M.A.D.D. was a situational temperance movement. It’s was an alliance of “concerned mothers” and emergency room doctors and the police against one aspect of alcohol abuse in the public eye. Anyway I think it’s a great recent example of persuasion that bubbled up from the ground up. It took a long time, too.
And, it’s a pro-life victory.
People love whining about the “nanny state,” but hey, just listen to your mom for once!!
This piece makes it clear that Americans who are not from rural, southern and midwestern roots have a different sense of history than those whose roots are from the Bible Belt.
Even more alienated from the Bible Belt are Catholics who now represent the largest single American religious denomination.
I mention this, because my roots are in Paterson NJ. And we were populated primarily by immigrants. We were located in an empty land and relied on immigrants to provide the labor force.
We had no old line families (or so few as to be negligible). Among our prominent citizens were Jews and Catholics and among them were brewers. So Jewish immigrant Nathan Barnert was mayor in 1889. Brewers Christian Braun and John Hinchliffe were mayors in 1893 and 1897.
Som of immigrants from Ireland, Andrew McBride, was mayor in 1908.
I mention this because American history is distinctly different from place to place. In coastal cities, from Providence and Boston to San Francisco, we do not EVER mention that someone is a Christian (even for conservative Catholics).
I wonder if some of the split between America’s heartland and cities is that between places where immigrants entered and other places that remain more or less backwaters.
First of all, excellent content. Honestly, newsletters like these were what nineties internet utopian Josh thought were the future- essentially citizen journalism, people with passion and interest sharing that and increasing the general quantity and quality of education around them.
Nineties Josh has been very disappointed with much of what the internet became, so thank you for throwing him a bone.
Prohibition had another angle that the modern antichoice movement lacks. Basically socially we are all stakeholders in people's drinking problems. Drunk drivers kill and injure tens of thousands of people a year, alcohol abuse touches most lives because we've all known people with various levels of addiction.
Abortion on the other hand has a primary stakeholder, women. (Two if you count the fetus. I personally don't.)
And yet antichoice is a heavily male-dominated faction.
This is intrinsically a women's issue, even if you take a 'life at conception' view (that push come to shove most people really don't take when challenged in practical terms) it's still an event taking place in a woman's body.
Personally, I count the fetus. I don't like abortion. But not as an equal to a fully formed human. From a practical policy standpoint, it's just not feasible to count a fetus, certainly not in the first trimester, as a full human being, even if you believe it is.
I can agree with that. And I don't like abortion either. But it grates me hard that the men most invested in restricting have no framework of comprehension for what they're trying to impose and visibly don't care to. Moreover, I resent any effort to rationalize legal policy on religious interpretation.
Excellent piece...I very much see the parallels and I just wish the pro life movement could work with others to make sure every child was a wanted child.
And while I am wishing for things that will never happen, I wish that they could see how many guns kill kids.
But they don't want to see either, so they never will.
This is a beautiful exposition of something that I have been giving a lot of thought to recently. If the Supreme Court dismantles the FDA-approved network for pharmaceutical abortion or down the road the Court approves of resurrecting the Comstock Act to work a lot of antiabortion prohibitions I see the nation going through another Prohibition exercise for certain. The majority will want/ demand something that has been outlawed. Like Prohibition, this will take a generally law-abiding nation and make the majority either participate in breaking the law or supporters and customers of those that do so.
Wow! Holy Cow, Holly this was fabulous. I know several wonderful, generous, smart people in the pro-life world… but I am so disappointed that since Dobbs… there has not been a concerted effort to show compassion, provide huge resources, and to admit to the medical complexities and dangers that can happen when pregnant. Thank you!!! Great piece!
Apr 17·edited Apr 17Liked by Holly Berkley Fletcher
Great, informative piece and an excellent comparison!
(One nit though, since this is the internet :) -- the President doesn't sign amendments and in fact has no role at all in the process than the bully pulpit.)
While I'm a relatively recent subscriber, this is the best piece of yours I've ever read. The parallels are absolutely uncanny. Thank you for the history lesson too. FWIW, had Dobbs not happened, I think we would have still seen a natural decline of abortions for a multitude of reasons, some good and some bad. The good is that family planning services & egg freezing services are becoming more prevalent. The bad is that, by all accounts, the youths just aren't... getting jiggy with it as much as the Millennials and GenXers did, probably due to social isolation and the easy access to pornography. For an immersive experience circa 2005, I had to actually learn how to talk, flirt, etc. (often aided with some liquid courage). In the Year of our Lord 2024, you can strap on an Oculus headset and "real enough" experience without having to put in all the work, embarrassment, and rejection. This is bad for a multitude of reasons, but it will contribute to fewer unplanned pregnancies.
I learned so much from this about the temperance movement.
Meanwhile, your paragraph about what the pro-life movement could have focused on brought me to tears. That's a platform I would 100% support.
