren, and over half of the grandparents are over
sixty years of age. Living on fixed retirement incomes, many
grandparents are spending from their own savings without
qualifying for any or little assistance because they do not fit a
standard family model. According to an April 8, 2023, article in the
Guardian newspaper, an estimated 245,000 children have lost one

or both parents who died of COVID-19 in the U.S. The
psychological toll on kids shunted around among adults due to
divorce, death, or substance abuse is profound.
It is unconscionable that Congress has a minimum wage of

$7.25, which equals about $14,500 a year. It was last raised in 2009
and has lost most of its purchasing power since then due to
inflation. Minimum wage jobs affect women the most and even
more so, poor women, whether white, black, Asian, or Latina. For
pious legislators extolling the dignity of work, the current reality is
a joke. Yes, individual states are stepping up to the plate and raising
their minimum wages, some to $15 an hour or more (but even
then, losing annually to inflation), but it is a hodgepodge effort.
Very few programs feature an annual automatic cost of living
adjustment (COLA) to avoid a loss of purchasing power.
The lack of federal standards for paid sick leave for low-
income workers, whether for themselves or a sick child, is morally
indefensible. Imagine a worker whose salary is $75,000 a year who
takes a week off recovering from the flu. With paid sick leave
benefits, the worker is still paid over $1,400 for the week. In
contrast, an hourly fast-food worker making $15 an hour without
benefits loses $600. They get nothing. And every dollar matters
more to them. Many working poor who have no benefits try to
work even when sick out of necessity because they need the
money, but also unintentionally infect their co-workers and the
public.
Lower-income parents also find it is easier working in a rip-

roaring economy than in a recession where marginal workers are
the first to get laid off. In small-town, red, rural America,
opportunities to work are even more scarce and offer meager pay.
Often, there is no work available at all. Erratic work schedules
involving nights or weekends are also problematic for parents
wherever they live regarding childcare. There can also be a
mismatch of skills—physical, mental, and educational—for
advertised jobs. Transportation commuting issues can also be an

issue for some workers. So, innocent kids in the toughest situations
suffer the most because of adult failings or circumstances beyond
anyone’s control.
There is always a subtext that the country can’t afford to be

giving away billions of dollars to poor people with kids. There is
an undercurrent of condescension (very understandable, part of
human nature) that says these poor people don’t deserve help and
a “what you sow, so shall you reap” mentality. While recognizing
special obstacles and circumstances in people’s lives, there is still
the strong feeling of “get off your butt and pull yourself up by your
own bootstraps, assuming you have boots. You may be down, but
you don’t need to stay there. Dig your way out. Get a grip. Get
moving. Your situation is mostly your own fault.”
Despite justified anger toward an irresponsible adult, things

are different if there is an innocent small child in their care. No one
said fashioning a coherent program would be easy. But it cannot
be used as an excuse to do nothing on behalf of kids. On the other
hand, even responsible and hard-working young American parents
in their twenties and thirties are struggling with a housing crisis
(unless they are lucky enough to get a loan from the bank of mom
and dad), resulting in high rents and housing beyond their means.
Some are still saddled with large school loans.
Beyond money, resulting psychological stresses interfere with

relationships between couples and their children. Money issues are
always contentious between spouses. Marriages are under stress,
and children can be demanding. Just keeping up with one’s own
peer group is a tough race to run. Numbers vary, but even among
the homeless, thousands have full or part-time jobs, but their pay
is so low they cannot change their living situation.
But back to the fetus. Forced birth activists must speak up and
make significant financial childcare provisions (i.e., taxes) to avoid
being big-time hypocrites. Requiring forced birth but making
insufficient financial arrangements for a newborn long-term, not
just short-term tokenism of a few months is inexcusable. It is their

responsibility to be among the loudest voices leading the charge
for children to be priority number one.
DOLLARS AND SENSE

In the business world, the words “human capital” has become
a favorite buzzword for the 21st century. Getting a competitive
edge often boils down to the quality of a company’s staffing. Who
is on your payroll can mean the difference between winning and
losing in a cutthroat marketplace. Personnel matters a great deal.
Among tech giants, the quest to hoard and retain top talent is
a never-ending battle. Recruiters in all fields are relentlessly trying
to “poach” star talent from rival organizations and descend like
locusts every spring on college campuses to cherry-pick the best
and the brightest graduating seniors. Businesses even recruit top
professional foreigners under the H1B program allowing 85,000
workers to annually come to America, plus another 20,000
international students finishing advanced programs from U.S.
universities rather than having to return to their home country.
The battle over “brain power” is never ending and has become
a global concern. In addition, smart and talented foreign nationals
in the hundreds of thousands are on the payroll working remotely
because they cannot get a U.S. visa. It stands to reason that
America needs everyone to pull their own weight and cannot
afford to have a permanent underclass or at least needs a lot less
of them. Investing in children should be a top priority. It will not
be a panacea but a big step in the right direction and the right moral
thing to do.
For starters, Congress should make permanent the enhanced

childcare provisions that were given during the height of the
COVID pandemic that made a difference with monthly checks.
So, how much would it cost to extend the COVID-19 tax credits
for parents with children? An estimated 61 million children

received the benefit when Congress originally passed it. The old
$2,000 CTC standard was supplemented because of COVID. It
was increased to $3,600 for a child under six and $3,000 annually
for older children through age 17. But now, since these enhanced
benefits expired with a return to the old rules, income thresholds
must be met (primarily benefiting the middle and upper classes),
which impacts the amount of money received and is harder for
low-wage moms on the margin to obtain.
But let’s get real. The overwhelming majority of kids’ parents

receiving free money during the pandemic came from homes that
did not lose their jobs or income during COVID. Their lives never
changed. The real help must go to the truly marginalized children
in the greatest need.
So, let’s consider some down-and-dirty math that is everyone’s

favorite subject. In general (Note: Figures fluctuate, and varied
calculations may apply), the poverty rate for poor children hovers
around 14% depending on the state of the economy. Assuming a
rough estimate of about $3,200 a year for the CTC (combining the
differential based on age), it is about $266.00 monthly, a modest
subsidy. If we were to take 11 million kids in poverty, the annual
cost to the federal government would be about 35.2 billion dollars
a year. Add another 8 million kids right above the poverty line at
half the rate ($1,700 annually), the total cost comes in just shy of
50 billion dollars.
So, would 50 billion dollars spent on reducing child poverty

by nearly half break our national piggy bank? Surely, in an era of
deficits, debts, and huge needs everywhere, adding more funding
seems like something the country can’t afford right now. The next
ten years don’t look good either. No commitments. Please change
the subject.
Yet, consider this ludicrous comparison. A wealthy person can

get a $7,500 tax credit on their tax bill if they purchase an
American-made electric vehicle for up to $55,000 or an SUV for

up to $80,000 in cost. A tax credit is always more desirable (it
reduces taxes owed dollar for dollar) than a mere tax deduction
because if an individual owed $7,500 in taxes, the purchase of the
EV would wipe out their entire tax obligation. Many individual
states give even more additional tax breaks. A single full-time
working mother with two kids making $20,000 to $40,000 a year
can’t even wrap her head around such a generous Congressional
tax break to the Tesla crowd.
But the counterargument in favor of children and moms is

three-fold. First, there is the moral question regarding
responsibility for innocent children. With some states requiring
“forced births” that will fall primarily on the working poor and
young women without an adequate safety net, it should be
considered child abuse to largely abandon babies after they are
born. Second, consider proportionality. The United States’ annual
defense budget is nearly 900 billion dollars. The Veteran’s budget
(for our men and women who served) is another budget item north
of 300 billion dollars for a rough total of about 1.2 trillion dollars
and rising in an inflationary environment.
The fifty billion dollars for millions of children do not even

add up to a nickel compared to our military budgets. Actually,
pennies on the dollar. Proportionality indeed! And the impact on
a poor child’s life can be profound, as many studies show. $50
billion dollars sounds like a lot of money, but it needs context as a
starting point. Consider that as Americans, we spend more than
$110 billion every year on our pets. We spend over $100 billion on
state lotteries and are closing in on another $120 billion on legal
sports gambling, up from near-zero five years ago.
Consider other comparisons regarding proportionality. The

infrastructure bill passed by Congress in 2021 spends over a trillion
dollars over ten years to address our neglected roads and bridges.
It is a wise investment and long overdue. But of equal importance
is an investment in our “human capital” for the most vulnerable
children, most of whom will be adults in ten years. Will they be an

asset to our society or a drain?
A quote attributed to Frederick Douglas is most relevant. “It

is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.”
Proportionality should also take into consideration the many
trillions of dollars spent on foreign wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,
along with bailing out Wall Street in 2008, big tax cuts, and the
massive and unprecedented spending on the COVID-19 pandemic
as “free” stimulus money for the vast majority of employed
Americans who did not need it.
Congress spent another $280 billion of borrowed money on

the CHIPS Act, another worthy endeavor to protect America’s
world-class technology. But in another insult to irony, companies
will be required to provide daycare, subsidized, of course, for
highly trained and well-paid workers. But not for the average
working-class mother or father scrapping to get by working in a
fast-food restaurant across the street from the high-tech plant.
Congress somehow finds money for what they want. Congress
followed up with the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, another
trillion-dollar bill with enormous grants of money paid to
companies (big bucks for them in subsidies) investing in important
overdue clean energy and other needed priorities.
Congress also allocated $400 billion extra for veterans in a very

expansive and generous program who “may have” been exposed
to “burn pits” while serving in designated military zones. They are
not required to show any documented direct exposure, only a loose
showing of being in the general vicinity, perhaps in an office,
downwind. But there is no money to extend child benefits to the
working poor in low-wage menial jobs who are also in challenging
circumstances, with many of them also living in environmentally
polluted industrial areas that are unsafe.
The third factor should consider our national defense as it

relates to the “brain race” with China. America needs everybody in
this race, including its underclass. All hands-on deck. The rise of
China in the past 40 years defies superlatives. In ten years, China

will have more college students who have attended some college
or graduated from college than the entire population of the United
States. It already figured out that our higher education system was
the “secret sauce” to America’s predominance.
So, over the last forty years, they have sent millions of their
best and brightest students to our universities, with roughly some
300,000 students currently enrolled, down from pre-COVID
times. But it should also be noted that China is struggling, coming
out of the Covid-19 pandemic. A crisis may be brewing since many
young people are having difficulty finding jobs that correspond to
their education and skill set. China’s spectacular growth rates have
greatly declined.
U.S. universities welcomed Chinese students with open arms

since most paid full tuition. No scholarships, student aid,
discounts, or loans were needed for them. In turn, the Chinese
came to study cutting-edge STEM subjects, unlike too many
Americans who preferred easier areas of study and shied away
from the tough hard-core sciences. And Americans scratch their
head in disbelief and confusion about how China transformed
itself in the past 40 years. In contrast, Americans owe over a trillion
dollars in student loans impacting poorer students the most. Even
more young people are locked out of higher education without
being prepared, often with inferior K-12 schooling, dysfunctional
parenting, unstable homes, and a lack of role models, fathers, and
mentors.
The question remains regarding dollars and sense. A more

concentrated focus for America needs to prioritize children as a
moral imperative. Since “forced births” in cheapskate-restrictive
states will fall most heavily on the poor, a baby is already in big
trouble that may possibly last a lifetime. Without dollars, it makes
no sense.”
FILTHY RICH COUNTRY

America is a rich country. We are the gold standard when most
of the world looks at our living standards, lifestyles, and consumer
habits. It is broadcast around the world daily in movies, television,
and social media. The siren call of the American Dream around the
world is alive and well. But if there is one common belief among
Americans, it is that we believe we are a rugged bunch of
individualists who don’t want anyone telling us what to do,
especially the government. But there is one irony. The dirty secret
is that almost all Americans are for “me” government but not for
“you” government regarding subsidies, deductions, tax breaks, and
special treatment.
Some of the following numbers may vary considering

inflation, real estate values, and a fluctuating stock market since the
economy is not static. But the illustration is still eye-popping. 89%
of the entire stock market is owned by the top 10% of Americans.
The bottom 50% own 0.5%! The stock market exceeds 45 trillion
dollars in value. The stock market is volatile and can easily take a
hit when economic conditions hit a rough patch. Share prices
could decline greatly and wipe out trillions in wealth as recessions
often do, but invariably, over time, come back and head higher,
even though no one has a crystal ball looking into the future.
Consider that the top 25 hedge-fund managers in 2022 averaged
$860 million (not a typo), down no less from bigger gains in 2020
and 2021. And they produced no new inventions or products.
Wow! What a country!
Americans marvel at top athletes signing quarter-of-a-billion-

dollar contracts compounded by commercial endorsements that,
combined, can have the potential to reach career earnings of over
a billion dollars. Some observers of sports predict the first billion-
dollar sports contract in the next ten years. And one bad injury and
their career could be over. Movie stars, business moguls, and
creative Silicon Valley nerds and geeks rake in stupendous riches.
Good for them, after all, this is America, the land of opportunity,
and we should all approve.
The moral question is, what happens on the luxury ship of

state when 1st class passengers live it up on the ship’s bow while
many 3rd and 4th class passengers are sinking fast underwater in the
stern of the ship, particularly children, without a life preserver?
In hundreds of upscale communities all around the nation,

house prices start at over a million dollars and go up from there.
Top-tier health care and higher education do not come cheap
either. A May 23, 2023, New York Times report indicates that Baby
Boomers control roughly $78 trillion in assets, Gen X has
$48 trillion, and Millennials follow with $14 trillion.
Most Americans are blessed to live in the 21st century

compared to those who have come before us, including those who
are considered the working poor. But as Baby Boomers begin to
die and pass off center stage over the next thirty years, there is a
lot of money to be passed on if, and only if, you are the lucky heir
to the right sperm and egg from parents or a close relative. Luck is
important in the family you are born into. For others, life will be a
constant struggle and a challenge. Still, for far too many individuals
born into privilege who are dismissive of the underclass, they fail
to fully grasp the fortunate windfall of inheritance and the truism
for many of, “There but for the grace of God, (and luck) go I.”
Inherited wealth is a big deal.
Wealth in America is often entrenched in “generational

wealth” passed down from grandparents to children to
grandchildren. It multiplies over time, and the lucky descendants
in the marathon race of life have a huge head start over all those
just crawling to get to the starting line. Some married couples cash
in on a sizable inheritance from both sides of the family, much like
a company merger uniting two fortunes. Kids today from smaller
families don’t even have to split an estate between five or six
siblings as in previous older generations. An only child gets it all.
Lucky, lucky! The rich do get richer, often without lifting a finger.
The entire discussion around inequality, justice, fairness, and

drawing red lines is contentious at best. Still, the United States has
a larger wealth gap between rich and poor than any other advanced
economy. No one is arguing against capitalism in America, which
has spurred innovation, creativity, and provided jobs for tens of
millions of people. It has been the great engine that has made
America the greatest success story in the history of the world. In
America, we reward the ambitious, the go-getters, and the
dreamers.
We love stories of those of modest means armed with an idea

and a passion that have built empires and phenomenal wealth while
literally changing the world. We rightly celebrate them. Few
Americans are jealous of the rich. They would just like to join them
and be one of them.
In recent times, we cannot conceive of our world without the

visions of Gates, Jobs, Bezos, Zuckerberg, Musk, and many others.
They have literally transformed America. The world stands in awe
of American enterprise, ingenuity, invention, and genius. The old
expression, “only in America,” still rings true today. We mostly
applaud these tycoons yet worry that things are increasingly
disproportionately skewed by any reasonable standard concerning
fundamental fairness. The dangers of plutocracy cannot be
ignored.
Rich lists of America’s wealthiest individuals fluctuate, but

taking just the top ten wealthiest that could be squeezed in around
your dining room table requires attention. For context, their wealth
is so vast that they could pass out a hundred thousand dollars
($100,000) to EVERY single household in New York, Los
Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Dallas, San
Diego, San Antonio, San Francisco, Seattle, Denver, Boston, and
Portland, COMBINED. That’s a lot of Benjamin’s to spread
around.
Just imagine the sight of a banker walking up and down every

street in these large metropolitan cities, knocking on each
household door and delivering a check for $100k, or a briefcase
full of cash containing 1,000 Benjamin’s? And mind you, these are
just the ten richest guys. If we took the top 100, we could easily
add over a few hundred smaller cities. We are talking about mind-
boggling, incredible wealth. America, the blessed!
In the American game of Monopoly, it is winner take all. But

