Tim Kaine: Abortion is murder, and that's totally fine

The Democrats are a morally incoherent party, and nothing captures with more perfection the feckless irrationality than Sen. Tim Kaine on abortion.

Speaking to CNN, the irrational Kaine said, “I have a traditional Catholic personal position, but I am very strongly supportive that women should make these decisions and government shouldn’t intrude[.] ... I’m a strong supporter of Roe v. Wade and women being able to make these decisions.  In government, we have enough things to worry about.  We don’t need to make people’s reproductive decisions for them.”

So he personally believes that slaughtering a baby in a cold-blooded murder is morally reprehensible, but he supports unequivocally your right to commit cold-blooded murder if you, you know, really want to.

Could there be any more fundamentally mealy-mouthed position than this?  Could there be a more incoherent position as a moral agent?

You have to recognize this for the leap downward that it is.  Hillary Clinton, icon of fungible morality that she is, holds to the position that the “thing” killed is not a baby.  She states that what dies in an abortion is not a human being – therefore, it’s OK to murder the not-human.

But here we have Kaine not just admitting the personhood of the fetus, but piously intoning his own religious belief and commitment to the life of the fetus and asserting that he personally would never slaughter a child that way.  But, having affirmed the personhood of the baby, he then affirms your right to murder people who are inconvenient to you.  Hillary admits to killing a lump of cells; Kaine admits to murdering a baby.

That is a long, long, step downward on the moral slide into the abyss.  It is a kind of anti-evangelism for Catholicism, the admission of its irrelevance and an invitation to mock it.  He doesn’t argue that Catholic views are incorrect or impure or compromised or inaccurate or out of date.  He doesn’t argue that he has the hot-ticket interpretation and others’ views are less advanced.  He argues that Catholic beliefs are accurate, right, and good, and he is personally committed to them.  Then he advocates that you can and should violate “thou shalt not murder” if it benefits you.  It’s a baby, and killing is wrong – so, by all means, go ahead and slaughter!  

There’s only one thing more morally repellant and dystopian than Tim Kaine’s abortion position: the fact that he’s with Hillary.

The vice presidential choice captures, in a human being, the aspirational policy of the nominee.  He is supposed to be the reassuring choice that all the beliefs of the head of the ticket can be embodied in in a first and best management decision, where people equate to policy.  The vice president isn’t just one heartbeat from the office; he is the constant presence of policy and the constant reminder of a president’s judgment.  It’s the first place where the president must give up some control and delegate decision-making power to another.

Hillary Clinton talks a lot about choice.  And in her first big one, what did she choose?  That abortion is unambiguously murder, and murder is unambiguously just fine.

The Democrats are a morally incoherent party, and nothing captures with more perfection the feckless irrationality than Sen. Tim Kaine on abortion.

Speaking to CNN, the irrational Kaine said, “I have a traditional Catholic personal position, but I am very strongly supportive that women should make these decisions and government shouldn’t intrude[.] ... I’m a strong supporter of Roe v. Wade and women being able to make these decisions.  In government, we have enough things to worry about.  We don’t need to make people’s reproductive decisions for them.”

So he personally believes that slaughtering a baby in a cold-blooded murder is morally reprehensible, but he supports unequivocally your right to commit cold-blooded murder if you, you know, really want to.

Could there be any more fundamentally mealy-mouthed position than this?  Could there be a more incoherent position as a moral agent?

You have to recognize this for the leap downward that it is.  Hillary Clinton, icon of fungible morality that she is, holds to the position that the “thing” killed is not a baby.  She states that what dies in an abortion is not a human being – therefore, it’s OK to murder the not-human.

But here we have Kaine not just admitting the personhood of the fetus, but piously intoning his own religious belief and commitment to the life of the fetus and asserting that he personally would never slaughter a child that way.  But, having affirmed the personhood of the baby, he then affirms your right to murder people who are inconvenient to you.  Hillary admits to killing a lump of cells; Kaine admits to murdering a baby.

That is a long, long, step downward on the moral slide into the abyss.  It is a kind of anti-evangelism for Catholicism, the admission of its irrelevance and an invitation to mock it.  He doesn’t argue that Catholic views are incorrect or impure or compromised or inaccurate or out of date.  He doesn’t argue that he has the hot-ticket interpretation and others’ views are less advanced.  He argues that Catholic beliefs are accurate, right, and good, and he is personally committed to them.  Then he advocates that you can and should violate “thou shalt not murder” if it benefits you.  It’s a baby, and killing is wrong – so, by all means, go ahead and slaughter!  

There’s only one thing more morally repellant and dystopian than Tim Kaine’s abortion position: the fact that he’s with Hillary.

The vice presidential choice captures, in a human being, the aspirational policy of the nominee.  He is supposed to be the reassuring choice that all the beliefs of the head of the ticket can be embodied in in a first and best management decision, where people equate to policy.  The vice president isn’t just one heartbeat from the office; he is the constant presence of policy and the constant reminder of a president’s judgment.  It’s the first place where the president must give up some control and delegate decision-making power to another.

Hillary Clinton talks a lot about choice.  And in her first big one, what did she choose?  That abortion is unambiguously murder, and murder is unambiguously just fine.