Does Stephen King understand how representative democracy works.

On the list of people for whom the exposure of social media has been a source of disappointing exposure, novelist Stephen King has got to be near the top. Like his books or not (and, honestly, given the content, I regret the influence that he had on my younger life), authors are generally placed in the “intellectual” category, and one would expect more insight than tweets like this:

StephenKing: The 1864 Arizona law forbidding most abortions, upheld by the State Supreme Court, also sets the age of consent for females at 10 Years.

I’m on the pro-life side of this issue, but I also wish we could have honest discussions about public policy.  The anachronism of this state law isn’t evidence that the federal government has to set policy for every state in the country, which was essentially the state of affairs while the horrible Roe v. Wade ruling was in effect.  Rather, it should be a reminder that we have an entire system built around the principle that people can change the laws under which they’re governed over time.

It’s telling that advocates for the permissibility of killing of children are so much more focused on deriving political benefit from old laws than changing them where they can be changed.  Apparently, what they really want is a world in which a rich old writer from Maine can tell the people of Arizona what sort of laws they live under.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Show your support for Anchor Rising with a 25-cent-per-day subscription.