in truth, if any of us were in the shoes of these rich icons, we would
be suspicious of the government as well, coming to “rob us” (i.e.,
tax) of our riches to give away our money to the less enterprising,
talented, or undeserving. It may be selfish, but it is human nature.
Yet, all the “poor” billionaire rich people can still collectively retain
trillions of dollars in personal wealth.
The question to ask is how far out of whack do we want our

country to be. How about a future “Trillionaire” sometime in the
not-so-distant future? No one is questioning wealth but
proportionality.
Enterprising rich people should be able to spend their money

any way they wish during their lifetime, even foolishly. After all, it’s
their money, and as entrepreneurs and inventors or investors, they
earned it through smarts, hard work, and creativity. But this should
not apply to inherited wealth for offspring who did absolutely
nothing to earn “Daddy’s and Grandpa’s money.”
In a “more perfect union,” offspring should perhaps be

limited to a mere ten-million-dollar inheritance limit and
encouraged to take this seed money and build their own multi-
billion-dollar empire and make their own mark and contribution to
the world. A mega-rich person, upon their death, should not be
required to forfeit their excess wealth to the government, but to
avoid this, be required to direct the balance of their fortune to any
charitable or philanthropic cause of their choosing in the medical
or educational field as part of the common good.
If it takes a village to support all children and become a more

just society, the rich should leave behind a noble legacy that helps
the entire village instead of funding a son or daughter to buy half
the village in a leveraged buyout. But, of course, we do not live in
this world, and it is wishful thinking. We live in a Gordon Gecko
world where greed is good, and power is even better. Children not
even dreamed of far off into the 22nd and possibly 23rd century,
many generations from now, will be born with a silver (golden?)
spoon in their mouth from trust funds. How lucky for them by a
fortunate spin of the egg and sperm roulette wheel. Fairness is a
relative concept.
The tricky question is what is owed to the children of the

underclass. Forget for a minute about some problematic, selfish,
abusive, or ignorant parent and just focus on the children.
Especially those born into a world of difficulties and dysfunction
which is not their fault. In the American game of Monopoly, what
do those living on Boardwalk and Park Place owe to the innocent
children who are stuck on Mediterranean Avenue facing eviction?
For anti-abortionists demanding “forced births,” innocent
children should be their first priority in a filthy rich country. No
excuses. America has the money but not the will, nor the charity.
FOOLISH MONEY
The COVID-19 pandemic spending to meet a national
emergency was a prime example of the government coming to the
rescue and wasting trillions of dollars at the same time. Yes, it was
a national emergency. Yes, time was of the essence. Yes, the
purpose of government is the national welfare. But sending out
stimulus checks willy-nilly across the country to nearly all
Americans without “targeted funding” was foolish, reckless, and,
yes, dumb!
The middle and upper-middle classes, and even a few who

were asset-wealthy but with qualifying incomes, got free money in
the mail. Their lifestyles and income never changed, pandemic or

no pandemic. Those able to work remotely in their bathrobe at
home saved even more on commuting costs and not eating out at
lunchtime. The vast majority (85%) of the American workforce did
not lose their jobs. These extra government funds were saved or
spent on Amazon and other goods during the lockdown, all from
Santa Claus disguised as Uncle Sam.
All 50 state governments got vast amounts of money and were

wallowing in state surpluses post-COVID and arguing over what
to do with found money from heaven. Some favored businesses
also made out like bandits while keeping their mouths shut and
keeping a low profile. Scammers and cheats were in hog heaven.
Most economists believe the subsequent inflation was partly due
to all this extra money sloshing around in the economy, and they
were right. Persistent COVID lockdowns in China impacting
supply chains and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine upsetting energy
markets completed the triple play resulting in inflation, causing the
Fed to react and hike interest rates. In addition, tight labor markets
with 10,000 experienced Baby Boomers retiring every day added
to the mix. Over ten million Boomers disappeared from the labor
force in just a three-year time frame.
Presidents Trump and Biden sent three rounds of stimulus

checks to the American people. The most important question is
why payments were sent out at all if an individual’s status was
unchanged? Apologists will claim that in the eye of the COVID
storm, there was no time for differentiation. But it is not a totally
convincing argument, showing government ineptitude.
The next short-sighted provision passed by Congress was the

generous criteria they set to receive stimulus funding. One example
is the ceiling of $198,000 (second stimulus) for a married couple
filing jointly. Hardly poverty incomes. But it gets worse. These
were based on adjusted gross income (AGI), which meant that a
household making $250,000 or even more and taking deductions
for a mortgage on an expensive home, state, and property taxes,
IRA, charitable deductions, and various other items could reduce

their income below the 198k threshold to receive “free money”
from Uncle Sam. Sweet! Who knew that someone squeaking by on
a quarter of a million bucks needed money from Uncle Santa? And
nearly all of them never missed a paycheck.
California completely lost its mind and sent out yet another
stimulus check with an even higher ceiling. A married couple could
pick up $400 if their A.G.I was under $500,000, meaning someone
making $600,000 with 100k in deductions qualified. Talk about
helping those in real need! It is irrational, wasteful spending that is
indefensible. It is nuts! And now California is moaning over a
looming deficit of red ink and is still hobbled with an intractable
homeless problem.
The question of need and fairness could also be argued over

the fact that married couples got twice as much as a single-filing
person did in all the stimulus programs. While this seems fair as a
per-capita benefit, and perhaps one’s marital status should not be
a consideration, it fails if there are children involved.
Proportionality in favor of children in a single home (or
guardianship) vs. a married home is just an economic fact of life
and should have been a no-brainer and adjusted more fairly to
reflect reality. No such luck.
Life is just tougher for children in a single-headed household,

male or female. It’s not the kids’ fault, and they can use the extra
financial help. Incredibly, under the current $2,000 CTC, a married
couple making up to $400,000 in adjusted gross income gets the
full credit. A single parent maxes out at $200,000 AGI. Of course,
the ethical argument is that neither should get the CTC deduction
with such large incomes.
What should be the grand lesson of the COVID pandemic?

Congress must prepare for the next national crisis in advance, with
more sheriffs, accountants, and overseers being judicious and fair
with taxpayer money for those actually in need. The government
needs to “target” its bountiful generosity where it is needed most
rather than giving wholesale handouts. Most all Americans favor a

helping hand but oppose handouts with no purpose. Since checks
were sent out in conjunction with the IRS, the IRS could have been
instructed to start with the bottom quarter of the country most
affected (the working class) and make needed adjustments up the
income scale.
Even granting the immediacy of the first stimulus of funds and

the inability to quickly evaluate those who did and did not lose their
jobs, a scattershot approach seemed unwarranted. Even less so for
subsequent rounds of stimulus. Trillions of dollars were
squandered by giving money to people and companies who did not
need it. And now everyone cries and laments the national debt.
Still, everyone talks about investing for the future. Investing in
children is a smart payoff for a better American future. China,
Europe, and the rest of the world are ever more competitive, and
we cannot afford to have millions of kids growing up sitting on the
sidelines, damaged, not prepared, and not contributing.
FREE MONEY
Everyone loves getting unexpected free money. Something
simple like finding change in the couch or forgotten folding money
in an old pair of pants or a purse stuck in a closet for years can
bring a smile to one’s face. An unexpected bonus or perk at work
is always a plus. Getting a “deal” at the store and saving money
brightens one’s mood.
So, where can the federal government find free money to help
support needy and innocent children? The surprising answer is the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS). There is free money, gobs of it,
just waiting for someone to collect it all. There are hundreds of
billions of dollars of taxes owed but not collected simply due to an
overwhelmed and outgunned agency. Congressional inaction in the
past was intended to hobble the agency everyone loves to hate.
Republicans, as the party of the rich and business, particularly
showed little interest in funding the department adequately over

the years.
Rich people and corporations hate having the IRS poking

around where trillions of dollars slosh throughout the national and
world economy. Rich people and corporate America employ tens
of thousands of lawyers and accountants with one overriding
mission. Lower our tax bill by exploiting every subsidy and
loophole in the tax code (many put there by our well-paid
lobbyists) we can find. We believe in taxes—just not us paying
them, but somebody else. Russel Long, the late Senator from
Louisiana, had a favorite explanation when it came to taxes. He
said, “Don’t tax me, don’t tax thee, tax that fellow behind the tree.”
Recent legislation attempting to modernize the IRS was passed

entirely by Democrats and was opposed by the Republican Party,
who were all against it, despite their cries over the national debt,
which would be helped by added revenue collected from tax
cheats. The Republicans offered no plan to make the IRS efficient
and more equitable. The legislation gave 80 billion dollars over ten
years to remake the IRS into a hopefully modern and properly
functioning agency.
According to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, the

number of auditors uniquely qualified to process complex returns
of high-income individuals and corporations is at rock-bottom
levels not seen since 1954 despite America having half the
population it does today. Customer service was nearly non-
existent, with only about 11% of calls to the IRS being answered.
Short on staff, money, and technology, the IRS has been held
together with duct tape, chewing gum, and an abacus for its current
computer technology.
It could be several years before any real difference in revenue

is realized. But Republicans, the party of ‘no’, quickly vowed to
slash the new funding to the IRS at every chance possible. Making
it modern, fair, and technologically capable is not one of their
goals. They have no desire to improve its functions. Sabotage is

their goal.
To illustrate the sheer folly of Republican nonsensical concern

to reduce federal spending, Republicans managed to claw back 20
billion dollars in funding (a 25% reduction) to the IRS in a fight
over the phony debt ceiling cliffhanger when allowing the IRS to
do its jobs would bring in more revenue from wealthy tax cheats.
The Congressional Budget Office says this clawback will actually
increase the deficit. Fat cats win again, and America loses. And all
this from a Republican party that claims they are the most fiscally
responsible party. Former Republican House Speaker Kevin
McCarthy vowed to go after the rest of the committed IRS funding
and gut as much of it as possible. Where are the adults in the room?
What happens to fiscal responsibility when tax cheats are not
pursued?
Nobody likes the IRS because nearly every citizen believes

they are overtaxed and is convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt
they could do a better job allocating money than a dysfunctional
Congress. The surest applause line for politicians is to say they
stand for lower taxes. All of us favor less money coming out of our
pockets. Of course, to take it to its logical conclusion, that number
would be zero, a bankrupt country and chaos everywhere. But it is
also a truism that you can’t live in a five-star country and pay for it
on the cheap. But we try. America has deficits and a national debt
to prove it.
America is a credit-card-addicted country demanding our

leaders give us more goodies without paying for them. A garden-
variety tax audit on a middle-class or upscale American is a drop in
the ocean compared to what the rich and corporations get away
with. When there is an overwhelmed sheriff in town, catch me if
you can.
So, how much money is not being collected by the IRS?

Estimates of the “tax gap” (what is collected vs. what is owed) vary
widely but range from $175 billion to as high as $500 billion and
more. An analysis in a June 14, 2023 article in the Washington Post

entitled, “How much did Congress lose in defunding the IRS?”
shows that for every dollar spent by the IRS to audit the rich,
twelve dollars is collected in revenue for an estimated $220 billion
not collected. Former IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig testified
before Congress in April 2021 that he thought perhaps a
TRILLION dollars was not being collected due to sophisticated
and convoluted tax schemes. No matter the amount, politicians
and economists would want these extra funds to be applied to
annual deficits or pet projects, not more spending on poor kids,
including “forced births.” Mothers, fetuses, babies, and children
are just sound bites and lose out again. Count on it. Other priorities
take precedence.
Republican opposition to more funding for the IRS is

dishonest. They falsely claim the “little guy” will get hurt and
audited. It is nonsense. They cry over how average Joe will be
hounded by voracious jack-booted IRS thug agents, nitpicking
over his tax return, looking for a few extra dollars, and labeling Joe
with the stigma of being a tax cheat. This is pure baloney.
An average tax return has a .04% chance of being audited.

That’s 4 out of 1,000 returns. The goal is to concentrate on filings
of over $400,000 and to concentrate on millionaires, billionaires,
and trillion-dollar corporations where the real money is who are
playing shell games. Five former Treasury secretaries (under
Democrat and Republican administrations), along with several
former IRS commissioners all support a modernization of the IRS
that is long overdue.
But what do Treasury secretaries and IRS commissioners

know when stacked up against special interests and water-carrying
Republican politicians willing to look the other way and trash the
IRS as contemptible and corrupt agents every chance they get? But
lying about them on right-wing media gets them votes. Integrity
and Truth are apparently not important.
The problem with the IRS is that it brings a knife to a fight

while the rich and corporations have their legal teams bringing a
bazooka. No matter how talented, smart, and capable, a civil
servant is rarely a match when up against a dozen tax lawyers from
a high-class law firm. It’s an unfair contest. The IRS needs to equal
the playing field by hiring top-notch specialists (and paying them)
to go after the “big money” who know where to look and find
uncollected revenue. Large companies and the ultra-rich strive to
make things opaque on purpose. There are huge gray gaps between
legal tax avoidance and illegal tax evasion, which are exploited. The
powerful also move large amounts of funds around the world to
less taxed jurisdictions along with suspect accounting gimmicks.
In recent years, astounding revelations of a secretive and

parallel world of offshore finance demonstrate a lack of
transparency on a colossal global scale. It is truly staggering. The
leaked publications of the Panama, Paradise, and Pandora papers
outline a web of trusts and shell companies to shield the mega-rich
and powerful from taxes and scrutiny of their stupendous mega
holdings. It is breathtaking in size, scope, and money. Granted, not
all of these are tax evaders, and some may have legitimate privacy
concerns.
But there are also criminal enterprises, drug cartels, and

thousands of others who wish to launder their money and protect
their gains without scrutiny or oversight by a tax official. Many
other accounts are set up to be offshore convoluted puzzles with
layers of secrecy. They are purposefully designed to be complex to
avoid the tax man. It gives a whole new meaning to “dark money."
Conservative Republicans are forever harping about budget

deficits, the national debt, and living within our means. These are
all legitimate positions to take. They will argue, rightly so, that
priorities need to be set and funded appropriately (but, of course,
not the IRS). Certainly, businesses and entrepreneurs should be
allowed to grow and flourish in order to make profits and employ
people. Everyone would agree with this sentiment. All is well and
good. But a functional civilization and society also needs to adhere
to the truism, “to whom much is given, much is required.” (Luke
12: 48). Crooks in high-tower suites in fancy three-piece suits

who steal millions with just a pen need far more oversight than a
street pickpocket looking for peanuts.
But the old adage “watch what they do, not what they say” is
instructive. Upon getting power in Congress or the presidency, the
first order of business for Republicans is not honoring their word
in tackling deficits and debt or balancing budgets which is hard,
but about tax cuts because that is easy, adding to our national credit
card.
The truth is that everyone in Washington likes to spend

money. Politicians know that the whole game of getting elected is
to promise people something. Saying no or taking things away is
unpopular. Even mentioning any reform of Social Security or
Medicare (which is needed) will get a politician run out of town.
The public is in denial.
Sacrifice is a dirty word. No one wants to hear it because it

means giving up something, and that’s the last thing we want to
hear about. Our lives are built around addition, not subtraction.
Realistically, the chances that extra tax collections from the IRS
would be redirected to poor children is between zero and less than
zero. Kids don’t vote, and politicians have a laundry list of other
priorities. But there is potential free money here to make a
difference. It is money already owed but not collected. However,
it requires a responsible and effective IRS and Congress to collect
it and forced birth proponents to lobby for the funds and demand
it goes to needy children.
Nevertheless, there is one other potential fix to support

“forced birth” babies and children in dire poverty that is hiding in
plain sight. It is to reallocate who can qualify for childcare tax
credits to those most in need in the first place. By capping income
limits in qualifying for the CTC to those making around $75,000
in gross wages (not AGI), billions would be freed up to help those
who need it most. It would be a tax shift rather than requiring new
taxes. But politics are hard as the better-off middle classes do not
want to relinquish their benefits. They like their tax deductions and
tax credits. The lunacy of sending out stimulus checks to those not
in need during the COVID-19 pandemic proves the point.
The most important moral question here is about the children.

