Romney’s Family Security Act is not pro-life economics

 Around 60% of abortions are done by single mothers living in poverty, so the aborting of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court has caused politicians to call for a pro-life economy. They seem to think that reducing poverty will end the need for abortions. Of course, socialists have always thought they could perfect humanity by getting rid of poverty.

The search for a pro-life economy inspired politicians to dust off Mitt Romney’s Family Security Act which he announced in February of 2021. According to his web site, the Family Security Act would “…create a new national commitment to American families by modernizing antiquated federal policies into a monthly cash benefit amounting to $350 a month for each young child, and $250 a month for each school-aged child.”

Socialists love abortion because they hate families

 Can economics explain the left’s rage over the Supreme Court’s abortion of Roe v. Wade? It can, and the logical chain isn’t that long. But we must understand true Marxism, not the popular myth that it is nothing more than a way to help the poor. 

Karl Marx claimed that class conflict drives history. The bourgeoisie get economic power by exploiting the much larger working class, the proletariat. Yet this conflict of interests has rarely boiled over into revolutions of the type that happened in Russia and China. What went wrong? Why didn’t the poor and oppressed stand up and throw off their chains? It wasn’t logical, Marxists alleged.

Marx’s followers began rummaging through the closets of their dark minds for answers. One they dredged up was Critical Theory, which taught that women and minorities had been oppressed for so long they had become accustomed to it and didn’t recognize how oppressed they were. Marxists claimed that Christianity helped the oppression of the proletariat by focusing their attention on heaven (encouraging them to endure hardship), and promoting the evil of private property. Another enabler of oppression, Marxists claimed, is the family.

Why Do Democrats Hate Families?

Why has the Democrat party become the party of the alphabet gang, the LBGTQRSUV... crowd? Because socialists have always hated the family. Jonathan Newman quoted from Marx and Engels in The Communist Manifesto:

Abolition of the family! [...] On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution. 

The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital. 

Do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents? To this crime we plead guilty.