print-icon
print-icon

Joy Reid Posts Crazed Rant About Alabama IVF Case - Suggests The State Wants Slaves

Tyler Durden's Photo
by Tyler Durden
Thursday, Feb 29, 2024 - 03:00 AM

Alabama's Supreme Court has recently ruled on the designation of fertilized embryos held by vitro clinics in the state, giving the embryos legal status as living children. 

The decision was made in response to lawsuits brought by three couples who were clients of one such clinic, where apparent negligence led to the destruction of embryos which the parents paid to have frozen in preparation for a future pregnancy.

One of the couples asserted that the destruction of their fertilized embryos should include charges of wrongful death of a minor, and the Alabama Supreme Court agreed.  Alabama issued a ban on the majority of abortions in 2019 and the US Supreme Court's overturning of Roe v Wade has solidified the standing that states have the right to decide the legality of abortion outside of federal interference.  Keep in mind, the Alabama case was not brought by the state, it was brought by private citizens in a dispute with an IVF clinic, but the decision has sweeping implications.    

The root legal argument made by abortion advocates is that the Constitution protects life, liberty and property, but it does not specify exactly what the definition of "life" is or when legal personhood begins.  The Alabama decision is terrifying to abortion activists because this is one of the first instances since the Dobbs case in which fertilized embryos are being defined as living human beings.  Such a trend would give constitutional rights to unborn children.

Conservatives in Alabama including Senator Tommy Tuberville have applauded the court ruling, but leftists are in an uproar.  The fear is palpable in the rantings of MSNBC host Joy Reid, who makes some classic anti-child's rights arguments along with some new and bizarre assertions about slavery in response to Senator Tuberville's suggestion that Alabama needs more children.

Three primary points need to be addressed here:

1)  Reid applies the old population control argument in a disturbing tangent - "If conservatives are going to stand against illegal immigration, then they must also support abortion."  

In other words, she thinks that opposing illegal immigration is the same as opposing higher population in the US and therefore, if conservatives oppose higher population, they should be pro-abortion.  But, this is not the conservative position. 

First and foremost, pro-life advocates are against what they see as the murder of children.  It's a moral argument, not an economic debate related to population rates.  The moral argument, not surprisingly, completely escapes Joy Reid's radar.

Second, her position is actually backwards.  If Democrats are going to promote and support mass illegal immigration into the US because they think America needs more workers, then why not simply stop abortions and increase the population organically instead?  Why continue subsidizing and incentivizing illegals when children can be born here legally?  Wouldn't it be preferable to raise a population with American principles and values rather than inviting in millions of unvetted foreigners who immediately take welfare, eat up housing and cause more crime?

2)  Reid then pursues an unhinged hypothesis, suggesting that Republicans in Alabama might want more children (in place of illegal immigrants) because those children will be "destitute" and easier to "enslave."  She then compares the notion once again to "The Handmaids Tale," a poorly written book for mentally deficient readers often cited by the political left as if it's as valid as Orwell's 1984.

Is Reid suggesting that illegal immigrants are used as "slaves" in the US?  And does she think this is preferable to making abortion illegal?  This seems to be her argument. If she actually believes that illegals are being used as slaves, then she should make a stand against open borders and illegal immigration.

It's hard to find any example in history of slaves being paid for their work while also receiving government subsidies and welfare as incentives to stay and continue being slaves.  That doesn't sound so "slavery-ish," as Reid so eloquently describes it.   

3)  Finally, Reid insinuates that the Alabama decision might be a ploy to increase the population of white people in the state (and leftists always treat more white people as a bad thing).  But according to her previous argument any children born under the new rules would be destitute and thus used as slaves.  Does this go for the white kids also?  Or, is it only victimization if the children are not white?

Some people might say that Joy Reid is an irrelevant person and there's no need to counter her blatherings with any seriousness.  However, her claims represent the thinking of a majority of activists within the woke movement.  It's important to show how disjointed and irrational this thinking is whenever it arises, otherwise it will continue to spread like a cancer across the country.          

0
Loading...