The money is already in the system and available. It is money owed
and just needs to be collected. Will well-off middle and upper-
middle-class families cry the blues in losing a tax credit or a
deduction? Of course, because we all like free money by paying
fewer taxes. We are deserving, and they are not. People are
sympathetic to kids in rough circumstances in the abstract, but not
so much if it affects their wallets. Innocent kids would stand to
benefit the most. But it will not happen even with potentially found
money from the IRS or even a tax shift as to who qualifies for a
tax break. Again, mothers, fetuses, babies, and children all lose.
Count on it.
MICHAEL LEE PART IV THE CRYSTAL BALL: WHAT’S NEXT | 224
CHAPTER 21
CHASING THE AMERICAN
DREAM
Chasing the American Dream is more expensive than ever.

Also, the definition of that dream has morphed over time, and
expectations have grown. We need money to provide the absolute
essentials of life, like food, shelter, clothing, smartphones, iPad,
laptops, 72-inch super-resolution TVs, satellite hookups, and
Netflix. Also, money for a larger and fancier home, a lakeside
mountain cabin, a lovely beach house, a cool speedboat, and a big
RV for glamping. Plus, we would like some nice jewelry bling and
a Tesla, Benz, Lexus, and a massive pickup truck in the driveway.
OK, that’s a humorous over-the-top take after the food,

shelter, and clothing bit, but not by much when considering the
American Dream. Because it is the dream part that everyone is
striving for. It means they have made it. The operative word that
explains the American Dream is “more,” as in more stuff, power,
and influence. It will not necessarily make people happier, but this
is the treadmill that many can’t get off. The dream is like a mirage
on the distant horizon. And those who do reach financial heaven
are not happy for long as they start to dream about “7th heaven!”
And to make even a dent in the American Dream come true,

outside the wealthy and mega-rich, it usually requires two incomes,
and most moms must work if they want some of the modest
trappings of the American Dream. Many feel they need to work
even more just to keep up the status quo with their friends and not
risk falling behind. Americans have become famous for being
“workaholics” by clocking in more hours than most other
countries. The push for the ambitious and their children is to “get
ahead” in life by being more successful than “others,” however

defined, whether their peer group or general society. You have to
hustle.
Because of divorce, death, abuse, or abandonment, single

women with children cannot compete on an equal footing. One
salary, as opposed to two, is a recipe for getting the short end of
the stick. Even among highly paid single professional mothers with
sizable incomes, they cannot compete with the same professional
married couple bringing in two checks and “living large” on the
other side of town.
Two married doctors, lawyers, or professors beat one

professional divorced woman nearly all the time. By definition,
they are 50% poorer and have fewer options. Everything is relative.
The same is generally true throughout the socio-economic
financial spectrum from top to bottom. Two beats one. Married
couples have a distinct advantage.
It should become the most cursed word in all of politics,

punditry, and reporting in the English language. It rolls off the
tongue or the printed page so effortlessly that no one sees it hiding
in plain sight. It is disingenuous, hollow, and often used as a
smokescreen. It’s a cheating word when looking for a solution. It
is the most abused word in the common language. It can never be
contradicted or disputed and should be held in the highest
contempt. Politicians and activists love this shallow word.
Reporters unwittingly become glib when using the word. So, what
is this dastardly word bandied about with abandon? It is the word
“affordable” which should be banished from the lexicon.
While an attractive and often well-intentioned word, it means

absolutely nothing except as a sound bite. Consider the following:
Affordable childcare, housing, education, transportation, medical
care, and fill-in-the-blank. It is meaningless without details.
A politician’s cardinal rule is never to attach a real number to

any of these concerns. They will be pilloried on all sides as either a
Scrooge or Santa Claus. Pundits and reporters will lament about
some pressing concern but will lazily lean on the word affordable
without blinking. It is like a get-out-of-jail-free card for everyone
with no consequences.
American society has always been stratified. In general terms,

it is split into five broad categories. They are the poor, the working
class/middle class, the upper professional and entrepreneurial
middle class, the wealthy, and the super-rich. Aside from
education, inherited wealth from one generation to another is
always a significant factor. And when it comes to the subject of
abortion, the poor and the working classes are most heavily
impacted, even more so for a single parent. The upper middle
classes, the wealthy, and the rich have resources and connections
to make (wait for it)—their own choices.
Choices are what lie at the heart of the American Dream and
is the definition of freedom. But forced birth advocates favor
coercion for the marginalized, and worse, they fail to provide
adequate funds for the support of the mother, the fetus, and the
child in distress for the long journey to adulthood. Money always
matters. Money buys options.
BABY BUST!
The American birth rate continues to hit new lows per 1,000
women. Women across all races and ethnicities are seeing declines.
The general fertility rate is about 56 births per 1,000 women ages
15 to 44, another low. That translates to a roughly 1.70 birth rate
when a 2.1 rate would be stable matching births to deaths. In
relative terms, it is falling faster among minorities than whites,
generally reflecting class stratification and the advances made by
minority women. Despite a small uptick in births coming out of
COVID (attributed by some to more college-educated moms able
to work at least part-time from home), the overall declining trend

lines are clear to see. Without immigration into America, the
country would start to contract its population overnight.
Declining birth rates are a trend not just in America but in all
rich and middle-income countries. Japan and Europe have been
alarmed at the decline among their native populations for decades
as their birthrates continue to slide. China, the world’s second-
largest population (edged out by a nose by India), is concerned that
it will grow old faster than it will become rich enough to care for
all its elderly. Its birth rate has crashed to a low of 1.3. Marriage
and birth rates have fallen roughly by half in just the past decade.
Births fell from 18 million in 2016 to just under 10 million today.
A stunning decline.
In just the last ten years, China’s young adults between the ages
of 21 and 30 have declined by 50 million. It is an astounding change
and is continuing to fall. Some cite Covid as a contributing cause,
but leaders fear a new trend line that may not recover and become
an ominous sign for the future.
China is projected to have 330 million people over 65 by 2050,

the current population of the entire United States. If only 20% of
these need a nursing home, it means finding places for 65 million
elderly seniors. And most of those who are elderly have only one
child to hopefully chip in and help out as a result of the former
one-child policy. China sees this as a current slow-motion crisis
that will only escalate.
With apprehension, China changed its one-child policy in

2015, which had been in effect for over two generations since
1980. Imagine growing up not having any brothers, sisters, aunts,
uncles, cousins, nieces, or nephews! Still, many young Chinese
women living in crowded and expensive cities and pursuing
education, or work, have not taken the hint to hurry up and
procreate. They also are not thrilled about men’s sexist double
standards.
Japan, a mostly homogeneous but elderly island nation, saw its

population contract by 20,000 in 2008 to an annual decline of over
500,000 a decade later. If current trend lines hold, one-third of
Japan will fade away over the next fifty years. For context, imagine
all of California, Texas, Florida, and New York “combined,”
fading away into thin air over fifty years. Japan’s role in the world
will diminish. Italy and Ukraine also have low birth rates, among
many others.
Add to these cultural trends the changing dynamics between

men and women everywhere and men’s often unwillingness to
adjust. For example, women in Korea (Korean birthrates have
fallen to a low of .78), Japan, and China, single and married, are
tired of male misogyny, discrimination, and lack of respect that
holds them back in the workplace and a failure by men to pull their
own weight at home and with childcare. Chauvinism rules in
spades in the culture. Younger women are going on strike and
delaying marriage or opting out altogether.
In many advanced countries, there is also a delay in young

women’s childbearing years if most of their twenties are consumed
with education and getting established in life. Also, educated
women place an even greater emphasis on the development of
their children to succeed in life, which can be compromised by
having too many children.
Divorce rates can also impact births as single mothers struggle

more. Fewer of them remarry than do men. Women, as primary
caregivers, make rational decisions. Similar stories abound across
the globe in varying degrees in all developed countries. Women see
themselves as more than just a mother or a wife but as a complete
human being with dreams of their own. Many men don’t like it.
Several countries are now pushing new programs to increase

their native birthrates, like Hungary, China, and others. Various
financial incentives are promoted for newborns. But the success of
these programs has been disappointing and mostly benefits the few
women already planning families. In Singapore, lavish grants, tax

rebates, and subsidized housing and childcare are all available.
However, the rich city-state still has a birth rate of only 1.0. In
many advanced countries, incentivizing (bribing) women to have
more children has failed to live up to expectations, and few women
are buying it.
Around the globe, women increasingly demand that they

control their own fertility, from birth control to abortion. As
women are more integrated throughout the workforce, they will
also demand more help in time, money, flexibility, and support in
raising their children. And women want to be the deciders, not
beholden to the patriarchy of the state. Abortion opponents will
find themselves increasingly swimming against the tide of trying to
control women’s fertility. They will win battles, but not the long
war.
CHILDCARE: THE HARDEST NUT TO

CRACK
Childcare, full stop. Here is a minefield just waiting to explode
into a hundred opinions. Here we go: Let’s start off with a working
married woman. “Well, the mom is responsible since she had them,
and the dad has to work.” How about an unmarried woman? “She
has no business getting pregnant in the first place. How dumb.”
How about a divorced woman? “Well, she should get alimony and
child support from her ex, and he should pay since they are his kids
too.” How about a woman on her own whose husband has died?
“How unfortunate, maybe her relatives or church can help her
out.” None of these situations is my problem. How about increased
taxes to provide childcare for these women? “Hell no, I’ve got my
own family to worry about.”
America is an outlier among all rich countries. We are a proud

people and think we are exceptional, which in most cases is true.
Our national motto could be a chant of, “We’re number one.” But
we fall way short in providing a safety net for kids compared to
other countries, which are much more generous. This is
compounded by a lack of standard benefits for the working poor
without any paid leave for getting sick, guaranteed health benefits
(depending on state geography), paid maternity leave, vacation pay,
or any defined-benefit retirement pension.
Social Security, pro-rated based on lifetime earnings, pays so

little for low-wage workers that many cannot pay their bills in
retirement. Social Security is only available to those who live long
enough to collect it, which means the least healthy who die early
often get nothing rebounding to the benefit of the educated and
better off. America is often the caboose in all these areas compared
to other advanced countries. In some of these deficient areas, the
chant would be “We’re last place, we’re number zero.”
Nearly all moms in most socio-economic classes struggle when

their child gets sick or if they get sick themselves. Men, much less
so. Trying to balance work and a sick child is stressful. Even with
a supportive husband also at work, a sick child wants their
mommy. Bosses, mostly men, are often less sympathetic and don’t
usually make things easier. A sick child for a low-paid “working
class” single mom is a crisis. She faces a choice between leaving
work to attend to a sick child and the threat of possibly losing the
low-paying job that she desperately needs. On the other hand, she
is not getting paid when absent from work and risks not having
enough money to put food on the table and pay this month’s rent.
It is a terrible predicament.
A flashback to the old days is often a default for older

generations. Those long retired today recall a different time for
their parents or grandparents in America. It was also a time of
lowered expectations coming out of the Depression and World
War ll. Without television or social media, many were not aware of
how the other half lived. With larger families, a mom stayed at
home and a dad worked. Childcare problem solved. Or grandma
may be available since families tended to cluster together more.

Problem solved.
Before Social Security became a reality and pensions more

common, grandparents moved in with their adult kids in a multi-
generational household and provided free childcare. Problem
solved. Same with eldercare. Problem solved. But many
grandparents these days are active, still working, and may live far
away. Problem not solved! Other grandparents retire to Florida or
Arizona for the good life and are no longer available for free
childcare. Problem not solved! Others have died or are disabled.
Problem not solved!
REALITY CHECK
Just over one-quarter of all kids in America live in a single-
parent headed household. What is handed down to the next
generation in terms of modeling behavior, sexuality, the
importance of marriage and commitment, and the manner of
raising the next generation of children may be even more
problematic than today. Emotional and psychological scars (real
and perceived) in childhood often affect an adult for the rest of
their lives, perhaps in ways they do not fully perceive or appreciate.
Those children living on the financial edge will always have
additional anxieties that are out of their control.
Most Americans lament the breakdown of the family and the

decline of religion and morals in society today. In many ways, they
are right. But they also tend to ignore that other countries are
challenged by these same family factors. These countries also have
divorced mothers, unwed mothers, and poor people. Yet, they
offer many more benefits and protections for their children and
workplaces. So, in the end, it comes down to priorities for
politicians to put tax money where their principles are supposed to
be.
America is an amazing success story not only yesterday but

today as well. Imperfect, yes, but half the world would move here
in a heartbeat if they could. Our broken and dysfunctional
immigration system attests to that fact daily. Immigrants are not
clamoring to get into China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, or scores of
other countries.
The foul mood of polarization in America only accentuates

the negative. Everyone has a grievance, a gripe, or a grudge. But
the real story of America is its capacity for resilience. We have been
through tough times before. Winston Churchill famously said,
“You can always count on Americans to do the right thing, after
they have tried everything else.” Certainly, the least among us are
innocent children with no agency.
The admonition of Jesus is clear for all Christians. To leave

children hanging out to dry in precarious situations is an
indictment of religion and a rich country that thinks of itself as #1.
And whether one is pro or anti on the subject of abortion, children
in the here and now should always come first. That should be a
given but is mostly lost in the rhetoric.
In 2018, before COVID-19, the Center for American Progress

found that more than 50 percent of Americans lived in “childcare
deserts,” where supply or location was insufficient. And this was
before COVID shut down nearly 16,000 programs in 37 states,
according to Child Care Aware of America. It has been slow to
come back in fits and starts. In low-income areas and particularly
in rural areas, available care is spotty to non-existent. And this is
before affordability issues come into play. Add inflation and a labor
shortage of child-care workers to complicate matters further.
Childcare! For most men, married or not, the issue of childcare

is not among their top priorities. If they do not have children or
their children are grown, and out of the house, childcare is rarely
even on their radar screen. Intentionally or not, for men, it is
treated as a woman’s problem. And for older wealthy male
legislators, the issue of childcare does not personally resonate with

them.
For the rich, who have a full-time mother homemaker by

choice, childcare is seldom an issue. If they have a professional
working wife, they just outsource childcare to expensive daycare or
hire a nanny since money is not an issue. Ironically, wealthy people
hire poor people to mind their kids, who, in turn, have little to no
help for their own kids. Some big companies provide childcare on-
site or give a subsidy benefit as a perk to keep talented and critical
workers from leaving due to the lack of childcare.
However, moms without special job talents or highly sought-

after skills that pay accordingly have no childcare safety net. For
middle-class parents of teenagers where both parents work,
practical adjustments are made. Teenagers may have after-school
extracurricular activities, a part-time job, or are trustworthy enough
to be on their own for a few hours in the afternoon before Mom
or Dad shows up after work.
On the other hand, it is a whole other world for moms with

babies, toddlers, or elementary-age kids. This is an issue that lasts
about 15 years in a two-kid family. Even in intact two-parent
homes where both parents work to maintain their lifestyles, many
struggle to juggle childcare for youngsters. Some households are
lucky and draft grandma into service. Others may put a teenage
child in charge of younger siblings when not in school. Some
mothers can work remotely at home, thereby keeping an eye on
the kids despite causing added anxieties and distractions when
concentrating on work. Home and work life are blurred.
But for a working single mother, she is in another solar system,

perhaps another galaxy if she has no available family to help while
trying to do everything on her own. It is a three-ring circus. There
is no way financially to pay for childcare when earning a low wage.
The same is true of a young dad whose wife has died or left the
family and kids behind for whatever reason. “Up a creek without
a paddle” is an understatement for these single parents in situations

often not of their own choosing.
And for the working classes, few people appreciate the type of
work required in manufacturing, retail, or other service jobs. They
are on their feet all day. Understandably, after a long day’s work,
one looks forward to putting one’s feet up. Some may have back
or feet issues but do not want to pay the $25 copay bill or take time
off for a chiropractor, even if they are lucky enough to be insured.
Many jobs that require working with the general public also
result in putting up with some customer abuse, which is unpleasant
and stressful. But with young children, there is no rest for the
weary. It is what it is. Physicality is also different for a 25-year-old
vs. a 40-year-old who is out of shape.
And then there is the childcare industry. The open secret is

that the pay stinks with no benefits or perks, rampant turnover,
odd hours, and immigrants and the young finding other jobs as
soon as they can. Plus, there is no respect, no status, little
appreciation, and no advancement. Some kids are little terrors.
Putting up with fussy or rude parents is a heavy cross to bear.
Feedings, crying, diapers and poop, and vomiting are routine for
babies. A meager paycheck says it all. Burned-out and bummed-
out childcare workers ask each other, “Where is the exit sign? I’m
outta here!”
Society demands that everyone be productive, work, and care

