The All things Political Topic - The Night never knew that its end was fleet.

[BruceVC]

8 hours ago, Hurlsnot said:

My God, you've done it. You've solved the whole problem. Huzzah.

It is one solution and part of the choices provided, taking personal responsibility for not accidently falling pregnant is possible

But not everyone has access to pharmacies or drugs that can help, so we see this  in countries like SA. We have a major problem with underage pregnancies in SA, this year we had 934 girls age 10-14 falling pregnant 

https://www.iol.co.za/news/politics/934-girls-aged-10-to-14-gave-birth-between-april-2020-and-march-2021-gauteng-health-mec-7ebedd6f-96b8-469e-ac1c-766d52ae042b

[Gorth]

4 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

It is one solution and part of the choices provided, taking personal responsibility for not accidently falling pregnant is possible

That is just part of it though, what I found despicable (and why I compare the Republicans to the Taliban) is they also explicitly excluded rape and incest victims, which will doom them to a life long reminder of their ordeals. Violent spouses have a history of raping their partners and keeping them in servitude by constantly and repeatedly making them pregnant. No way out for those other than flee the state of Texas, not unlike the way people tried to escape from East Berlin during the cold war. What's next? Going after people who try to help people escape Texas? Wouldn't surprise me to be honest.

[BruceVC]

6 minutes ago, Gorth said:

That is just part of it though, what I found despicable (and why I compare the Republicans to the Taliban) is they also explicitly excluded rape and incest victims, which will doom them to a life long reminder of their ordeals. Violent spouses have a history of raping their partners and keeping them in servitude by constantly and repeatedly making them pregnant. No way out for those other than flee the state of Texas, not unlike the way people tried to escape from East Berlin during the cold war. What's next? Going after people who try to help people escape Texas? Wouldn't surprise me to be honest.

You right about the exclusion of rape and incest, its just seems particularly cruel and insensitive 

One consolation about the US and these new draconian  abortion laws is most women have the option of leaving Texas and getting an abortion in another state. So at least its not a country wide legal change 

 

[Gfted1]

9 hours ago, Elerond said:

Just give them time

Oh, were just theory crafting? It is my understanding that Plan B is considered a pregnancy preventer, not aborter. So do you think TX will also include other birth control methods such as condoms, "the pill", IUD, etc.?

[Amentep]

While medically Plan B isn't considered an abortion pill (which dislodges a fertilized egg that has attached to the uterus by thinning the uterine lining and causing contractions), I seem to recall that Plan B is still not liked by some groups because it blocks a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus in the first place.  The key thought being that once the egg is fertilized, it should be considered a person with rights.

I do think that its entirely possible that any state that is leaning towards limiting 'abortions' would go after anything that could negatively effect the gestation of a fertilized egg, including Plan B.  I doubt they'd go after things that prevent an egg being fertilized, however.

[Elerond]

Just now, Gfted1 said:

Oh, were just theory crafting? It is my understanding that Plan B is considered a pregnancy preventer, not aborter. So do you think TX will also include other birth control methods such as condoms, "the pill", IUD, etc.?

It is, but that does not prevent anti-abortion people claiming that it is abortifacient 

here an example

https://lozierinstitute.org/plan-b-abortifacient-and-other-risks/

Prescribing information for Plan B points out that the drug works by “preventing ovulation” or “possibly preventing fertilization.”  Or it may alter the endometrium and thereby “inhibit implantation.”[1]  This refers to implantation of any newly conceived human individual/zygote in the mother’s womb.  Hence, the complete clinical pharmacology of Plan B demands that the drug product be duly recognized as an abortifacient – or potential abortifacient – and not merely described as “emergency contraception.”

and here another

https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pa_acdlife_doc_20001031_pillola-giorno-dopo_en.html

3. It is clear, therefore, that the proven "anti-implantation" action of the morning-after pill is really nothing other than a chemically induced abortion. It is neither intellectually consistent nor scientifically justifiable to say that we are not dealing with the same thing.

 

 Science does not matter in these questions and laws implemented to ensure that their ideology is heeded

[Gfted1]

24 minutes ago, Amentep said:

The key thought being that once the egg is fertilized, it should be considered a person with rights.

Ah, this must be the lynchpin. That and the assumption that every act of unprotected sex results in a fertilized egg! Plan B is only effective within the first 72h, so I think its impossible to even determine fertilization during that time?

[Amentep]

40 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

Ah, this must be the lynchpin. That and the assumption that every act of unprotected sex results in a fertilized egg! Plan B is only effective within the first 72h, so I think its impossible to even determine fertilization during that time?

That's my understanding with the issue around Plan B, that Plan B is problematic because it could be rejecting a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterine lining and developing further.

[Hurlshort]

I just have a hard time with this whole concept of dictating the terms of what a women can do to her body. That should be between her and her medical professional. 

Ideally, everyone would use birth control. Ideally, if that fails or is not used, people will use plan B. But unplanned pregnancies rarely come out of ideal situations.

It is also good to point out that abortion rates have declined quite a bit since the late 70's. We don't actually need to make abortion illegal to stop it from happening. We have had success by offering services to support women with reproductive health instead of trying to criminalize it. 

[Elerond]

Actual pro-life movement would actually build social benefits that would ensure that there is no people in poverty and that any child born would  have decent place to live, access to good schooling and they don't cause unbearable burden to their parents. 

Making things illegal don't remove reason why people are seeking abortions

[Raithe]

[Skarpen]

12 hours ago, Elerond said:

Actual pro-life movement would actually build social benefits that would ensure that there is no people in poverty and that any child born would  have decent place to live, access to good schooling and they don't cause unbearable burden to their parents.

