One of the most interesting things about the Planned Parenthood scandal is that it has blown the Obergefell scandal off the front page. This might seem problematic to some, given the travesty that was Obergefell, but to my mind it is entirely to the strategic good. In the long game, I am always willing to trade a rook for a queen.
Don’t mistake me here. Obergefell is the lamest of abominations, and it has to go. But the reason it was possible for it to be imposed on us in the first place was because of all the legal mayhem that had happened to heterosexual marriages over the decades prior. There are sadly multiple examples of this — things like no-fault divorce — but the crowning insult to heterosexual marriage was the bloody decision of Roe. That crowning insult was the attempt to make heterosexual unions fruitless, and to enforce that fruitlessness by declaring open season on the fruit. Not all babies are killed, but all the babies could be.
According to that decision, whether a baby was to be aborted or not was a decision to be made between “the woman and her doctor.” Out of the legal picture was the husband and father, meaning that whether the woman was married was a constitutional irrelevance. One of the little known results of Roe was the abortion of the family, the abortion of the meaningfulness of marriage. Given that, Obergefell was inevitable. And now we come to discover that the decision being made between a woman and her doctor included whether or not to sell the baby off for parts.
Once you have done something like that, guaranteeing that every heterosexual union can be as fruitless as one party in that union wants to be, why would you refuse unions that are fruitless by their very nature? Marriage as God designed it is a conjugal union, centered around a sexual act that is liturgically fertile. Not every sexual act results in a child, obviously, but every ordinary sexual union enacts what fertile unions do.
Once you have surrendered that in principle, there is no reason to limit marriage to members of the opposite sex. Once you have defined marriage as a particular “emotional intensity for the time being” there are no limits outside that emotional demand whatever. Indeed, there is not even a reason that sexual activity of any kind be required. What counts is the demand to be included in what used to be called marriage. But we discover, rapidly enough, that to operate this way does not make the parasites part of the host. Despite the legalese of the decree, it just ensures that we get enough parasites to kill the host.
So without Roe, Obergefell was unthinkable. Obergefell was imposed on us in much the same way as Roe was, through an act of judicial despotism. Both decisions rejected the claims of natural affection. And the one made the other possible.
In what I am about to say, I am not claiming a conscious conspiracy, as though Supreme Court justices were cracking their knuckles and cackling over their execution of “the plan.” No, I am saying that the spiritual chess board only has a limited number of pieces, and they can only be configured in a limited number of ways. If you do not want to be governed by the authority of the normal, there are only so many abnormal things you can do. When it first starts, it seems cool. Then it is outré. Then it gets kinky and flamboyant. And then — and this is where we are now — it is lame.
So I believe that the reason the bad guys went for a second desperate overreach in Obergefell is because they were steadily losing ground with Roe. A full generation after Roe supposedly settled the matter for us, pro-lifers were winning incremental victory after incremental victory in state after state. There were actual rollbacks occurring. From their perspective, the next phase of their mission had to be launched, even though that launch was premature. And now this happens. It is almost as though a higher power were at work.
So this turn of events is not simply a random set-back for Planned Parenthood and their ghoul network of support. To have this blow up in this way is far more than a PR set back for abortion advocates. Roe is just as “legal” as it was a year ago; nothing has changed yet in that respect. But given how all this is unfolding, despite the continued legality, we have a clear opportunity to make our abortion laws loathsome. And that is good, for that is what they are. And if we succeed in persuading our fellow citizens that our abortion laws are loathsome, the ax is at the root of the tree.
I said earlier I would take a play that exchanged a rook for a queen. This is especially the case in spiritual chess because in this play — little known rule — after they lose their queen, we get our rook back.