for themselves and their family. But the realities surrounding
childcare are a challenge that no one has an answer for because the
cost is high to fix it, and there is an unwillingness to make it widely
available. Legislators kick the can down the road and wonder why
so many vulnerable kids fall between the cracks and end up as
dysfunctional adults while demeaning and stigmatizing the next
generation of poor mothers who are not working for lack of
childcare. And so it goes.
CHILDREN FIRST
What is your number for “affordable” childcare? Be bold and
definitive, along with identifying the sources of money to make it
all work. Who should qualify and for how much, and under what
circumstances?
What about access in rural counties? What about parents who

work nights, swing shifts, weekends, and holidays? What about
extra money for children with special needs? How about additional
funding for infant care, which requires more attention? What about
the caregivers’ licensing and insurance liability and a living wage?
How many children should an adult be allowed to supervise and be
responsible for at a time? What about a play area, food expenses,
sick children, and aggressive children? What about age grouping
separation so younger children are not bullied? How should
caregivers be compensated in regard to many years of experience
to reduce turnover? Should they get benefits also? What about more
comprehensive background checks for caregivers?
Yep, messy, messy, messy. Do you have a headache yet? There

are a hundred moving parts to the childcare question with even
more ramifications.
So how much money should the government put into

childcare? Tough-love Republicans want people to work, even
single moms with kids. However, they do not want to raise
minimum wages to make work pay or require employers to offer
standard employee benefits. Working all day for minimum wage
only to hand over nearly your whole paycheck to a childcare
provider for two kids makes little rational sense. Then there are the
vexing problems with elderly grandparents raising grandchildren
and disabled parents who can’t work, or those parents who have a
special needs child requiring constant attention.
Some able-bodied women are providing free care for declining

elderly parents as well. They are a part of the “sandwich
generation,” looking after both children and seniors. Few men find
themselves in this situation. Yet the focus of this problem, on both
sides of the political spectrum, should be mercy for children, not
justice alone for a loser parent. This should be about being helpful
on behalf of innocent kids, aside from just scolding screw-up
adults and holding them accountable, which is entirely appropriate.
There is also one other consideration that often gets

overlooked by single working-class mothers. Set aside a lack of
higher education or marketable skills for a moment. She is at
another disadvantage when it comes to her earning higher pay in
that many jobs requiring brute strength or odd hours are
foreclosed to her. An ex-boyfriend or ex-husband without a college
education who fathered their child can work in heavy construction,
drive an over-the-road big rig, or be employed in various trades
that can pay three or four times the wages available to such a
woman. And she is financially responsible for the kids and often
gets meager help or no help from an ex-partner.
Getting adequate child support from the father is often a

merry-go-round for many mothers. This fact is generally
overlooked by male legislators and agencies setting child policy
allotments to the detriment of children. Also, a capable working
mother trying to better herself may need to turn down a promotion
and a two-or-three-dollar an-hour raise because she will no longer
qualify for some child benefits. It’s a Catch-22 dilemma.
While there is much lamenting about millions of jobs fleeing

to China and Mexico (but on the upside, Walmart, Target, and a
thousand other businesses provide cheaper consumer goods), the
role of automation across all manufacturing companies in the 21st
century is under-appreciated. Entire industries have downsized
their labor forces without affecting output, which continues to
grow. With the arrival of artificial intelligence (AI), the changes will
become even more evident in the years ahead. But politically, it is
much easier to demonize foreigners than robots. Innocent kids

indirectly lose again when single moms struggle to find decent-
paying jobs, even without any benefits. And all bets are off with a
recession and downturn in the economy.
But first and foremost, of all groups who should be answering

these questions are forced birth advocates in restrictive states
because single working mothers are the most impacted with the
least resources. This question is not pointed at pro-life activists or
their convictions in opposing abortion. It is a pointed question
about hypocrisy to see how committed they are to being pro-life
after birth all the way to adulthood or whether it is just an empty
slogan.
Low-income parents cannot “afford” (Yes, a terrible generic

word) current childcare and are priced out. A single mom is five
times more likely to be poor than a married couple with children.
Childcare is even more critically important to a parent on their
own. The childcare equation is a showstopper, even for working
single mothers making more than the state minimum wage and
living on a shoestring between rent and food. Without childcare,
work, or schooling, for a mom to advance herself becomes nearly
impossible.
Those overwhelmed enough or discouraged enough may take

a break and go on public assistance. It is often a rational decision
if forced to pay $200 a week for childcare if one can even find it
that cheap at all. Infants and special needs kids cost even more.
Subtracting a $800 monthly cost for childcare from a $2,350
monthly net income (with a $15-an-hour job) leaves a balance of
$1,550. It is not enough to cover rent, utilities, transportation, and
food expenses, much less anything else. Now consider doubling
the cost with two children ($1,600 a month) needing childcare. Go
ahead; you do the math.
According to the Economic Policy Institute, annual costs for

childcare in 2020 varied from $5,436 (Mississippi) to $24,243
(Washington, D.C.). Add into the equation the shortage of

caregivers compounded by low pay and inflation, and those
expenses are certain to rise.
Of course, this invites the false stereotype of a lazy mother

(doubly so if black or Latino despite declining birth rates among
all minorities) sitting around idle all day, having kids, and living off
the government. It is a stereotype that right-wingers love
demonizing while at the same time threatening all kinds of grief
and punishment if they decide to get an abortion. Go figure.
But conservatives are not all wrong. There are real stories to
be told of young mothers with attitude, defiance, and a chip on
their shoulder. There is a lot of dysfunction in the underclass. It
rightly exasperates most people. But these represent a small part of
the group at large. Most moms try to do the best they can for their
kids under tough circumstances. Most single moms do work, but
childcare in any context is always relevant.
When the losers, grifters, and “welfare queens” on the dole are
portrayed in the media, it lacks proportionality and the bigger
picture. But there is no denying they exist. Race can also magnify
the anger but is often just a sad, historical left-over legacy of
America’s past, much like a hangover.
Generational poverty is a real thing, but often the backstory

for loser parents is that they, too, came from unforgiving and crazy
homes with no life skills handed down regardless of color or
ethnicity. Some observers estimate that up to half of all Americans
have suffered from some trauma while growing up. This includes
physical or sexual abuse, poverty, bullying, neglect, violence,
sexism, alcohol or drug abuse, mental health, anxiety,
discrimination, depression, learning challenges, debilitating injury,
parental death, or parental divorce. Wow! There are a lot of
walking wounded among us. For the blessed “normies,” it is often
too easy to overlook the life journey of others. Many traumatic
scars are invisible.
Nevertheless, it is always the children who are hurt the most.

They did not ask for this. Too many conservative politicians
overlook children while raging in support of a fetus with draconian
laws threatening poor working women without the means to travel.
But the most important thing is perspective. If nine million kids
are financially helped by robust child policies while one million
others are cheated by a selfish, calculating, and terrible parent, the
greater good has still been achieved. Getting a score of 90% on a
test is good for an A- grade, even though a negative press
constantly harps on outliers, stirring anger. Some positivity is in
order.
One solution to our polarized political stalemate that is fixated

on hot rhetoric rather than solving problems is to change our
voting process away from toxic primaries where the crazy flame
throwers on both sides reside, leaving only rabble-rousers to
choose from in a general election. It’s a terrible choice if one must
choose between a far-left nutcase Democrat and a far-right crazy
Republican. America loses.
A partial answer lies in “ranked choice” jungle primaries

whereby all candidates are on a single ballot, and the top four are
chosen, regardless of party, who then go on to the final general
election. It forces all candidates to reach out to all voters, not just
the rabid extremes. Ranked choice voting would greatly improve
governance and remove some of the invective poison from our
politics. Alaska and Maine already allow it, as do a small number
of city governments. If adopted nationwide, it would recapture
part of the American Dream to be problem solvers rather than just
grievance complainers and obstructionists.
We can only hope for an injection of common sense. But

incumbents who get re-elected more than 90% of the time recoil
in horror that their job could be put in jeopardy and oppose
ranked-choice voting like the plague as they pander to their base.
In fear and alarm, half a dozen Republican states have passed
legislation to ban it outright. They falsely claim it is too confusing
and complicated for simple-minded, stupid, and ignorant

Americans. They lie. It is the same as ranking in order your favorite
sports or movie stars, which is not rocket science.
Fear of losing to a more moderate member, even of their own

party, motivates current legislators to oppose it. The truth is they
see ranked choice voting as a real threat to their exalted position.
Tragically, in our polarized political climate, the modern-day
version of a moderate is also known as “roadkill.”
In addition, as a smokescreen, some will quickly pivot and cast

conspiracy theories on computer systems that can be rigged.
Everyone is corrupt, and computer code can be hacked and
manipulated by “them,” of which the list is long. Self-interest over
the national interest triumphs again. Perhaps ranked voting could
be passed if it just did not go into effect until ten years or so in the
future when half of the legislators retire or leave. Time passes, and
America will benefit. Imagine more politicians trying to appeal to
ALL of their constituents focused on problem-solving rather than
just demonizing their opponents. Revolutionary!
PART IV
THE CRYSTAL BALL: WHAT’S
NEXT
What’s Next? The Crystal Ball?

MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 22 FREEDOM, CHOICE, WOMEN | 242
CHAPTER 22
FREEDOM, CHOICE, WOMEN
On the abortion issue, pro-choice advocates need to stress the

words freedom, choice, and women’s rights. Even Republicans like
the words freedom, choice, and liberty. Progressives need to
champion women and children more than just attack the other
side.
When it comes to the poor, progressives make the same

mistake that people on the right do, which is to lump everyone into
the same category. While millions of people are poor due to
circumstances beyond their control and need more help, there is
also a failure by liberals to recognize that millions of poor people
are poor because they deserve to be poor. In the words of Forrest
Gump, “Stupid is as stupid does.” They have made bad choices in
life and expect family or government to keep bailing them out over
and over again while refusing to make life changes.
Conservatives are right that irresponsible people are owed

nothing. Progressives err in failing to make distinctions and are too
quick to absolve personal responsibility by blaming all personal
failures on an unfair society. They are wrong. Many screw-ups
came from good homes and had siblings who did not become self-
destructive.
Even criminals know right from wrong in trying to avoid

consequences. Yet, the main exception both sides should
remember is that children are innocent and not responsible for
incompetent adults. Programs that benefit kids while minimizing
dysfunctional parents need to be tailored as such. It’s tricky, but an
imperfect program is better than none. There will always be a
minority of scofflaws gaming the system. But kids should not be

held hostage to political rhetoric.
The abortion issue should be a unique segue opportunity for

both sides to unite in defense of children and struggling women.
Particularly for bleeding-heart Democrats, this is the winning
formula that should be front and center and priority number one.
For Republicans, it is also an opportunity to establish their “bona
fides” about family values with actual cash and child-friendly
programs rather than pious posturing that is short on delivering. A
laser-like focus on children in the wake of “forced birth” restrictive
states is a generational opportunity for both sides.
Since millions of the poorest of the poor in America are

innocent children (the rest are mostly elderly, the disabled, the
mentally ill, the drug addicted, and low-functioning adults), the
goal should be to provide a stronger safety net for kids that is long
overdue. Safety nets for older adults like Medicare, Social Security,
and unemployment insurance are standard along with disability
provisions because old people vote and look after their own
interests first.
Safety nets for farmers and various businesses kick in when

things get tough. The tax code is a black box of thousands of
subsidies, exemptions, deductions, and special carve-outs for
special interests. Nearly all of it goes to adults. Yes, some safety
nets for children have been helpful and need to be recognized. But
much more needs to be done. It is stressful and nerve-racking for
struggling working mothers standing on the edge of a giant
economic frying pan while trying mightily not to lose one’s
balance. Taking a fall into the frying pan while holding your child’s
hand is terrifying. Innocent children need to be a priority. Children
should not be held hostage by a parent they had no choice in
choosing.
A SWEET SPOT
Democrats are known to be the party making the most noise
about inequality, the poor, and the marginalized. But imagine that
the overturning of Roe could have the potential for enormous
progress in uniting the country on at least one issue, the welfare of
poor children and their mothers. What a potential opportunity!
If Democrats made child welfare their top-priority issue, it

could impact all their other social causes. Solve this problem, and
nearly half the basic poverty problem goes away. Wiping out
poverty is unrealistic, as even Jesus said, The poor you will always
have with you” (John 12:8 ) but in a rich country like America, the
goal is to have a lot less of them (say under 3 or 4%) by being more
generous to the children.
Children as a central issue is just different from guns, taxes,

the military, sexuality, race, immigration, and even abortion. It is
just much tougher to demagogue an issue about children with no
agency. Both liberals and conservatives love their kids, know
intuitively that life is unfair, and that helping the “least of these” is
noble and very American. The only question is having the will to
make it happen.
Fighting over abortion will continue but consider if women

leaders agreed to work together on this one crucial project. Perhaps
Republican women will realize that being pro-life cannot stop at
birth. Maybe they will see that their concern for moms rings hollow
when there is no adequate long-term safety net. Perhaps they will
see an opportunity to claim the mantle of being the family values
party. Imagine suspicious Democratic women leaders bravely
joining hands with their nervous Republican sisters to address this
issue head-on even though they are in profound disagreement over
abortion. Roe aside, it could be among the biggest advancements
for babies and children.
Imagine on this one issue, regarding child welfare, that

women, both pro and anti-abortion, stand shoulder to shoulder
demanding the men (who are the deciders) do something about it
besides blowing smoke. On the Republican side, this will have to
come from Republican women courageous enough to demand
priority changes on behalf of children. This is especially true since
many Republican men are entrenched in their calcified views about
a woman’s place. These men are against giving more money to the
undeserving poor while failing to appreciate that many of these are
poor innocent children.
But Republican women know the challenges of motherhood,

unlike most men, and need to demonstrate that, at least on this one
issue, all women are united. It will take guts and tenacity on the
part of Republican women not to be outmaneuvered by their male
colleagues. Children take precedence over party labels. It would be
a godsend to children.
Top Republican women will need to brazenly and relentlessly