So basically you absolve the pro-choice side of taking care of those things? As pro-choice scream hypocrisy on the other side they don't seem see their own when they use this argument only against pro-life and not actually care about those either. 

[BruceVC]

6 hours ago, Raithe said:

I am confused by the point of this meme but I think its significant ....I just dont get it?

Is it prolife or prochoice, I assume its saying when you take away a womens choice it can lead to many kids being raised in foster care which is not ideal. So I would assume its prochoice but why do they frame the prolife in a positive way with a parent ?

[majestic]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

Is it prolife or prochoice, I assume its saying when you take away a womens choice it can lead to many kids being raised in foster care which is not ideal. So I would assume its prochoice but why do they frame the prolife in a positive way with a parent ?

Go back a couple of pages and look up the George Carlin quote he posted, it's exactly the same, just with more visuals.

[BruceVC]

10 minutes ago, majestic said:

Go back a couple of pages and look up the George Carlin quote he posted, it's exactly the same, just with more visuals.

I can do that but its easier if someone understands it to spend  the 2 minutes explaining it 

[Raithe]

19 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

I can do that but its easier if someone understands it to spend  the 2 minutes explaining it 

It's basically playing on the fact that the pro-life crowd who focus on  "the unborn life of a fetus is so important we have to do all this to help it" tend to gloss over and ignore the vast amount of kids who have been born and are in the US foster care system. Life is important to them, until it's actually born and requires education, feeding, care, and homes with family.

There does seem to be a large segment of the pro-life crowd that tend to be running with that "we care until they're born, then it's all socialism that we're against to actually look after the children..."

[Gorth]

1 hour ago, BruceVC said:

I am confused by the point of this meme but I think its significant ....I just dont get it?

Is it prolife or prochoice, I assume its saying when you take away a womens choice it can lead to many kids being raised in foster care which is not ideal. So I would assume its prochoice but why do they frame the prolife in a positive way with a parent ?

Tl;dr; “pro-lifers” don’t give a **** about kids once they’re born and can drown for all they care.
 

It’s about the logic of religious mindsets. Ilf I focus on a single issue, I can feel good and superior or some such

[BruceVC]

23 minutes ago, Raithe said:

It's basically playing on the fact that the pro-life crowd who focus on  "the unborn life of a fetus is so important we have to do all this to help it" tend to gloss over and ignore the vast amount of kids who have been born and are in the US foster care system. Life is important to them, until it's actually born and requires education, feeding, care, and homes with family.

There does seem to be a large segment of the pro-life crowd that tend to be running with that "we care until they're born, then it's all socialism that we're against to actually look after the children..."

 

16 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Tl;dr; “pro-lifers” don’t give a **** about kids once they’re born and can drown for all they care.
 

It’s about the logic of religious mindsets. Ilf I focus on a single issue, I can feel good and superior or some such

Okay, it makes sense...I got it 

[Elerond]

7 hours ago, Skarpen said:

So basically you absolve the pro-choice side of taking care of those things? As pro-choice scream hypocrisy on the other side they don't seem see their own when they use this argument only against pro-life and not actually care about those either. 

I didn't say anything about pro-choice.

But they are ones who support personal freedom and that matter is personal. So hypocrisy in this issue is almost totally on 'pro-life' side

Also pro-choice politicians seem to mostly support improving social benefits, making schooling free, free health care, parental leaves, preventing firing pregnant people. Where pro-life politicians are mostly against these things.

[Hurlshort]

8 hours ago, Skarpen said:

So basically you absolve the pro-choice side of taking care of those things? As pro-choice scream hypocrisy on the other side they don't seem see their own when they use this argument only against pro-life and not actually care about those either. 

Pro-life groups actively seek to shut down organizations like Planned Parenthood. Pro-choice groups actively seek to support them. Seems like a pretty big distinction. 

[rjshae]

6 hours ago, Gorth said:

Tl;dr; “pro-lifers” don’t give a **** about kids once they’re born and can drown for all they care.
 

It’s about the logic of religious mindsets. Ilf I focus on a single issue, I can feel good and superior or some such

I suspect that's an oversimplification. They do care about the kids of their family and friends. Many of them are probably charitable.

[Pidesco]

42 minutes ago, rjshae said:

I suspect that's an oversimplification. They do care about the kids of their family and friends. Many of them are probably charitable.

In a similar way that politicians that are against abortion, are actually ok with it, as long as it involves, their family members or, perhaps, mistresses.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

If Texas women want to have abortions, they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps and **** Republican legislators or be related to one.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Gorth said:

It’s about the logic of religious mindsets. Ilf I focus on a single issue, I can feel good and superior or some such

While the religious aspect is an easy target (because it's usually the reason they provide), I think the actual root-cause is "just-world" thinking

It's not about the child, it's about forcing mom to live with the consequences of her actions. I don't actually care whether she makes it or not, I just want to see her sleeping in the bed she made.

It's been my experience that this explains a lot of "conservative" behavior

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

9 minutes ago, Achilles said:

While the religious aspect is an easy target (because it's usually the reason they provide), I think the actual root-cause is "just-world" thinking

It's not about the child, it's about forcing mom to live with the consequences of her actions. I don't actually care whether she makes it or not, I just want to see her sleeping in the bed she made.

It's been my experience that this explains a lot of "conservative" behavior

In my experience even this is selectively deployed. Like if a woman gets pregnant or if a kid gets arrested for weed they need to deal with the consequences, but if a guy gets his book deal dropped because he tried to overthrow the government or banned from social media for yelling racial slurs that's cancel culture destroying freedom.