Over the last several days, I’ve been listening to an interview with J D Vance on the New York Times Podcast The Daily.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/1PYZ9PxZCJrYxV9zuxzvSo?si=syhv9iSpSyW5aTKQC-wssg
What is interesting is I agree with many things he says. But the logic gets turned around and circular. On one side he talks about the fundamental reality. American businesses and individuals hire these immigrants creating illegal subcultures unable to ask help of the Police to police their communities.
But like with the tarrif they forget who ultimatelynpsyd for any tax the government imposes. Government sanctioned project cost tax payers money or add to our debt.
That begs another conversation about debt. And, how it gets confused with debit. He then twists himself up about abortion, women’s right to choice, compounded by the complexity of should the states decide. Whereas I would argue neither of you havento right to decide what I do about protecting my life and body. Yes a fetus that is unable to care for itself becomes what?
Is it, by itself able to survive, or does its life also become part of the formula of the woman’s rights to a life. Here we can then embrace social norms to balance sensitivities that will arise between different reading of faith based documents. YetnI think we all agree it is not the publics right to decide. It is the doctor, family and faith leaders and other parties that help the girl deal with her life decisions.
Vance was twisted without clarity but to bounce back to the original mantra of States decide. No the public not the government decides.
This whole issue of immigration gets to the question of how we think about people wanting to come to this country. I hear different issues arising around how we manage immigration in whichever is political.
Bottom line I fear the nature of the man.