“call out” their male colleagues and seize the microphone on this
issue. These men will try and “railroad” the women and bully them
by making excuses (over money and dependence) every chance
they get, losing sight of helping young kids. These brave
Republican women need to take the high ground and not let the
men ignore, condescend, or try to placate them when it comes to
child welfare.
Surely a couple of dozen top women coming together from

both sides of the political divide can fashion a revolutionary new
safety net for children to provide support for poor kids.
Republicans who emphasize a “work ethic” could make childcare
a viable reality, allowing more parents to work who have no
childcare. A takeoff of the common slogan “America First” should
be the slogan “Kids First,” which lives up to American ideals. The
passage of the Pro-life Children Priority Act would be a testament
to American goodness. A temporary truce in the middle of the
storm over Roe on behalf of the welfare of children would be a

credit to both sides.
But it will require some brave women on both the pro and
anti-abortion sides, nervous and leery to break the ice, to pick up
the phone and contact their counterparts. Alliances are always
more powerful than going it alone. And things get done. A
temporary timeout on the abortion wars to change the lives of
millions of children would be a lasting positive legacy from Roe. A
win/win for both sides, but especially for children.
A SMART CONCESSION
On the abortion question, lefties hold fast to their idea of
abortion rights close to the point of “viability,” which was the
dividing line in the Roe decision of about 22 weeks. But the
country, even though the majority supports abortion rights, is still
uncomfortable with the narrative of late-term abortions. Even
though these are rare (late-term abortions are about 1%, often due
to medical complications), forced birth activists have beaten the
public over the head with images of baby killers killing near-viable
babies. It makes people naturally queasy unless the pregnant
mother may die.
Anti-abortion activists pushed this misleading and unfair

narrative because it pushed people’s buttons. It was a great sales
job on the anti-abortion side, even though some 90% of abortions
take place in the first trimester and 95% in the first 15 weeks. But
stubborn progressives were painted with the caricature of near-
term infanticide. Pro-choice activists had become as obstinate as
those on the forced birth side. Progressives got played for suckers
and deserved it. They failed to adjust to the common ground that
overwhelmingly favored them.
The Dobbs case from Mississippi that resulted in the

overturning of Roe was originally a fight over a Mississippi law that
limited abortions to 15 weeks. It did not outlaw abortion, just

further restricted it, still allowing 95% of women to get an abortion
in this time frame. Agreeing to this new standard by pro-choice
activists would have meant taking far more than half a loaf (a
whopping 95% of the loaf) rather than nothing.
This was the position Chief Justice Roberts favored in a

concurring opinion. Yet, he could not get one of the other
conservative justices to join him. Certainly, it can be argued that
the conservative justices were hell-bent on getting rid of Roe
altogether, whether in this case or another, so the point may be
moot. But being entrenched in a difficult position when
considering the new composition of the court was foolish and
short-sighted by progressives. Most people learn that when things
go against you, you salvage what you can and adapt. The result of
entrenched positions of all or nothing by liberals and conservatives
is that they often lead to trench warfare. That is where the court
has left the divided country today.
What about the other 5% of abortions that would fall out of

the 15-week window? It would be a rational defense to campaign
on this issue to leave such medical decisions to a hospital board
rather than an individual doctor as a smart concession. Some
critical medical problems will not appear until later in pregnancy,
and standard medical protocols would be followed. A 15-week
ceiling would also tend to focus the minds of the 5% of wavering
pregnant women to “make up your mind one way or the other, no
procrastination.” There is a strong argument to be made that if
procrastinating women recognized that the 15-week clock is
ticking, perhaps another 3% would more quickly decide within the
15-week window. This would increase to roughly 98% of all
abortions in this time frame.
Forced birth advocates are now devoted to a zero-sum game

of no abortions permitted at all. They are taking the extreme
position. Yet, nearly two-thirds of the public favor the pro-choice
view, mostly as established by Roe. But nothing is set in stone since
each state is different. Pro-choice leaders should not be so short-

sighted if they can establish a new 15-week national standard.
A reasonable 15-week ceiling standard is a concession pro-

choice activists should embrace to deprive anti-abortionists of a
visual and visceral feeling on viability and late-term abortions. It
largely takes that narrative off the table. America would quickly
rally around this new standard since they do not favor unrestricted
abortions. Getting 95%, or potentially 98%, of a loaf is an outcome
that progressives should embrace. Plus, it shows goodwill and a
compromising position while still protecting women’s rights. Such
a possibility seems remote today, with both sides entrenched in an
all-or-nothing battle. However, attitudes and circumstances can
change over time.
Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina tried to float a 15-

week national abortion ban proposal in Congress that went
nowhere. This is because it still allowed individual states to impose
even tougher restrictions or ban all abortions. It attempted to set a
national ceiling on abortions, but not a national floor, with
individual states allowed to opt out and set lower standards or
impose complete bans.
Republicans, in some circles, who are less ideological, are

becoming increasingly alarmed that the abortion issue will hurt
them in elections, primarily among women and young people.
They try to avoid talking about the issue as much as possible (let’s
change the subject), and some are looking for an off-ramp to mute
the abortion issue. But religious conservatives are having none of
it. They are adamantly opposed to compromise and are even more
strident in demanding a national abortion ban. Leading anti-
abortionists even met with Donald Trump at his home in Mar-a
Lago and gave him a scolding and an earful of their displeasure by
his comments questioning six-week abortion bans that he implied
may be too harsh and hurt Republicans in elections.
Republicans are a house divided in private and increasingly in

public. On the abortion issue, some will feel like the proverbial dog
who chased the bus for fifty years and now finds himself tied up
and locked inside the bus, parked by the curb with no way out. But
the one constant in life is change. If citizens continue to vote in
favor of choice, conservative politicians may find their principles
begin to wobble. Put it to a vote in all fifty states. Let the people
vote! It’s the American way.
MICHAEL LEE CHAPTER 23 THE END GAME | 250
CHAPTER 23
THE END GAME
No one knows what the lay of the land will look like regarding
abortion 10, 20, or more years from now. As crazy as it may appear
today, perhaps in 2050, a liberal Supreme Court will re-instate Roe.
Or a future lopsided Congress may codify it on the national level
one way or the other. No one can predict anything with certainty.
But in the near term, one can surely expect that the war between
the pro-choice defenders of women and the “forced birth”
righteous defenders of all fetuses will be locked in mortal combat.
The forced birth advocates are already hard at work

strategizing how they can get the second half of the loaf outlawing
abortions throughout America. Pro-choice activists will fight to
retain what they have in various states and work diligently to
undermine what they see as police states, which are anti-women,
denying them autonomy over their bodies. There will also be
internal dissent within restrictive states. Large numbers of
objectors in anti-abortion red states will be defiant. They will
vehemently disagree with what their state is doing in denying
women freedom of choice. In red states, with blue cities, some
prosecutors already say they won’t prosecute.
In other jurisdictions, large and small, officials may just turn a

blind eye. Dyed-in-the-wool anti-abortionists will then demand
ever harsher laws, more penalties, and greater conformity, trying
to fire officials who do not sign up for bullying women. They will
be punitive and unforgiving towards doctors and nurses they do
not trust. They will want to make an example out of a few to make
the rest cower under uncertainty. In some cases, it will get highly
personal and ugly, but it will also create its own backlash.
THE BACKLASH COMEBACK

Since the demise of Roe, pro-choice activists are shaking off
their shock and dismay, regrouping, and beginning to organize in
a big way. Much as the fifty years campaign of anti-abortionists
succeeded in packing the Supreme Court, the counterattack has
begun. It will cover a wide range of tactics and comprise both short
and long-term strategies. So, how will the backlash against Roe play
out? Some or all of the following may be employed by pro-choice
activists. Consider the possibilities:
#1 No Contest: No Debate: The number one argument will

be an incessant drumbeat pounded throughout media that if
chauvinistic men got pregnant and were the primary young
childcare givers, the whole controversy over abortion would vanish
into thin air since men would not stand for it. Therefore, it is
blatantly sexist and misogynistic while using morality and religion
as a dodge. Most everyone knows intuitively this is true about men.
Conservative men will squirm and bloviate but can’t deny it.
#2 Pill Distribution: Since half of all abortions end medically

with the two drugs of misoprostol and mifepristone, the plan will
be to increase current efforts already underway for several
clearinghouses that dispense these pills to whoever requests them.
Those in restrictive states cannot easily stop the U. S. Post Office,
FedEx, UPS, and Amazon. Discreet and benign-looking packaging
will show up at people’s front doors. Friends and relatives will carry
them privately across state borders in defiant disregard for
restrictive state laws.
YouTube videos will walk a woman through the procedure in

detail. Telemedicine with doctors from out of state or country may
also be available for advice. The border with Mexico will be
porous. More threats of litigation will follow. A new “drug war”
against mifepristone on the state level and with the FDA is
inevitable and is already underway. Forced birth activists see these
pills as a mortal threat and will try to place every obstacle available
to shut down this “pill highway.” Regardless of what the ultimate
decisions of the Supreme Court rulings turn out to be, it will make
little difference. Pill restrictions will fail when large amounts can be
smuggled in from foreign countries if that becomes necessary.
Everything will become contentious and murky about the true
nature of the “underground” battle over pills.
#3 Referendums: Citizens want to vote. Everywhere citizens

get a vote, it is against restrictive abortion laws. Kansas, a red
conservative state, resoundingly voted to retain abortion rights.
They were followed shortly with voting in conservative states like
Kentucky and Montana, although the Kentucky state Supreme
Court ignored the wishes of its citizen’s vote. Events in Ohio and
Wisconsin further the narrative against harsh restrictions.
Those states which quickly passed restrictive laws regarding

abortion will find themselves in their own internal mini-civil war.
Anti-abortionists who rejoiced at the overturning of Roe will have
to contend with anywhere between 45% to 50% of citizens in their
own restrictive states who disagree with them. There will be
demands for a referendum, even in states that don’t allow them.
Anti-abortionists will constantly be fighting many rear-guard

actions against those who demand women’s rights in their own
states. Pro-choice organizers will push to “let the people decide,”
not male politicians. And if legislators refuse, they will be called
out as sexist, undemocratic cowards, and chickens that refuse to
let the people vote. Elections may become even more contentious.
It may be shocking in a few states how many “closet

supporters” of a woman’s right to choose there are when men,
church members, preachers, husbands, and hardline conservatives
are not looking over their shoulder in a voting booth. The New
York Times did a study calculating that if all 50 states voted on
abortion, only ten might narrowly retain restrictive abortion laws.
But interestingly, even in these conservative states, the margins fell
roughly within the 5% range. These are very close votes. Since the
end of Roe, the number of women registering to vote has spiked
upward. It could tip the balance in additional states in favor of
abortion rights.
Even in ultra-conservative states like Mississippi and South

Dakota where an earlier ballot initiative promoting “personhood”
was on the ballot, it was defeated. Referendum outcomes may be
surprising. Kansas and other conservative states proved that. It is
telling that forced birth advocates are busy working to erect
barriers to ballot referendums. They greatly fear the public and do
not want them to vote.
An interesting alternative approach is to insist that only

women be allowed to vote in a statewide referendum on abortion
since it exclusively affects them. While this would not pass court
muster, the idea would be to shame men and put them on the
backfoot because they claim disingenuously that they care about
women. If true, then let the women decide would be the rallying
cry. Put up or shut up. It puts men on the defensive against
democracy and equal protection.
#4 Attacking All Church Hierarchies: No, not the religion,

not the faith, not the belief, not the members, but rather the
leadership that is rigged and controlled by men (both Catholic and
Protestant), and they should butt out on this private issue. A
drumbeat will sound that this is the 21st century, not medieval
times. Women deserve respect, and Holy Men do not hold a
monopoly on God. The key questions should be about the
character of God. Is he a God of love, mercy, free will, and respect,
or an ogre God, ready to shoot lightning bolts down from heaven
only upon women (not men) and send them to hell, cackling with
glee, who got themselves in a jam, often not their fault?
#5 Funding: There could be a major organizing push to raise

large sums of money among several pro-choice groups.
First will come the encouragement of millions of women and

men to financially support clinics for outreach and help for poor
women to travel who wish to make their own choices. The second
push may be an appeal to billionaire women (and men) to organize
themselves in a high-profile PR program to collectively donate
several billion dollars to the issue of female independence and
empowerment supporting clinics and referendums. It will require
female leadership like Melinda French Gates, Makenzie Scott,
Oprah Winfrey, and many others who have the connections and
relationships to raise vast amounts of money.
A parallel push by activists among big corporations for major

funding beyond window dressing and PR could also be launched.
Big-name celebrities might be drafted in a coordinated campaign
to raise funds and keep the issue in the public eye. Also, some
religious leaders who are pro-choice may be asked to speak up and
speak out.
#6 New Clinics: The imperative to open more women’s

clinics on the borders of anti-abortion states may become a distinct
possibility. With proper funding, security, resources, and sufficient
new staffing to handle the increased requests for services, it may
become a game changer for some women.
#7 The War of the Websites: Cyberspace will be ratcheted

up to provide trusted information, compassion, and hope that
desperate women are not abandoned in a time of need and that
they have choices, their choices. Forced birth advocates will
attempt to shut down websites in restrictive states but not succeed
while dispensing misinformation.
#8 Outreach to the Black and Latino Communities: Since

most abortion clinics are organized by whites, facilitators in these
communities of color will need to be recruited to serve as better
confidants to give added comfort and trust as a go-between. All
ethnicities will need to be recruited across the board. Peer-to-peer
help is important. But this is less a racial issue than a class issue
that affects the poor disproportionately regardless of color.
#9 Media Campaigns: Press releases and daily headline news

will occur of women dying or in deep distress because of draconian
state rules. The push to end Roe over the past 50 years was, on
some level, an abstract “what if.” But harsh and unforgiving laws
in restrictive states will put a new reality on the national scene that
affects the lives of actual women. Stories about real women dying
or suffering compromised health outcomes beat statistics every
time. It becomes personal.
#10 The Horror of Rape and Incest: Fear sells. The public
will recoil in disgust as innocent women are shown trapped by
nonsensical laws that also make them out to be criminals. Women’s
greatest fear will move them to anger, then unity, then organizing,
and finally, an attitude of “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to
take it anymore,” defiance. A call to women everywhere to rise up
against such evil laws (mainly passed by men) will gather steam.
#11 Drafting More Men: Fathers, husbands, and brothers will

be asked to speak up loudly and more often, and with passion in
defense of women they love and care about to make their own
choices.
#12 Highlighting the Potential Closing of IVF Clinics:

Restricting clinics that may deny women who want a child because
of leftover embryos in the process would be contentious. Any
attempted closings will bring a backlash.
#13 Holding Men Accountable: Calls to hold men

accountable who got any woman pregnant will ensue. There will
be attacks on their irresponsibility for birth control that all end up
on the woman. Do men do their part? How about a man being
sued for not using a condom? Ridiculous, maybe, but it illustrates
a point.
#14 Going on the Offensive: It is offensive to treat women

like children, that they are denied free agency and incapable of
handling their most private situations.
#15 Demanding a New Federal Child Support Law: A

demand for a new national database to be created to register all
births as to male paternity to supersede all state laws. Its main
requirement would be that all men pay child support for the babies
they helped to create.
If one believes that babies are important, especially forced

birth babies, anti-abortionists should be the first in line to support
this new national law. No more dead-beat dads that harm children.
State laws are often weak and all over the map, and often
ineffective. Enforcement is spotty. Men skip out to other states
and start another family. Jurisdictions are confusing and time-
consuming, and such cases have a lower priority in the courts.
A national child support law with teeth in it regarding

enforcement and financial collection is long overdue. The potential
upside is that more men will take responsibility for birth control,
leading to fewer abortions, a win for pro-life advocates. Getting hit
in the wallet gets men’s attention. It should be championed by
conservatives in promoting personal responsibility.
But conservatives will reflexively oppose it as “big

government” (and to protect men) and a hidden tax, yet can’t deny
the benefits of potentially lowering government taxpayer costs
while helping children, a family values position. A Catch-22
dilemma for them. Men who cry invasion of privacy are laughable
compared to what a woman must be subjected to when denied
choice.
#16 The Mobilization of Young Women: On college

campuses, young women have youth, passion, drive, energy, and a
voice they are not afraid to use. Smart, intelligent, and articulate,
they recognize their future is on the line as they are into
their childbearing years. It is not an academic matter for them, but

real life. But some of the passion and urgency may be dissipated
by living in an abortion-protected state.
#17 Education: The fact is that most women getting an

abortion are already mothers and not someone getting pregnant on
Saturday night in the back seat of a car. The truth is that a totally
responsible woman who does everything right, even if her birth
control is 99% effective, may find it fails her.
#18 Confrontations with Male Politicians: In hearings

before Congress or in a state legislature, or on TV, people may
demand that a male legislator would swear that if his wife, sister,
daughter, or granddaughter were raped, he would raise that child as
his own. No equivocation, a yes or no.
Next question: “Would you forbid your wife if she wanted an

abortion?” (Note: For older legislators, a hypothetical--“You and
your wife are 30 years old, and your wife is raped. Would you swear
you would not get an abortion? Please tell the committee and your
colleagues here today and the public what you would do.”) And if
they respond with adoption, the question would be whether they
would change their will to include full inheritance rights for the
rapist’s child and financially support the child to adulthood. We
will let the American people judge your honesty.
#19 Calling Out Restrictive States: Such states would earn

the slogan Pro-Life Fakers because they are cheapskates, misers,
and liars about being pro-life. This is because their states fail to
support kids and their mothers with substantial money (not
tokenism money) to help and protect forced-birth babies and the
poor from childhood to adulthood. Calls will go out to support the
“Pro-Life Children’s Priority Act” and dare Republican pro-lifers
not to vote for it. At a minimum, it would restore enhanced CTC
benefits, guarantee health care for every young person under 26, and
include free dental care. (Note: Dental care is one of the biggest
requests among the suffering homeless and the poor. Many resort to
cheap street drugs to relieve their pain)
Because pro-lifers claim to be most concerned about a baby

and their mother, they would demand that the mother get paid
maternity leave for four months and free health care for three
years, covering the pregnancy along with pre-and post-natal care
(for those not already covered). To help low-wage working moms,
annual paid sick leave for three weeks would be guaranteed by all
employers after four months on the job. Minimum wages would
be raised to a living wage as a percentage of each state’s median
wage since states differ in the cost of living. All these provisions
would become standard protocol as simply mercy toward children.
#20 Demands of Pro-Life Advocates: Pro-life advocates

