Share This Article with a Friend!

Assault on America, Day 152: What would happen if liberals boycotted every pro-life state?

Boycott Fizzles
Have you ever stopped to consider what would happen if everyone boycotted everything?

It’s not possible, of course, but if you listened long enough to the gigantic blasts of hot air emanating from Hollywood celebrities and filmmakers these days, you just might think boycotts are the norm and anyone purchasing stuff or freely working in location x, y or z is the exception rather than the rule.

A few weeks ago actress Alyssa Milano proposed a type of boycott of her own -- a sex strike! -- to protest the passage of a Georgia law that protects unborn babies in utero with detectable heartbeats. Milano reasoned if a woman opted not to couple with her male partner she wouldn’t end up pregnant (at least she got that right) and henceforth be compelled to choose between vacuuming the fetus out of her womb or carrying the growing baby to term.

Now more Hollywood honchos are promising/threatening not to work in Georgia if the law survives appeal and takes effect. Yes, it really has become that stupid, folks. Melissa Quinn reported at The Washington Examiner, “A boycott of Georgia spearheaded by actors and producers in the wake of the state’s new abortion restriction threatens to upend its position as the Hollywood of the South.

“Known as ‘Y’allywood,’ Georgia ranks as the country’s third-largest production hub and has drawn big-name projects like AMC’s ‘The Walking Dead’ and Marvel Studios' ‘Black Panther’ with its generous tax incentives of up to 30%. But after Gov. Brian Kemp signed the so-called heartbeat bill, some production companies and actors are vowing to steer clear of the state.

“The standoff pits Hollywood and its progressive views against a conservative state where the television and film industry — attracted to Georgia with the promise of tax breaks — has become entrenched.”

Quinn’s story lists actor Jason Bateman, film producers Ron Howard and Brian Grazer and actress Kristin Wiig among the “stars” who will no longer practice their craft in the life-loving Peach State, allegedly upset that Georgia legislators disagreed with their own personal views of when human life begins. (Note: Disney and Netflix are hooking on to the PC train too.) No doubt the principled elected leaders who proposed the pro-baby humanity law are quaking in their proverbial cowboy boots at the notion of liberal Hollywood entertainers dissing Georgia and refusing to go there to work or visit.

Clearly these unnecessarily upset opportunists hope the economic impact from their boycott will force the pro-life side to bend and once again allow abortionists to wield their deadly instruments with life-terminating precision -- all over the prospect of their state government losing a few bucks. What’s a life worth? Not much to these people apparently. After appraising these stupid Hollywood losers and their inane boycotts you wonder whether the pro-death side is concentrating on ending the wrong lives.

Instead of engaging in “conversations” over issues these whiners use their elevated platforms to make donkeys of themselves. Rather than testifying in committee hearings or generating grassroots letter campaigns or holding rallies to put pressure on public figures they protest from afar, typing out frivolous Twitter posts that probably take 30-seconds to concoct, all the while placing themselves on higher moral ground by threatening to “punish” Georgia for passing local laws based on contemporary community standards (how’s that for a Supreme Court reference?).

Besides, who really suffers from these boycotts anyway? Is it the governing class that spends the majority of its time answering constituent concerns, listening to lobbyists’ demands or debating the higher notions of the day? No, it’s the working man or woman who depends on the goodwill of the entertainment industry to go to work every day and earn an honest wage for a hard day’s toil. Quinn’s article indicated local unions (and even 2018 gubernatorial loser Stacey Abrams) are against the Hollywood inspired boycott because one, it won’t do anything to change the law (because those dastardly pro-life men won’t listen to reason!) and two, why lay the burden at the feet of wage-earners who need to pay their bills?

There’s yet another side to this controversy to consider. Boycotts often inspire liberty-loving conservatives and others fed up with senseless liberal grandstanding to direct their business towards the trade that’s being targeted. The burgeoning conservative film industry just might reward Georgia with additional interest thanks to Hollywood’s spotlighting of the state and its traditional values. With the tax incentives already in place, the Peach State is a darn nice place to make a movie or TV show… if you don’t believe it, just ask the liberals themselves.

Everyone knows Chick-fil-A has faced a constant barrage of boycotts and other liberal shunning practices -- and look how it’s turned out for the chicken chain. Even though Chick-fil-A only operates six days a week (closed on Sunday) it’s by far the most successful fast-food franchise. Why? Because the same values that make it a leader in pro-Christian causes also help it maintain a steady and profitable business -- namely personnel that’s courteous and respectful, a clean restaurant environment and yeah, the product tastes pretty good too.

Chick-fil-A got its start in (Hapeville) Georgia and still has its headquarters there (College Park)… a coincidence? Liberals already target Chick-fil-A as anti-progress, so any additional boycotts wouldn’t likely make a difference. Maybe they’d even help the company grow.

Hopefully, as is the trend recently, when more states pass restrictive abortion laws there won’t be any decent places left to produce Hollywood’s dimwitted entertainment features, except for the already prohibitively high-tax locales like California, Illinois and New York. Lest we forget one of the draws for actors and studio heads to states like Georgia are the tax incentives -- therefore, they make more money on what they do. If these antagonists are such big believers in abortion let them pay for it -- literally -- by cutting their own profit margins.

Lastly, how stupid are boycotts? Ask someone from the dark days of Soviet communism to share their feelings about voluntarily choosing not to buy something because some idiot Hollywood actor or producer told them to forego the happiness and satisfaction freedom and capitalism provides. Such people know what it’s like to go to a store and find nothing on the shelves. The offerings weren’t great back then -- you’d be lucky to find enough sustenance to feed your family much less be able to select from thousands of products at virtually every corner location.

Or how about Venezuela today? People there are losing percentages of their body weight every year because there’s not enough food. What do you think a Venezuelan would think of the Hollywood fools’ boycotts?

Besides, what’s wrong with being pro-life anyway? It isn’t just about favoring the life of the baby, it’s a general concern with improving the lives of everyone -- including the mother.

Kyle Blanchette wrote at The Washington Examiner, “If [pro-lifers and pro-life activists] were really pro-life, the argument goes, they wouldn’t simply oppose abortion. They would also support government programs designed to help mothers and babies thrive once the baby is born. By opposing abortion without also supporting social welfare policies, most pro-lifers reveal themselves as only caring about babies before they are born. They aren’t actually pro-life; they are pro-birth. They are either not thinking through the implications of their pro-life convictions, or they are failing to put them into practice...

“It’s sensible to think that those who seek to protect babies via legal restrictions on abortion should also be providing positive help to mothers and babies in difficult circumstances. This is what the ‘pro-birth’ objection gets right. But there is room for debate on the relative merits of social welfare programs. Without establishing that forced governmental redistribution is the only effective means of providing help to human beings after they are born, the charge of inconsistency does not stick.”

States like Georgia and Alabama recently passed laws protecting the unborn because of a belief in human life, not to “oppress” women or anyone else. As Blanchette pointed out, there are plenty of non-governmental entities serving new and would-be mothers. It’s the highest form of charity to assist those in need -- and lots of good people are stepping up to do it.

These caring enterprises are doing the real work of charity, too, not just pushing a pathetic cause from across the country using only social media. Hollywood actors and producers should stick to what they do and leave a state to decide for itself how it views pregnancy and human rights.

Pro-life state legislatures should be commended for pushing the envelope on the human rights issue. As liberal challenges to abortion restriction laws mount, the Supreme Court will decide. Here’s thinking Hollywood actors’ and producers’ absurd boycotts won’t accomplish a thing.

Share this