Kevin Williamson: I'm being censored.
Naive onlooker: That's terrible.
[KW publishes in Commentary and WSJ]
KW: I'm being censored.
NO: Yes, I heard you the first time.
[KW publishes in Weekly Standard & Washington Post]
KW: I'm being censored.
NO: Shut up already.
Naive onlooker: That's terrible.
[KW publishes in Commentary and WSJ]
KW: I'm being censored.
NO: Yes, I heard you the first time.
[KW publishes in Weekly Standard & Washington Post]
KW: I'm being censored.
NO: Shut up already.
Joking aside, I remain baffled by Williamson's position. He says abortion is an "an absolute evil" & "in some ways it's worse than your typical murder" but will accept laws that will allow 90% of abortions to continue washingtonpost.com/opinions/kevin…
I mean if abortion is "an absolute evil" and "worse than your typical murder" why all the federalist foofaraw about New Jersey & Utah having different laws. They do for murder to some extent, but they both punish it severely.
If abortion is murder, why tolerate, out of political expediency, 90% of abortions. And as you move to restrict, why allow some states to have strong ban and others to be lax. That makes no sense.
And Williamson continues to drop the suggestion that he wants to punish women who have abortion but doesn't want to spell out what they would be. That's very strange. 
Williamson is willing to accept large numbers of abortion for foreseeable future, because total ban is "50- or even 100-year project." In other words, he's pro-life after we are all dead. But thinks abortion is worse than regular murder. That's not a coherent position.