must lobby relentlessly in favor of federally funded childcare (to
allow mothers to work) and organize 500,000 pro-life sisters to
march on Washington to demand professed family value
Republicans commit to dedicated taxes to support children. This
would also include enhanced benefits (means tested) for struggling
mothers. Also, some current financial provisions need to be set
aside for these “forced birth” babies to afford college 18 years later.
If one cares about children, and not just a fetus, this bill must be
passed.
Of course, conservative politicians will cry that we don’t have

the money. They will try to talk the talk but refuse to walk the walk
and pass such a “budget-busting” bill. The term CINOs (Christians
in Name Only) will be bandied about because when it comes to
money and taxes in meaningful support of children, conservative
politicians start to sing a different tune. If Republican legislators fail
to vote for the Pro-Life Children’s Priority Act, it clearly
demonstrates they are not pro-life by failing to live up to their own
sanctimony and righteousness.
#21 Rallying Prosecutors in Red States: Crime will be

emphasized as a top concern, and the need for all law enforcement
departments to spend their budgets and time on getting bad

guys, not defenseless women. Large segments of the legal
establishment will argue that they lack the resources and personnel
to harass, monitor, and bully desperate pregnant women. Besides,
those women with means can arrange for an abortion out of state.
That means prosecuting mostly poor women. A ubiquitous slogan
with T-shirts, posters, and banners will declare, “We are
prosecutors, not persecutors.”
#22 Highlighting the 8th Amendment: The 8th Amendment

protecting criminals against cruel and unusual punishment will be
repeatedly cited. An abortion is roughly fourteen times safer than
a birth in terms of causing death to the mother in the first six
weeks, according to the American College of OBGYNs (ACOG).
So, the state is demanding that this additional risk be borne by a
female against her will, possibly resulting in her death. The U.S.
ranks 55th globally in maternal deaths.
#23 Civil Rights: Money ($$$) is always pro-choice and is

discriminatory against poor women who can’t travel because of a
lack of funds. Only they are affected and stuck. Restrictive states
will not have an answer for the fact that abortion is mostly a class
issue, primarily targeting the poor.
#24 Review and Assessment: Someday, there may be a

review of the Dobbs case and a reassessment of where the public
is comfortable. A new reasonable standard of 15 weeks (floor and
ceiling) for an abortion (which would cover 95% + of all abortions)
would increase public support and remove the red herring of
partial-birth abortions. Any medical issues that arise beyond that
time frame would be up to an entire hospital board. It would be a
smart tactical concession.
#25 Elections Matter: Conservative forced birth politicians

will be called out as being anti-women, anti-freedom, anti-choice,
and anti-liberty candidates. They know that the abortion
controversy in most jurisdictions is a loser issue, especially among
women. They will constantly try to change the conversation to other
topics. They will be framed as mostly hardline male misogynist

politicians, out-of-touch, beholden to male clerics and activists on
a mission. They will pay the price at the ballot box. Women will not
be happy with them and will make their votes count. Scorned
women voters will tip close elections.
THE DEATH STAR?

The jury is still out on the future of abortion politics, and
nothing is certain. But a potential “death star” could, over time, be
a game changer. Who knows? Maybe yes, maybe no. But then
again, money talks. Forced birth advocates would howl at a
systematic, organized campaign to get celebrities, corporations,
and sports to boycott restrictive abortion states.
Imagine rock star celebrities taking a stand not to perform in

stadiums and arenas that fail to protect a woman’s right to choose.
Or, in the alternative, performing while also making a “scene” or a
provocative “statement” during their performance as a protest.
Some Hollywood studios may decide to send their on-location

filming productions out of anti-abortion states. Imagine female
athletes in golf, tennis, swimming, and track and field moving their
venues to only pro-choice states. Men will hate all of this
interference; they will just hate it. But bit by bit, the pressure from
women and allies may build slowly over time. Change is slow and
may take years. After all, the demise of Roe took nearly fifty years.
And here comes the potential killer punch. Women will

agitate, agitate, agitate, along with some male allies, that football
bowl games and all-star basketball games be moved out of states
that do not respect women’s choices. There will be male outrage
and horror at even such an attempt, and it may take years of
cajoling before any of it could come to pass.
Sports leagues and organizations dominated by men will thank

their lucky stars that they can hide behind their long-term
contractual obligations tying their hands (“Thank you, Lord, for
long-term contracts,” they will mutter). Football is a religion, and
to attack such a sacred event is close to blasphemy. It will just
prove to sportsmen that women are out of control. You can’t trust
women. They are nuts. Women may also target advertisers that
could affect millions of dollars and be a potent symbol of women’s
power since they are the dominant household shoppers.
Perhaps the death star will fade away and be a non-factor. Who
knows? Everything is only hypothetical. But even the threat will
put the fear of God into some movers and shakers like nothing
else. Money is power, and men will begin to squirm. It may be
shocking that some men will come around and “see the light”
when you threaten their pastime and their pocketbook. Chicken
legislators may then hide under the covers and reluctantly allow a
state referendum in favor of democracy, getting them off the hook
since “the people have spoken.” Now, let’s get back to the game.
The nation’s capital was far away from most of the country,
tucked away on the eastern seaboard, but the enemy (for both
sides) will now be just across town or over the state line. It does
not take much imagination to visualize several thousand protestors
forming together to invade a nearby state.
Forced birth advocates could mass rally and then cross the
border to protest at another state’s abortion clinic, trying to get
those legislators to pass laws banning abortion and to intimidate
women. Meanwhile, thousands of pro-choice activists could decide
to cross state lines to protest at restrictive state capitals against
police state Gestapo laws and tactics that prevent women from
having freedom and bodily autonomy. A potentially imagined great
visual news story for the evening news would be seeing two
invading armies, miles long, passing each other on the interstate
highway, banners flying in the wind. Thank you, Supreme Court.
You solved this issue.
DÉTENTE?
Is it possible that over many years, mutual exhaustion may set
in for both sides on the abortion issue and result in an uneasy
truce? For anti-abortionists, they have made their stand, gotten
their state laws passed in a number of states denying women an
abortion and proclaiming their righteousness. They will also
recognize that despite all the draconian enforcement obstacles, it
will be self-evident that women who want an abortion will find a
way, one way or another. Forced birth advocates will also find it
nearly impossible to refute the charge that their anti-abortion laws
and restrictions apply only to poor women without money. Neither
will they be able to deny that gender is the issue and that if men
got pregnant, there would be no state bans or limitations.
As for the pro-choice side, they will eventually claim a de facto

victory even if failing a de jure outcome in some states. Their
efforts to set up more clinics on the state border lines will, over
time, be able to handle the extra demand. But this may not even
be necessary as abortion pills will increasingly be the preferred
private method of abortion at home. It could be that abortion
clinics may decline in number as a result. Clandestine “drug
dealers” of family, friends, and others will ensure that abortion pills
get to women in restrictive states one way or the other.
Forced birth advocates will also find themselves fighting a ten-

headed monster dragon that will frustrate them. Everything will
become more difficult and an increasingly uphill climb.
The first head is Wall Street businesses, with many companies

offering to pay their female employee’s expenses to obtain an out-
of-state abortion. Threatening boycotts against mega billion-dollar
companies can backfire on a state’s workforce and have a ripple
effect. Wall Street does not trust in God; they trust in money.
The second dragon head is liberal Hollywood. Television and

movies have tentacles that reach far and wide and are nearly
unanimous on the pro-choice side. They largely influence the
culture for good and bad.
The third foe is the mainstream national media, dominated by

college-educated professional journalists. No matter how hard they
try to objectively report the news on the abortion issue, the clear
message is that the forced birth position is for medieval times and
an era of chastity belts for women, not the 21st century.
The fourth enemy is Silicon Valley, with billions of subscribers

and its future-oriented ethos about everything. Their tentacles
spread everywhere. They will champion the woman over the fetus.
Young female social media “influencers” with large followings will
chime in and express their displeasure against restrictive states.
The fifth entity of concern over time is the young. Unless there
is another large religious “awakening” that is unforeseen, the rise
of the “nones” without religious ties will be an increasing challenge
for the church. Evangelicals have peaked in membership, and their
stridency on a number of issues will not endear them to the young.
And the young mostly favor a woman’s right to choose.
The sixth challenge will be the increased passing of the “Baby

Boomers” over the next 25 years. More conservative than the
general public, their votes and voices will decline year by year. As
many as twenty million or more will die just over the next ten years.
The seventh ugly head will be a ticking clock. The largest

group of supporters for abortion rights are those with college
degrees, particularly women. As the numbers of the college-
educated continue to rise among the under fifty-crowd and the
beginning of the passing of the Baby Boomer generation, the odds
favor abortion rights with every passing year. And with more
women than ever moving up the ladder in all positions of society
and authority, their power and influence will continue to grow.

And they will demand bodily autonomy for all women.
Over time, in a quest for increasing female talent, businesses

may be inclined (or pushed) to locate headquarters, offices, and
manufacturing facilities in pro-choice states. They will want to
avoid potential losses among the rising ranks of accomplished
women who may shy away from restrictive states. Some OBGYN
doctors may choose pro-choice states to practice, negatively
impacting restrictive states' maternal care.
The eighth head of the monster will be university faculty

members on hundreds of university campuses. Already a majority
of students are female, and a liberal faculty culture will champion
female autonomy.
The ninth problem will be a recognition that many other

countries are liberalizing their views about women, free agency,
and reproductive rights. America will increasingly be out of step
with world trends bending in favor of women and opposed to
restrictive American states that deny, or limit, female choice.
The tenth threat may provide the biggest black eye to the
internal hypocrisy of pro-life leaders and activists. Stories will be
splashed across the media of leaders or members of their families
trying to get an abortion on the sly with false names and secret
locations. Can you imagine a governor’s wife who was raped after
he signed a bill allowing no exceptions? What is policy “for others”
is far different when it comes home to your own family. Nothing
is abstract anymore.
Imagine a well-known anti-abortion activist whose pregnancy

with an abusive husband caught cheating on her is the last straw,
and she tries to get a secret abortion. Consider a renowned
conservative preacher dealing with a family incest issue or getting
a parishioner pregnant from an affair, arranging for an abortion. It
would be a circus of recriminations, gossip, disgrace, finger-
pointing, and a tabloid editor’s dream. Headline news stories will

play it for weeks until it is replaced by the next scandal of hypocrisy.
When all is said and done, abortion is all about the role of
women, coercion, religion, sex, class, money, and who decides, a
woman or the state. Fighting the 10-headed monster will be a
daunting challenge for forced birth advocates. Many of them will
feel that they won a significant victory in overturning Roe but will
question whether they will ever win the war. A changing culture is,
after all, a changing culture.
MICHAEL LEE EPILOGUE | 266
EPILOGUE
God is pro-free agency

Money is always pro-choice
The majority of women are pro-choice
The majority of men are pro-choice
America is pro-choice
And “Holy Men” do not have a monopoly
on God
HEADLINE BREAKING NEWS
TRUST WOMEN:
THEY KNOW BEST!
MICHAEL LEE PART V CODA | 267
PART V
CODA
Reflections on truth, integrity, honor, and decency.

Having an allegiance to objective truth should be a part
of everyone’s allegiance to their honor code because
truth matters.
THE “TRUTH” ABOUT HYPOCRISY

ON STEROIDS: NO DOUBT!
OK, time for some truth serum to be passed around the room
to everybody, whether on the left, the middle, the right, or even
the extreme right concerning abortion. Donald Trump, three times
married, a well-known misogynist, and the man accused by roughly
two dozen women of sexual assault (who all lied, every one of
them, despite some payoffs and a conviction) is always a boy scout
when it comes to telling the truth and his honesty is beyond
reproach. No Doubt!
Is there anyone, regardless of political persuasion that believes

for a second that if one of the women Trump was messing around
with got pregnant, he would have followed the restrictive anti-
abortion laws of the state if they had been in force at the time? Do
you believe he would have “fessed up” and insisted the woman
have the child in keeping with the anti-abortion laws of such a
restrictive state? Do you believe he would “man up” and be a good
father and be present in that child’s life including providing equal
inheritance rights to his fortune? What if there were several women
(potential little Trumpies) at the same time in the same situation?
Would he stand by and honor these babies as well?
No, it would never happen, not in a New York minute. No

Doubt! The pregnant woman/women would be whisked away
quickly to another pro-choice state or out of the country for an
abortion, all expenses paid. Discreetly and secretly, of course. No
Doubt! If questioned, Donald Trump would deny it as fake news
and a political witch hunt. No Doubt! The Supreme Court and
state legislatures may pass rulings and laws, but Donald Trump has
always operated outside laws, customs, and norms that do not
apply to him. Rules are made “for the little people.”
Donald Trump has always believed and shown time and time
again that truth is irrelevant and doesn’t matter. His loyal fans
suffering from amnesia don’t care. OK, the truth serum may be
wearing off now, but if anyone doubts this scenario, Donald
Trump has a bridge in Brooklyn he would like to sell to you. Cheap!
No returns!
ROLE MODELS: STANDING UP FOR

“TRUTH!”
Republican George Bush Senior once talked about his “life
code” and said this: “Tell the truth, don’t blame others, be strong,
do your best, try hard, forgive, stay the course.” He was a man born
into privilege who could have easily arranged to stay out of harm’s
way during World War II. His father, Prescott Bush, was a
successful businessman and later became a U.S. Senator from
Connecticut. His mother came from a prominent family as well.
On his 18th birthday, the same day as his graduation from high
school, George, the senior high school class president, enlisted in
the war effort only seven months after Pearl Harbor.
Upon finishing his naval training, George Bush Sr. became the
youngest naval pilot in the nation. He flew 58 combat missions and
was also shot down, losing two comrades, and was picked up by a
submarine in the Pacific Ocean. Aside from a love of country and
a sense of duty, he claimed he was inspired by his high school
motto from Phillips Academy, “not for self.” The rest of his life
was devoted to honorable service in many high-profile positions
before becoming president.
Historians laud his deft handling of the collapse of the Soviet

Union without a shot being fired. Millions of soldiers in Europe
from many countries, including hundreds of thousands of
Americans, stood on guard for decades on freedoms side of the
Iron Curtain awaiting possible Armageddon under a mushroom

cloud but went home alive and well. Competence, professionalism,
service, common sense, respect for decency, and adherence to
truth is an honorable and noble legacy George Bush Sr. left behind
for America. A noble Republican. The country would be fortunate
to find another one like him.
In contrast, is there any parent in America who would be

proud to have their child emulate Donald Trump’s stellar
character, his conduct, his decency, his compassion, his humility,
his graciousness, and of course, his legendary truthfulness? Donald
Trump, narcissist extraordinaire, flunks on all counts of character
and brags about grabbing women “by the pussy” and insists he is
a “stable genius.” A parental nightmare.
Yet, Donald Trump holds a mystical cult power over

evangelicals and most conservatives. Truth is relative and easily
denied. He mocks the essence of Christianity when he says he can’t
recall anything he has had to ask God’s forgiveness for. He acts on
impulse with no filters, no restraints, no accountability, and with
self-assured impunity. He thrives on hype, spectacle, negativity,
and bombast at the expense of America’s future. America has
never seen anything like it in its history. And yet most evangelical
lemmings are enthralled by their pied piper. All sins are forgiven
or overlooked reflexively without much thought regarding their
hero.
The difference between a decent and capable George Bush Sr.