I know. What could have been.
M.A.D.D. was a situational temperance movement. It’s was an alliance of “concerned mothers” and emergency room doctors and the police against one aspect of alcohol abuse in the public eye. Anyway I think it’s a great recent example of persuasion that bubbled up from the ground up. It took a long time, too.
And, it’s a pro-life victory.
People love whining about the “nanny state,” but hey, just listen to your mom for once!!
This piece makes it clear that Americans who are not from rural, southern and midwestern roots have a different sense of history than those whose roots are from the Bible Belt.
Even more alienated from the Bible Belt are Catholics who now represent the largest single American religious denomination.
I mention this, because my roots are in Paterson NJ. And we were populated primarily by immigrants. We were located in an empty land and relied on immigrants to provide the labor force.
We had no old line families (or so few as to be negligible). Among our prominent citizens were Jews and Catholics and among them were brewers. So Jewish immigrant Nathan Barnert was mayor in 1889. Brewers Christian Braun and John Hinchliffe were mayors in 1893 and 1897.
Som of immigrants from Ireland, Andrew McBride, was mayor in 1908.
I mention this because American history is distinctly different from place to place. In coastal cities, from Providence and Boston to San Francisco, we do not EVER mention that someone is a Christian (even for conservative Catholics).
I wonder if some of the split between America’s heartland and cities is that between places where immigrants entered and other places that remain more or less backwaters.
Of course, as an Irishman, alcohol is normal.
You're absolutely right! it's urban-rural on a more categorical level, but of course, urban areas are more diverse with more immigrants.
First of all, excellent content. Honestly, newsletters like these were what nineties internet utopian Josh thought were the future- essentially citizen journalism, people with passion and interest sharing that and increasing the general quantity and quality of education around them.
Nineties Josh has been very disappointed with much of what the internet became, so thank you for throwing him a bone.
Prohibition had another angle that the modern antichoice movement lacks. Basically socially we are all stakeholders in people's drinking problems. Drunk drivers kill and injure tens of thousands of people a year, alcohol abuse touches most lives because we've all known people with various levels of addiction.
Abortion on the other hand has a primary stakeholder, women. (Two if you count the fetus. I personally don't.)
And yet antichoice is a heavily male-dominated faction.
This is intrinsically a women's issue, even if you take a 'life at conception' view (that push come to shove most people really don't take when challenged in practical terms) it's still an event taking place in a woman's body.
Personally, I count the fetus. I don't like abortion. But not as an equal to a fully formed human. From a practical policy standpoint, it's just not feasible to count a fetus, certainly not in the first trimester, as a full human being, even if you believe it is.
Fair.
I can agree with that. And I don't like abortion either. But it grates me hard that the men most invested in restricting have no framework of comprehension for what they're trying to impose and visibly don't care to. Moreover, I resent any effort to rationalize legal policy on religious interpretation.
Excellent piece...I very much see the parallels and I just wish the pro life movement could work with others to make sure every child was a wanted child.
And while I am wishing for things that will never happen, I wish that they could see how many guns kill kids.
But they don't want to see either, so they never will.
This is a beautiful exposition of something that I have been giving a lot of thought to recently. If the Supreme Court dismantles the FDA-approved network for pharmaceutical abortion or down the road the Court approves of resurrecting the Comstock Act to work a lot of antiabortion prohibitions I see the nation going through another Prohibition exercise for certain. The majority will want/ demand something that has been outlawed. Like Prohibition, this will take a generally law-abiding nation and make the majority either participate in breaking the law or supporters and customers of those that do so.
Wow! Holy Cow, Holly this was fabulous. I know several wonderful, generous, smart people in the pro-life world… but I am so disappointed that since Dobbs… there has not been a concerted effort to show compassion, provide huge resources, and to admit to the medical complexities and dangers that can happen when pregnant. Thank you!!! Great piece!
Great, informative piece and an excellent comparison!
(One nit though, since this is the internet :) -- the President doesn't sign amendments and in fact has no role at all in the process than the bully pulpit.)
🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️😱
While I'm a relatively recent subscriber, this is the best piece of yours I've ever read. The parallels are absolutely uncanny. Thank you for the history lesson too. FWIW, had Dobbs not happened, I think we would have still seen a natural decline of abortions for a multitude of reasons, some good and some bad. The good is that family planning services & egg freezing services are becoming more prevalent. The bad is that, by all accounts, the youths just aren't... getting jiggy with it as much as the Millennials and GenXers did, probably due to social isolation and the easy access to pornography. For an immersive experience circa 2005, I had to actually learn how to talk, flirt, etc. (often aided with some liquid courage). In the Year of our Lord 2024, you can strap on an Oculus headset and "real enough" experience without having to put in all the work, embarrassment, and rejection. This is bad for a multitude of reasons, but it will contribute to fewer unplanned pregnancies.
Very well put, thank you for this.