SCOTUS and whatnot

[gehringer_2]

9 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

I am fully aware of the reasoning and am fully aware that they aren't banning condoms.

But in the case of the bill in question, it's a regressive policy (ie. targeting Medicaid recipients who are generally lower income - also a demo that sees a lot of abortions), the net effect will lead to less options for contraception for those who cannot afford to pay for an IUD or who don't have medical insurance that will cover the procedure.

I just don't see that as a good thing, and am gonna call it out when I see a poster lecturing everyone about contraception when the most effective forms of it end up at risk of being limited.

So are all these antediluvian white males so focused on female fertility because they want to keep their own wives barefoot and pregnant, or just because they don't have the confidence to compete with them in the workplace?

It also ties in directly with suppression of minority voting access because their program will also help speed their transition to racial minority status, so you have to have voter suppression well established before that bigger generation of minority babies reaches voting age.

Edited May 5, 2022 by gehringer_2

[mtutiger]

14 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

So are all these antediluvian white males so focused on female fertility because they want to keep their own wives barefoot and pregnant, or just because they don't have the confidence to compete with them in the workplace?

I mean, I do think there's sincere religious beliefs involved here. As misguided as the actions (specific to limiting access to contraception) may be from a policy perspective.

But even so, setting aside how much religion should be influencing policy (I know where I stand on that lol), the reality is that when you get into the question of when life begins, you really cannot separate abortion from contraception. As much as some conservatives would like to, particularly given how popular many forms of contraception are.

The big reason I keep bringing this up is that it's totally believable to me that if Roe goes, there's really not much stopping states from limiting access to certain forms of contraception. Which is a net negative for women's health and would be deeply unpopular overall.

Edited May 5, 2022 by mtutiger

[CMRivdogs]

What about the fact there is nothing in any of these bills that punish the sperm donor? 

But then, these are the same people who discourage young women from reporting an assault or rape, most of the time do not believe her or accuse her of doing something that causes it. Even to the point where the accused gets away with murder.

 

[gehringer_2]

34 minutes ago, buddha said:

i think the reasoning

Reasoning? There is no more "reasoning" here than the once serious arguments over Angels dancing on pin heads. There is no "reasoning" at all behind any of it, it's all a bunch of ancient superstition with an overlay of modern high tech demagoguery and basic misogyny. That is the reality when it come to anything resembling rational analysis here.

Edited May 5, 2022 by gehringer_2

[oblong]

the goal is an authoritarian patriarchal theocracy rooted in a specific form of Christianity.

 

 

[buddha]

24 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

I am fully aware of the reasoning and am fully aware that they aren't banning condoms.

But in the case of the bill in question, it's a regressive policy (ie. targeting Medicaid recipients who are generally lower income - also a demo that sees a lot of abortions), the net effect will lead to less options for contraception for those who cannot afford to pay for an IUD or who don't have medical insurance that will cover the procedure.

I just don't see that as a good thing, and am gonna call it out when I see a poster lecturing everyone about contraception when the most effective forms of it end up at risk of being limited.

im not fighting with you, i just remembered the argument against iuds from before.  i dont agree with it.

[gehringer_2]

5 minutes ago, oblong said:

the goal is an authoritarian patriarchal theocracy rooted in a specific form of Christianity.

 

 

RIght - I'll start thinking about supporting anti-abortion law the day they promise that no woman goes to jail for it unless the male that 'donated' the sperm to the transaction goes too.

Edited May 5, 2022 by gehringer_2

[oblong]

19 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

RIght - I'll start thinking about supporting anti-abortion law the day they promise that no woman goes to jail for it unless the male that 'donated' the sperm to the transaction goes too.

can't do that because they're the breadwinner or something.  It was probably the woman's fault anyway.  Erections and Ejaculations don't happen by themselves.

 

[Motown Bombers]

 

[ewsieg]

There are solutions to this folks, i'm not sure why everyone thinks it's a big deal.  A compromise can be reached, but it'll take some blinders.