and a loose-cannon Donald Trump is the difference between a
mature adult in a crowded room and an angry and self-centered
teenager playing with a hand grenade, always threatening to pull
the pin.
Compare and contrast Donald Trump’s harsh style and

demeanor and those of his blind disciples with that of a local
Rotary club devoted to community issues. Over 46,000 Rotary
clubs are scattered around the world. The Rotary promotes the
four-way test motto. #1 Is it the truth? #2 Is it fair to all

concerned? #3 Will it build goodwill and better friendships? #4
Will it be beneficial to all concerned? You be the judge.
The traditional media have been played by Donald Trump, a

train wreck they can’t escape. He has been dynamite box office for
ratings and an ongoing soap opera waiting for the next gripping
episode. Fair-minded reporters are also trapped in the no-win idea
of “both siderisms” and false equivalency in a vain attempt to show
“on-the other-hand” neutrality. It doesn’t work and fails miserably.
Donald Trump treats them as saps and suckers. If Donald Trump
lies 30,000 times and his opposition lies 3,000 times, they are both
liars and both should be called out for it. But that is not the same
as even-handed equivalency.
Someone who robs an old lady by snatching her purse on the

street and another who robs a bank and shoots a bank manager are
both criminals, but hardly equivalent. Sadly, the cynical public is
left with the impression that there is no difference between lying
politicians.
The hypocrisy even extends to Donald Trump’s three

appointed conservative Supreme Court justices directly resulting in
the overturning of Roe. The biggest joke is that Donald Trump has
always been personally pro-choice until he decided to run for
office, despite some public waffling and dissembling on both sides
of the issue over time.
In 1999 on “Meet the Press,” Trump explicitly said he was pro-

choice. For political reasons, not out of deep personal convictions,
he held his finger to the wind and adjusted his position to appeal
to the right wing of the Republican Party where the intensity and
the votes were. This is even more evident when considering his
private conduct towards women. His selection of Mike Pence as
vice-president, a devout Christian and ardent foe of abortion,
helped seal the deal and was a signal that won him the support
of conservative evangelicals. Without them, he could never

have been elected president.
It’s true, Donald Trump changed America, but in a harsh,

bitter, and negative way. It is impossible to point to anything
Donald Trump “elevated” as exemplary in American life. He made
no effort or appeal to a “higher calling” for American goodness.
He never attempted to set any example of any redeeming quality.
He never showed respect or even decency to his “nasty”
opponents who were nothing but “losers.” He never demonstrated
“statesmanship” while lauding dictators and showing contempt
and rudeness to many of America’s friendly foreign leaders. He
never attempted any healing politics in his overriding quest for self-
aggrandizement. Truth and integrity were hidden away in a closet.
Vitriol has been his main calling card. Insults, revenge, and
scathing attacks on others consume his time and attention.
But the can of worms he opened up through the ruling of the

Supreme Court on Roe v. Wade settled nothing, only throwing
more gasoline on the fires of division. The fallout and rancor will
echo in the history books for decades after Donald Trump is dead
and long gone. Despite all the crazy drama that surrounds him, his
impact on Roe and the Supreme Court with its lifetime
appointments may be his most lasting impact, along with the
constant drip, drip, drip, corrosion of democracy, reflected by
Trumpism even without Trump. The country deserves better.
Some small factions of the Republican Party are trying to

distance themselves from Donald Trump, but not Trumpism.
They hope to find Trump-Lite without the baggage. Donald
Trump will leave a lasting stain on America, rather than a noble
contribution. History will remember him most of all for his anger
and bellicosity. It is a tragic legacy for America.
If Donald Trump shot “Mr. Truth” in the back on 5th Avenue,

his response would be the following. “This Mr. Truth guy was a
very bad dude, a horrible guy who kept getting in my way,
hounding me, stalking me, and was very annoying. He was a real
threat to me, challenging me every day. He was always in my face,
badgering me, correcting me, and telling lies about me. A real evil
guy. A restraining order never worked with this guy. I did the
police, the courts, and the country a favor in “taking him out.”
Mr. Truth was dangerous and a bad man. He was a terrible

guy, very nasty. He had to go. He also showed his disrespect by
turning his back on me. I had no choice but to shoot him in the
back as a public service. But as the cops say, it was a “righteous
shoot.” Indeed, I say it was a “perfect shoot.” Mr. Truth, a bum,
got what he deserved. Nobody will miss him. Besides, my
hundreds of supporters and fans on 5th Avenue who witnessed the
shooting will testify that I acted in self-defense against a very
threatening and menacing idiot. I am an innocent man and did
nothing wrong. Furthermore, I deserve a medal and a reward for
community service.”
Donald Trump’s crass violation of classified top-secret

documents found scattered all over his Mar-a-Lago home in a
bathroom, ballroom, storage area, and office are beyond the pale
of rational conduct. No average loyal American of any persuasion
or party would be so cavalier and reckless. Even a twelve-year-old
would have at least hidden top secrets under his bedroom mattress
or dug a hole in his backyard. He would have told no one, showed
no one, and certainly would not have left them scattered
haphazardly throughout the house. Trump’s conduct defies any
normal sense of reason or good judgment.
Donald Trump’s lying and obstruction of justice regarding

top-secret documents align with his arrogant attitude that he is
always above any accountability. But of even greater concern, and
much more worrisome for America was the genuflecting of other
Republican candidates and prominent Republican legislators
trashing the FBI, the Justice Department, the special counsel, and
the media, all on bended knee in fawning worship of Donald
Trump. It is even more incomprehensible considering the head of
the FBI, Christopher Wray, was appointed to his job by none other
than Donald Trump. The smearing of all good and honorable civil
servants (like the FBI) as having a personal vendetta against
Trump’s inexcusable conduct is beyond sad. It is dangerous.
When will the good and honorable Republican leaders

(cowardly hunkered down in the basement, seemingly, incognito
in the witness protection program) of old-time values come out of
their bunker and stand up for truth? Not just against the lies of
Trump, but against the trashing of objective truth and promotion
of crazy conspiracies? Leaders who will place the national interest
of America over any individual or false narrative.
The sad misfortune for America about Donald Trump is that

he always puts himself first over America. Trump’s “Make America
Great Again” slogan properly translates to “Make Donald Trump
Great Always.” His quest for a comeback as president (and
possibly pardoning himself from all indictments and convictions)
is all about the bright spotlight on the American stage with himself
in its center. At a meeting of CPAC, the conservative political
action committee, Donald Trump was full of vinegar and
victimhood, while claiming, “I am your retribution.” Certainly,
these are the uplifting words of a statesman and an inspirational
leader!
If there is one word to describe Donald Trump, that word

would be belligerent. Every subject, gripe, grievance, and rant is
about him. Selfish and vain, he complains like a spoiled child that
he is never at fault and always a victim of everything because a lot
of people don’t like him, or more accurately, do not worship him
by kissing his ring and big toe. He whines as if he is the most
mistreated martyr in world history since Jesus Christ, and he is not
completely sure even about that.
The truth is Donald Trump has always been unhappy with

being a mere president which he views as too confining. His dream
would be to be King Donald and have a fawning royal court with
the absolute power to send all those who displease him to jail or
worse. Swipe right, swipe left with his scepter depending on his
mood. “Lock em’ up!” That’s the dream job. Donald Trump’s
driving goal is not good governance, the American people, or
wasting his time over boring policy positions, but simply to be
worshipped. It is so tragic that character and integrity are cast aside
and are held in contempt by so many elephants.
In 2012, the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest

Protestant denomination in America passed a Resolution on
the Moral Character of Public Officials that includes the
following: “Tolerance of serious wrong by leaders sears the
conscience of the culture, spawns unrestrained immorality
and lawlessness in the society, and surely results in God’s
judgment.” For devotees of Donald Trump and those in his
image, the response is, “Never mind.”
“BORN AGAIN” ELEPHANTS:

REFLECTIONS ON “TRUTH”
Ok, so what is the point of going into this snake pit of anger
on all sides? The answer should be to honor truth once again. The
point is we need to bring back the GOP, the Grand Old Party of
Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and Reagan. In essence, a
“born again” elephant defending all the good virtues because truth
is precious and has been sullied by Trumpism. Truth has been
trampled underfoot. But all these giants would be mocked today
as RINOs (Republicans in name only). Yes, even Reagan! Would
these giants of yesteryear even recognize today’s elephant party?
Even decent and good men like the late John McCain and the
Senator from Utah, Mitt Romney, are treated with contempt and
scorn. How tragic.
A proud party that believed in truth, justice, and the American

way has lost its way, blinded by “alternative facts,” loony
conspiracies, and a denial of common truth. A party that often
refuses to even outline a platform of ideas and policies is basically

saying whatever Dear Leader Trump or his wannabe disciples
decide, we will follow as sheep.
Never before in American history has a cult following of a

public leader been so profound. For evangelicals, some soul-
searching over the checklist of the seven deadly sins (pride, greed,
lust, envy, gluttony, wrath, sloth) is in order. But they ignore it all.
However, sloth may not be relevant to the victimology of Donald
Trump as he works full time around the clock tweeting and
complaining about how he has been wronged and mistreated. He
is a MEGA-MAGA-MARTYR. It is worth noting the contrast
between a sunny, optimistic, gregarious, and humorous Ronald
Reagan and the angry, pessimistic, dystopian, and bleak carnage
outlook of Donald Trump. “Morning in America” has been
replaced with “Winter is Coming.”
Tragically, far too many politicians in the elephant camp today

will sell their souls for power, position, money, and ego and put
self-interest above the country. Many are cowed into public silence,
muttering behind closed doors over any of Trump’s transgressions.
The more radical Trump cheerleaders embrace the attendant

chaos. Yet, those who are fearful centrists have their muted voices
interpreted as complicity and an endorsement. Without a spine,
they live in abject fear of blowback from Twitter, YouTube, Fox
News, TikTok, Instagram, and the Facebook lynch mob. Worse,
much worse, is many of them with Ivy League educations know
they are lying with impunity. Yet, they can’t help themselves and
calculate it is necessary in the service of blind ambition and the lust
for power which comes above truth itself, which no country can
long survive. They are in deep denial of the Biblical admonition of,
“For what will it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and
lose his own soul” (Matthew 16:26).
The tragedy of the former Republican Party (now the Trump

and Grump Party) is that America needs a good and great party.
Sadly, it is missing in action in a leveraged buyout to the cult of
Trump and blind accomplices serving the Kool-Aid. Much of the
elephant establishment is in fear of Trump and refuses to suggest
the emperor has no clothes, thereby risking political death.
The elephant party is largely in rebellion against the present

and the future, hoping to find solace in a vain and futile attempt to
return to a simpler past. They are held hostage by a “House
Freedom Caucus” faction mentality that is more concerned about
ideology, obstructionism, and grievance over governance with no
vision for the future except the status quo or retro causes. “Where
there is no vision, the people perish.” Proverbs 29:18.
Appallingly, despite Donald Trump, and even after he has

gone, he has infected the party with a virulent virus in which mini-
Trumps of all kinds are taking the playbook and perpetuating the
idea that American “carnage” continues unabated and the country
is sliding down the hell-hole fast.
Only an authoritarian like Trump, or a close clone of him, can

set the country straight again. Democracy and majority rule
nonsense just gets in the way of the greater good as we see it. We
have to save the country from itself. Therefore, we are entitled to
rig the game whenever we possibly can with gerrymandering and
voter suppression. Elephants are more interested in ruling than in
fair representation. Trumpism without Trump is still a virus. It
leaves bitterness, resentment, and a mean-spiritedness in its wake.
Donald Trump’s M.O. and those of his disciples over any bad
conduct or policy is obfuscation. The response is always to deflect,
distract, denigrate, disparage, defame, demean, deny, and destroy
anything or anyone that displeases him. Always point out the speck
in the eye of your opposition and ignore the “beam” (Matthew 7:3-
5) in your own eye regarding your own conduct or any
shortcomings. Never apologize, never defend, never budge, but
always relentlessly attack, attack, attack, ruthlessly and with malice.

Never stop for a red light.
As we have mentioned before, evangelicals are good people,

and many are great people, but fear sells, and Donald Trump and
his “fellow travelers” can sell it better than anyone. He has
promised to be their gladiator champion to stand against those
who threaten change in a changing world.
But for God fearing people of the gospel, they need to see
clearly that Trump in his behavior and conduct is the anti-Jesus in
word, spirit, and deed, going against what Jesus stood for. Being a
fan of anyone, whether it be in sports, movies, politics, or even a
favorite pastor, a man of God, can be blinding. The word fan is
taken from the word fanatic. The Bible warns against idolatry.
Trump rallies are often where the faithful can gather to worship
their new Messiah.
There is a difference between genuine faith and blind faith

which is the blind leading the blind in a circle. Many evangelicals,
but not all, will scoff at the idea that if they had to choose who to
follow at church next Sunday, half the church may choose Trump
over Jesus. Does any true, honest, and committed evangelical in
their heart of hearts believe Jesus would validate, applaud, and
promote Donald Trump? WWJD? But Jesus is too wimpy for most
Trumpies. Jesus means well but lacks guts, is too soft, and doesn’t
understand the issues.
Behind closed doors, preachers complain privately to one

another that they get their members for a one-hour sermon on
Sundays but can’t compete with forty hours of weekly sermonizing
by Fox News and their many podcast clones each week preaching
doom and gloom in the echo chamber. Pastors and priests are at a
loss for how to get the focus back on Jesus and the gospel.
Preachers swap stories that they are under a microscope with
members monitoring them. It used to be the other way around.
Members are ready to bolt out the church doors if a preacher dares
to cross any red lines. They do not want to hear about a meek and
loving Jesus; they want “Rambo” Jesus.
One humorous, but sad anecdote is a member complaining

about the preacher spouting liberal stuff after a preacher finished
talking about Jesus’s “Sermon on the Mount” on the “Beatitudes.”
Does any true Christian believe Jesus would show up at a raucous
Trump rally cheering wildly and wearing a red MAGA hat in
fawning approval?
Many preachers and pastors live in fear of their politicized

congregation. They do not want a schism among their members
with the real threat of losing members or tithes and offerings,
thereby wrecking the church budget and membership rolls.
Neither do they want to lose their jobs at the next church board
meeting. After all, they have a family to look after. Rumor, gossip,
and innuendo may also torpedo his chances of getting another
church elsewhere. It never looks good on your résumé to get fired.
Some pastors who went to seminary are not trained to do

anything else, despite their calling. They see no alternative. The
clear message is self-censorship, keep your mouth shut, keep a low
profile, and don’t rock the boat no matter how crazy some
members get. The prevailing view is, “I am a pastor, not a martyr.”
After all, look at what happened to Jesus.
How great would it be to have a Republican statesman? One

who could lower the temperature and hot rhetoric. On the
abortion question, perhaps speak more compassionately about
women and the hard choices they make all the time for their
families. Maybe acknowledge that no one knows God’s will on this
personal subject or has all the answers. Perhaps talk down the
crazies by making exceptions for rape and incest and being in favor
of a broad and inclusive interpretation of the “health and well-
being” of mothers by being more understanding and considerate
towards women.
Even more impressive, the statesman could be a true

Republican leader who speaks up on the importance of family
values and the need for significant financial help for struggling
families as a vigorous advocate for children. A Republican that
shows more compassion than bite and vinegar. A Republican who
can at least talk in measured words and tones beyond his crimson
red base about how much more needs to be done for the welfare
of children. A leader with the guts to propose dedicated taxes and
expansive policies in favor of working mothers and their children.
Yes, this would be a profile in courage, but also healing politics.
But before anything, truth must be restored no matter where

one stands on the political spectrum. Without objective truth,
America is in big trouble. Consider the following about the 2020
“stolen election.” Keep in mind, no politics or partisanship but just
a rational observation of common sense and the importance of
truth. In the Bible the prophet Isaiah says, “Come now, and let us
reason together.” Isaiah 1:18.
#1 The number 60 is important. Keep that number front and

center. Our system allows lawsuits to be brought into court to
challenge votes if fraud is suspected. Result? In some 60 cases or
more on the issue of fraud, Trump lost every one of them. Every
single one! A complete shut out. Trump conspiracy hounds will
claim the fix was in. But many of the judges were Republicans, and
nine were appointed by Trump himself! Wow, but no matter,
RINOs and betrayers all.
#2 The results were recounted and audited, even an audit of

an audit resulting in no change. No matter, the “deep state”
cheated.
#3 A number of the audits were supervised by Republican

election officials and under Republican governors and certified.
No matter, they can’t be trusted either.
#4 Homeland Security: Chris Krebs, director of cybersecurity,

Trump’s own appointed official, announced that the elections were
“the most secure elections in history.” Well, deniers will claim, you
can never trust the government with anything. Result: Trump fired
Krebs.
#5 The four top members of the justice department, William

Barr, followed by Jeffrey Rosen, deputy Richard Donoghue, and
assistant Steven Engle, all told President Trump there was no
evidence of fraud. They all served at the pleasure of Donald
Trump. Doesn’t matter; deniers will spout off about “turncoats.”
#6 Two secret firms hired by Donald Trump, Simpatico

