Chase McWhorter: Enough with labeling
Ken Fry’s response to my previous letter is the perfect example of our post-2020 world where foundational discussions — like “Should people have the right to vote on certain issues, like abortion?” or “Should the executive branch have unlimited power?” — are turned into some sort of emotional diatribe and attempt to label someone based on limited information.
During the height of COVID-19 hysteria, if you questioned something like vaccine effectiveness, you were labeled “anti-vax” — despite the fact you may have all other vaccines and are simply questioning if this new vaccine works as advertised. This type of mental gymnastics has now become the norm for all discussions.
So, Ken, did I claim to be pro- or anti-abortion? Or was I more questioning if taxpayers should have any say in the legality and funding of abortions? Didn’t the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg question the structure of Roe v Wade despite being pro-abortion?
And just to respond to a couple of your more egregious assumptions/”facts”:
1. Please provide empirical evidence of violence from pro-lifers. I can point to threats of violence made — in just the past couple of months — by sitting members of Congress and mainstream media toward U.S. Supreme Court justices. I can point to a man with tape and a gun going to a justice’s home to murder him. Did any “crazies” go to a liberal justice’s house after Obamacare was upheld?
2. What are the net migration trends from those “crazy” red states? Are people flocking to Illinois, California and New York, or have places such as Idaho, Florida and Texas seen people moving in, despite their evil “red” laws?
Lastly, you wouldn’t be suggesting that women should be free to make their own health choices when it comes to things like, say, a vaccine would you? If a woman in 2021 stated she didn’t want to get the COVID-19 vaccine, would you respect her health decision?
Chase McWhorter
Carbondale