For my left leaning friends here. (Right leaning, move to the next paragraph without reading this) Publicly say abortion isn't a good thing, you don't even have to say bad, just say it's not a good thing, no one wants it, etc.  Then accept a 'penalty' against the person that gets the procedure.  Because it's not desired, it needs to be well regulated, like Pot.  You have to go to a federal approved site to have it done, that'll ensure you pay the penalty.  In looking it up, it says the average abortion is $750 but less in some states, let's just say $500 is the cost of the 'fine'.  We're actually subsidizing it, but shush, be quiet.  Please stop reading now.

Hey my right leaning friends.  We all know abortion is really bad, but c'mon, who gets abortions?  Yeah, you're right, people that go around having sex or allowing themselves to get raped or molested.  Do we really want those people being mom's?  So let's have a federal legal ban on abortion but for those that are going to do it anyway, like those stupid hippies smoking their 'reefer', we'll punish them with a tax penalty of $500 bucks everytime they do it.  That'll show them and help them lead life without hopping into bed outside of marriage (to a man of course, amirite?!?!?)  Good God fearing women would never break the law, so this will help save them from a horrible sin that the devil currently tempts them with.   Plus all the tax money we get out of this ,we can put towards cops to protect us from those babies that liberals end up not aborting due to this.  

[mtutiger]

So what happens on miscarriages?

Any of these politicians consider that yet?

[oblong]

 

[oblong]

24 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

There are solutions to this folks, i'm not sure why everyone thinks it's a big deal.  A compromise can be reached, but it'll take some blinders.

For my left leaning friends here. (Right leaning, move to the next paragraph without reading this) Publicly say abortion isn't a good thing, you don't even have to say bad, just say it's not a good thing, no one wants it, etc.  Then accept a 'penalty' against the person that gets the procedure.  Because it's not desired, it needs to be well regulated, like Pot.  You have to go to a federal approved site to have it done, that'll ensure you pay the penalty.  In looking it up, it says the average abortion is $750 but less in some states, let's just say $500 is the cost of the 'fine'.  We're actually subsidizing it, but shush, be quiet.  Please stop reading now.

Hey my right leaning friends.  We all know abortion is really bad, but c'mon, who gets abortions?  Yeah, you're right, people that go around having sex or allowing themselves to get raped or molested.  Do we really want those people being mom's?  So let's have a federal legal ban on abortion but for those that are going to do it anyway, like those stupid hippies smoking their 'reefer', we'll punish them with a tax penalty of $500 bucks everytime they do it.  That'll show them and help them lead life without hopping into bed outside of marriage (to a man of course, amirite?!?!?)  Good God fearing women would never break the law, so this will help save them from a horrible sin that the devil currently tempts them with.   Plus all the tax money we get out of this ,we can put towards cops to protect us from those babies that liberals end up not aborting due to this.  

I can't tell if this is serious or not

 

[RatkoVarda]

"they won't do that"

they are already doing that

edit: from the well known liberal rag Reason 

Edited May 5, 2022 by RatkoVarda

[gehringer_2]

1 minute ago, oblong said:

I can't tell if this is serious or not

 

I think Roe pretty much was the compromise. One side wants out of it.

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, mtutiger said:

I mean, I do think there's sincere religious beliefs involved here. As misguided as the actions (specific to limiting access to contraception) may be from a policy perspective.

But even so, setting aside how much religion should be influencing policy (I know where I stand on that lol), the reality is that when you get into the question of when life begins, you really cannot separate abortion from contraception. As much as some conservatives would like to, particularly given how popular many forms of contraception are.

The big reason I keep bringing this up is that it's totally believable to me that if Roe goes, there's really not much stopping states from limiting access to certain forms of contraception. Which is a net negative for women's health and would be deeply unpopular overall.

The fertilized egg argument betrays a basic ignorance of biology. Nature throws away half of all fertilized eggs as they never implant. Sounds like the Creator was not sufficient devout. I guess they're going to need to find a way to put the big guy in sky in the pokey.

..Oh that's right, he's strictly male type. Nevermind.