Software Systems and Berkeley Group (at the reported cost of 1.5.
million dollars) to find fraud came up empty as well, despite a
furious Trump. No worry, Donald Trump continues
“Trumpeting” the Big Lie.
#7 Mike Pence, certainly the most loyal and obsequious vice

president in history, said there was no fraud to change the election.
The reaction by deniers? Hang Mike Pence!
#8 No other challenges of election fraud down the ballot were

raised for those running for Senate and House seats, only,
bizarrely, for Trump alone. Apparently, only Trump ballots were
manipulated in some convoluted fashion in a dark conspiracy.
#9 Pushback is required against Fox News (aka PRAVDA for

right-wing Americans) on the appalling revelations of emails in the
Dominion court case that blatantly showed the rank hypocrisy of
Fox News throughout the organization from studio set to
management to ownership. Misinformation and lying about the
“stolen election” were peddled relentlessly in pursuit of ratings and
stock prices in abject fear of losing their hard-core audience. It is a
stunning portrayal of moral decay where truth is trashed and lying
is condoned and promoted. The settlement pay-off of 787 million
dollars to Dominion Voting Systems was a cost of doing business
and avoiding a humiliating trial of possibly even more outrageous

revelations.
More lawsuits and settlements are in the pipeline. Clones of

Fox News were not far behind in being complicit and echoing
nonsense. Truth, honesty, and integrity were sold out. But true
believers in alternative facts do not care.
#10 In what must be seen as surreal theater, it should be

remembered that Donald Trump stood next to Vladimir Putin in
Helsinki, Finland, in July of 2018, and told the world press that he
believed Putin’s (a former KGB operative no less) over all the
American Intelligence agencies about election interference. Talk
about America first! Can one even imagine any former president
taking the word of Stalin, Khrushchev, or Brezhnev over our own
intelligence agencies? It is completely incomprehensible.
It is also remarkable for Donald Trump, the stable genius, who

is forever lauding his own greatness, of how many great people he
appointed to prominent positions in government that he has later
turned upon and trashes incessantly. Apparently, he picked a lot of
losers. Genius on display! His legal teams to defend him are a
revolving door of those who either quit or were fired.
None of these listed shortcomings are remotely the conduct

of a noble statesman, but that of an individual unworthy and unfit
for a return to the presidency. Infinitely worse, a second Trump
term would magnify and unleash all the petulance, mean-spirited,
score-settling he could muster. There would be precious little time
for governance. It would be a betrayal of American values. The
words of Abraham Lincoln are relevant. “Shall we expect some
transatlantic military giant to step across the ocean and crush us at
a blow? Never!... At what point then is the approach of danger to
be expected? If it ever reaches us it must spring up amongst us; it
cannot come from abroad. If destruction is our lot, we must
ourselves be its author and finisher.” George Washington warned,
“Guard against the [imposters] of patriotism.”
Finally, many conservatives want to whitewash the

conclusions of the January 6 Congressional insurrection hearings
as partisan and dismiss them out of hand as biased. But nearly all
those testifying to Trump’s incitement of insurrectionists on Jan. 6
were Republicans! Many dealt directly with Donald Trump. They
witnessed it.
Blind Trump diehards, in some twisted conspiracy fashion,

will believe that those Republicans testifying must have been
“turned” somehow by the deep state. It’s all fake news as they place
their hands over their eyes and ears. In another mockery of our
judicial system, Donald Trump talks openly about possibly
handing out pardons to those convicted in the January 6th Capitol
insurrection fiasco if re-elected. As a former Republican ( turned
independent), it saddens this author that truth is trashed as being
inconsequential. Democracy itself is in jeopardy when objective
truth is not believed or honored.
For anyone, Republican or not, to be an election denier

standing by Trump defies logic, math, evidence, and rationality.
Forget about politics; this is about the soul of America. It is tragic
for the country when a cult can brook no dissent from the “Big
Lie” and believes that up is down and down is up and two plus two
equals anything you want it to be. Democracy loses, and America
loses. But worst of all is that Truth with a capital T loses.
Why waste time talking about this? Because America needs a

re-dedication to basic truth. The GOP needs fearless leaders with
guts, courage, and integrity to declare truth from fiction, no matter
the personal cost. It needs to honor principles first and have an
allegiance to truth without fear. The party needs to summon
dignity and honor and, most of all, become a profile in courage,
even at the risk of losing political position and power. The party is
in need of a “road to Damascus” rebirth.
Consider the words of John Boehner, former conservative

Republican Speaker of the House who quit after having had
enough of the right-wing obstructionists of the so-called Freedom

Caucus in his own party. In an October 30, 2007, Vanity Fair
article, he lamented, “They can’t tell you what they’re for [but they]
can tell you everything they’re against. They’re anarchists. They
want total chaos. Tear it all down and start over. That’s where their
mindset is.”
John Boehner further elaborated in his book, “On the House, A

Washington Memoir” where he claimed he was “mayor of crazy town,
populated by jackasses, media hounds, and some normal citizens
as baffled as I was about how we got trapped inside the city walls.”
Mind you, this was the top Republican in the House of
Representatives, next in line behind only the vice-president to
assume the presidency.
Paul Ryan followed John Boehner as Speaker of the House but

was also hounded and vexed by the same cabal, and after four years
of frustration, he happily quit and moved back to Wisconsin
without looking back. Sadly, he has kept a low profile and has not
risen to the moment to call out deception and falsehood forcefully
and unequivocally. He has abdicated his duty to America. Sadly, he
is not alone.
The embarrassing and humiliating 15-round vote to confirm

Kevin McCarthy as Speaker of the House vividly showed the
crazies still running the asylum. It also sadly depicted McCarthy as
having the spine of a marshmallow and the ethics of a weathervane
with one finger always in the wind, willing to surrender anything
to the arsonists to get his coveted position. Obstructionism,
grievance, and performance, not governance or compromise are
the calling cards of the Freedom Caucus. Fast forward nine months
and the malcontents, troublemakers, and arsonists booted
McCarthy out of the Speakership for the first time in American
History.
The tragic problem with elephants today is they have no

compelling vision for the future. Everything is a rear-guard fight
against the future. Elephants are obsessed with a mythical rose-

colored past, distressed over a confusing present, and fearful of an
unknown future that is changing so fast in so many ways. It is
disconcerting. Power for the sake of power is the current ruling
ethos. Hang on for dear life to the old status quo.
Loyal American Republicans wedded to truth need to look for

a good person—not a New York charlatan, a Lincoln, Teddy
Roosevelt, or Ronald Reagan. The country could use a good and
decent man for troubled times like Gerald Ford—to bring the party
back to its goodness and not just its grievances. It would be a
godsend. Likewise, men of character like Dwight Eisenhower and
George Bush Sr. None of these presidents were perfect, and all had
their flaws as human beings. However, each of them possessed a
moral compass, unlike Donald Trump whose needle only points
toward himself.
America needs a leader who truly thinks of country first and

not themselves looking in a mirror all the time with a middle finger
waving in the wind. America is already a proud, great, and noble
country, despite its imperfections. We need less “Make America
Great Again” and more “Let’s Make America Better.” Bring back
the honest GOP, an elephant “born again,” grounded in truth,
decency, and honor with true courage. The country needs you.
ELEPHANTS: FOR YOUR

CONSIDERATION
For ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you
free. John 8:32
Breaking news from Fox News.

Hi, we’re your Fox evening hosts, Truth, Honor, and Integrity.
Word has just come in on Twitter and Facebook of an

unconfirmed rumor that some guy named Jesus is thinking about
running for president of the United States. It’s really a humorous
joke of a story. You’ll get a kick out of it. Pass it on to your elephant
friends for a good laugh.
This long-haired hippie Jesus guy is a cross dresser,

transvestite, unemployed, and homeless guy who has no address,
no wife, no children, no political experience, and thinks he is God.
It’s a hoot. Obviously mentally ill, it is also assumed he has a gay
agenda as his 12 best friends called disciples are all guys and follow
him around. However, it’s reported he does hang out sometimes
with a woman named Mary, who some say is a prostitute. The
relationship is somewhat murky. All of these are “fine people,” so
we have been told.
Another rumor making the rounds is that this guy Jesus may
be a bastard, as his mother Mary’s husband Joseph may not be the
real father. No one is sure who is, but reports abound about a
powerful mystery magic man.
It is reported that this Jesus character heals people, so

naturally, ha, ha, there will be no need for health care in the future.
He also reportedly took a basket of loaves and fishes and
multiplied them enough times to feed 5,000 people. So obviously,
there will be no need for welfare food stamps in the future. “Give
me a break.” He talks about how “in his father’s house are many
mansions,” so the homeless problem is solved as well. Apparently,
the homeless guy on the street corner may qualify for a free
mansion just for believing in this guy. What a deal! This Jesus
character is also a science fiction guy since he claims, “My kingdom
is not of this world.” Maybe he knows Spock from the planet
Vulcan and Worf from the Klingon Empire. How delusional can
you get?
Our field reporter who has heard him speak to followers,

nearly all low, common types of people, reports this Jesus fellow
keeps talking about the poor all the time like a broken record, so
he must be a socialist. Some think he will call for raising taxes to
help “them” when any idiot knows we need tax cuts to help out
the wealthy to spur the economy. Some fear this Jesus guy wants
“Dominion” over biased media and public policy, which will surely
lead to trouble and most likely, fake news. Remember, we warned
you. We know how that turns out.
This Jesus character also rails against the rich saying how hard
it will be for them to make it to heaven, so he must surely be an
anti-capitalist. Some believe he may be a communist in sheep’s
clothing. He asks the children “to come unto me.” So, some worry
that this single guy in his thirties who has reportedly never had a
girlfriend may be a pedophile. Parents should watch out and be
forewarned.
Other rumors abound about the wine industry filing a lawsuit

for lost sales since this Jesus character turned water into wine. They
are demanding a “cease and desist order” to prevent this from
happening again. Jesus also appears to have the skill to “walk on
water,” which shows negligent parenting in failing to teach him
how to swim when he was a young boy. Apparently, he was not

taught many “family values” growing up. Some reports indicate he
was a carpenter at one time but apparently quit and is living off
handouts from his followers. It does not speak highly of his
commitment to a “work ethic.”
His buddies are nobodies, mostly fishermen. One guy called

Matthew worked for the IRS, who is probably crooked. Another
one of them by the name of Simon, the Canaanite, is a zealot
revolutionary and troublemaker. Two of his guys, James and John,
are known as the “Sons of Thunder.” We’re not sure what that’s
all about. Add flawed character judgment for another shady guy
called Judas. The apparent treasurer for the group, he has been
reported to be embezzling funds from the group’s GoFundMe
account and is always scheming for his own benefit. One friend
said he would sell out anyone for a mere thirty bucks.
Yet this guy Jesus also talks a lot about love, compassion, and
forgiveness, so some military generals worry he is a pacifist who
would cut defense spending by shifting spending to social causes
to help forced birth babies, children, the poor, and struggling
families, leaving the country unprepared. There are reports of
chatter on the dark web among conspiracy theorists that a lot of
people don’t realize how dangerous this Marxist-communist-
socialist Jesus guy could be and that someone should “take him
out” somehow, maybe even in a humiliating public display to
discourage would-be followers. Some cruel ideas are being tossed
around.
Surely, this is a guy that the authorities need to lock up for his
own mental care and the safety of everyone else, as these types may
turn violent. He already demonstrated that with a whip in a
synagogue, attacking merchants minding their own business trying
to make a buck. He should have been arrested for assault, but there
is no police report. Probably lefties who do not believe in law and
order let him go. One citizen has already notified the police that
this guy Jesus should be “red flagged” to deny him obtaining any
guns, just to be on the safe side and out of an abundance of

caution.
These eccentric loner types need to be watched. You never

know. Even his reported second cousin, another strange homeless
guy named John the Baptist, was an itinerant preacher living way
out in the desert, wearing camel hair and eating locusts and honey.
Yuck, a nutcase for sure. He got into trouble with some authorities
on “Trumped up” charges. He was murdered and then beheaded
in some strange, twisted mother-and-daughter plot scheme. Weird!
Trouble seems to run in the entire family.
“Well, folks, there you have it. The world has gone absolutely
raving mad. You can’t make this stuff up, even though we at Fox
News try our best. As always, we are “Unfair and Unbalanced” and
unafraid in our eternal quest for high ratings, a high stock price,
and the highest standards of biased journalism. You know we are
never cynical and give our viewers exactly what they want to hear.
Even if it costs us nearly a billion dollars in lawyer fees and
settlements for lying and promoting disinformation. Nobody does
pessimism, negativity, and snarkiness better than we do. We’re
your hosts, Truth, Honor, and Integrity. See you again tomorrow.
Oh, by the way, keep the faith, God bless!”
New Testament Admonition
Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever

things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are
pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good
report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on
these things. Philippians 4:8
TRUTH, HONOR, AND DECENY

ARE
PRECIOUS AND MUST ALWAYS
BE DEFENDED.
Michael Lee

The Abortion Bible

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Abortion Bible

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE

THE LAST WORD ON FAITH, REASON,

Copyright. © All rights reserved. Note exception: Writers,

PART I THE JOURNEY

CHAPTER 2 THE GODFATHERS: HOW WE GOT HERE. ............. 15

CHAPTER 3 THE SUPREMES.............................................................. 31

CHAPTER 4 THE HOLY MEN.............................................................44

CHAPTER 5 GOOD PEOPLE ................................................................55

CHAPTER 6 BIG BROTHER IS IN THE HOUSE (YOUR

CHAPTER 7 LIFE AND TIMES BEFORE ROE . . . THE GOOD

CHAPTER 8 IF YOU DON’T WANT TO HAVE AN ABORTION,

CHAPTER 10 A VERY SHORT CHAPTER ........................................ 103

PART II WOMEN: MOVIN’ ON UP

CHAPTER 11 WOMEN ON THE MARCH ........................................ 108

CHAPTER 12 MEN JUST DON’T REALLY WANT TO KNOW ....... 122

CHAPTER 13 OLD GOATS: (MIA−MISSING IN ACTION) ............. 131

CHAPTER 14 FAMILY MATTERS ..................................................... 134

CHAPTER 15 SEX, SEX, SEX............................................................... 145

CHAPTER 16 WHAT DO WOMEN WANT? ...................................... 157

PART III CHILDREN

CHAPTER 17 THE ADOPTION OPTION.......................................... 161

CHAPTER 18 CIVIL RIGHTS .............................................................. 168

CHAPTER 19 WHO IS HAVING ABORTIONS? AND WHY? .......... 178

CHAPTER 20 THE COUNTRY CAN’T AFFORD IT ......................... 195

CHAPTER 21 CHASING THE AMERICAN DREAM ....................... 224

PART IV THE CRYSTAL BALL: WHAT’S NEXT

CHAPTER 22 FREEDOM, CHOICE, WOMEN ................................ 242

CHAPTER 23 THE END GAME ......................................................... 250

THE “TRUTH” ABOUT HYPOCRISY ON STEROIDS: NO DOUBT! ............................... 268

The author writes from California, is married, and has spent

Disclosure: The author of this book was a lifelong Republican

A previous book by Michael Lee: Title: Boomers Turning 60ish.

Author Contact Information:

Mail: Michael Lee P.O. Box 7885 Redlands, Ca. 92375

Review from Sarah, a Women's Rights Supporter:

Review from John, an Advocate for Informed Discussions:

Review from Emily, a College Student Exploring Reproductive Rights:

This book is an insightful four-part story that begins with how

A Coda is added after the book’s conclusion requiring a

In America, the earth moved, and the ground shook. Across

Six very conservative justices of the United States Supreme

For anti-abortionists, there was celebration and jubilation in

and-white issue of right and wrong, with no gray areas or nuances

For those who supported Roe and a women’s right to choose,

The sorting process on the abortion issue among the states is

ride away if an abortion was required for themselves or a family

On the anti-abortion side, after cherishing a sweet victory after

Often implied or just assumed was the woman’s role as a

The 1970s saw a shift in evangelical circles as a backlash to the

both groups demanding to be recognized as more than second-

Schaeffer advocated for political involvement by the church to

David Roach, writing in the Baptist Press in a January 16, 2015

Anti-abortion alliances were formed with Jerry Falwell of the

Dobson of “Focus on the Family,” among many others, most of

Yet in another twist of irony, it was Republican Ronald Reagan

With crime surging in the ‘60s, along with the assassination of

Since the passage of Roe v. Wade in 1973, many evangelicals

a moral crusade of righteous proportions to get rid of the national

Emboldened by the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn

IN THE TRENCHES: RELIGION 101

of the flagship Christianity Today magazine, Carl Henry, affirmed

When the Roe decision was announced in 1973, W.A. Criswell,

Even James Dobson of “Focus on the Family” in 1973 said

By his own admission, Jerry Falwell, founder of the Moral