Edited May 5, 2022 by gehringer_2

[CMRivdogs]

10 minutes ago, oblong said:

 

Hence the love, honor and OBEY DAMN IT, in the marriage vows.

[mtutiger]

14 minutes ago, RatkoVarda said:

"they won't do that"

they are already doing that

edit: from the well known liberal rag Reason 

Yep.

It's easier to ignore cases like these, or pretend they don't happen, or ignore questions about who is held liable for an abortion, or to act like there's nothing that could possibly happen to popular forms of contraception. Despite the answers not being clear at all.

Edited May 5, 2022 by mtutiger

[gehringer_2]

1 minute ago, CMRivdogs said:

Hence the love, honor and OBEY DAMN IT, in the marriage vows.

LOL - my wife took the scissors to the vows. She was pretty adamant she wasn't promising to obey a dumb git like me. It's been cool, we've been ignoring each other's stupid stuff for 45 yrs now.

[oblong]

8 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

The fertilized egg argument betrays a basic ignorance of biology. Nature throws away half of all fertilized eggs as they never implant. Sounds like the Creator was not sufficient devout. I guess they're going to need to find a way to put the big guy in sky in the pokey.

..Oh that's right, he's strictly male type. Nevermind.

someone I know tried to play the "the fetus is it's own body" argument and I didn't want to wade into it but my question is where then is the line from one body to the other?

Nature/Bioilogy/Evolution/God made the fetus dependent upon the female's body.  Women don't ley eggs.  Until birth women have autonomy.  "That's the way God wanted it" which should sound familiar to the Christian Taliban.

 

 

[gehringer_2]

3 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

Yep.

It's easier to ignore cases like these, or pretend they don't happen, or ignore questions about who is held liable for an abortion, or to act like there's nothing that could possibly happen to popular forms of contraception. Despite the answers not being clear at all.

And it completely ignores that step by step roll-back is the publicly stated position of conservative jurisprudence. You really should listen to people when they are telling you exactly what they plan to do.

Edited May 5, 2022 by gehringer_2

[ewsieg]

19 minutes ago, oblong said:

I can't tell if this is serious or not

 

Definitely a joke, unless we can get the right messenger to make it.  I mean, Trump says this and within months of Roe v Wade being overturned, the GOP would be pushing through a bill that effectively subsidizes and ensures access to abortion across the entire country, just because Trumpee's would look at it as 'owning the libs'.

[RatkoVarda]

3 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

You really should listen to people when they are telling you exactly what they plan to do.

half the GQP is mocking Dems for being concerned about "things that will never happen" that the other half the GQP is threatening to do

[CMRivdogs]

21 minutes ago, oblong said:

 

 

5 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

LOL - my wife took the scissors to the vows. She was pretty adamant she wasn't promising to obey a dumb git like me. It's been cool, we've been ignoring each other's stupid stuff for 45 yrs now.

Same here. I think we settled on Love, Honor and Cherish or something like that. The last words were "This is my beloved, this is my friend" (Solomon 5:16)

[mtutiger]

7 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

And it completely ignores that step by step roll-back is the publicly stated position of conservative jurisprudence. You realt should listen to people when they are telling you exactly what they plan to do.

This thread by Jane Coaston, who is pretty reasonable overall, kinda nails it. 

Now that it appears we are heading in this direction, the goal for a lot of conservative punditocracy seems to be to frame this all as a way for states to adopt the abortion laws of France and Spain. And to do so is to be willfully ignorant of what is *actually happening* at the state level. I know it's happening where I live, in Louisiana (with the bill I shared earlier), MIssouri, etc.

I mostly get frustrated because, moreso than some others here, I do struggle with abortion on moral grounds. But the problem is that there are a whole host of other issues that the most extreme, maximalist position on this issue presents as well. And no one who is in favor of that position seems willing or able to deal with the end result of the other issues that arise from it. 

I even asked one of the more pro-life posters the other day who they thought should be held criminally liable, and the response was "that's for the politicians to deal with". Like, if one feels as strongly as they do on this issue, that answer shouldn't cut it for those in the middle. It just shouldn't.

Edited May 5, 2022 by mtutiger