User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » AppleOutsider »

Roe Vs. Wade Rehash (update: RvW officially dead as of 2022-06-24)


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
Roe Vs. Wade Rehash (update: RvW officially dead as of 2022-06-24)
Page 3 of 5 Previous 1 2 [3] 4 5  Next Thread Tools
Dr. Bobsky
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: UK's most densely packed city. It's not London...
 
2022-05-04, 13:20

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anonymous Coward View Post
Yes, you are told that this is an essential practice, but this argument is really stretching the point. First of all, whether you believe it or not, at the point in the ritual, it is no longer considered wine. It is one cup (not the fluid measurement) shared between a number of people, probably 50 to 100. It is only a sip. The only one to drink more is the priest or assistant finishing the cup at the end of that portion of the ritual. There is no encouragement of the use of wine to any other use outside the ritual. Not to mention that even though the use is encouraged, even in children, it is still optional for the congregation to the point that the practice is sometimes suspended in the event of a contagious disease outbreak.
I think you’re missing my point: a joint has as much ill effects on the world as a sip of wine does, a glass of wine can kill. The notion that the extended war on drugs has any moral basis is stupid. If it had a moral basis, you might see proportionate regulation of drugs according to their social use risks, but we don’t.
  quote
Quagmire
meh
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-05-04, 13:28

Quote:
Originally Posted by turtle View Post
I'm trying to help others see a side that is factual and not shrouded in emotion. Sure it is an "easy position" for me because I happen to like the end result, but the point is still the same; the SCOTUS did their job in handing the case properly and explained their reasoning well in the (draft) opinion.
That is where you lost me.....

It is your view and opinion to be a strict constitutionalist. That isn't facts of how the system is supposed to work. It is our view that the right to privacy covers abortion.

Or you going to argue since there isn't an amendment that strictly states same sex marriage is a right so that should be left to the voters and the state? Yet if we want to ban straight marriages in return because I may view marriage as an out of date practice to control women( note: this is hypothetical), that runs afoul of the 1st amendment. Funny how that shit works......

giggity
  quote
Quagmire
meh
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-05-04, 13:30

Quote:
Originally Posted by 709 View Post
You know what else isn't in the Constitution? Nine Supreme Court Justices. Expand the court, if only to make up for the ones put in place by un-democratically elected Presidents.
Or two seats stolen by democratically elected Presidents by the opposing parties( Obama in 2016 and Biden in 2020 using the GOP's standard used to steal Obama's pick in 2016). Roe would still be around in either scenario( Garland was placed on the SC or Biden would have chosen). As the court would still be 5-4 and Roberts would again be the tipping point like he was in the 2017 and 2018 cases in the GOP last attempt to overturn Roe.

Cause Trump was fairly elected like it or not ( you can have a view of the relevancy of the electoral college though....). If you argue that, you're no better than the 2020 was stolen idiots that led to January 6th.....

giggity
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-05-04, 13:43

I don't believe the states of the Union were ever intended to enjoy the same individual rights as the people whose rights the constitution protects. As per the 10th Amendment, where they may rule (on matters not proscribed) they must do so in respect of the constitution. In the spirit of the country's formative utterances, ideally the states would gravitate over time to a "more perfect union" - which to my ear has always read as more consistent across the country in both intent and outcome, and differ only programmatically in how those ends are achieved. Not that a state would be exceptional over many respects of the law, or that "rights" could stand in stark practical difference on one side of a freeway versus another. The goal of a more perfect union is to erase the Mason-Dixon line, not draw new contemporary versions all over the map.

Interpretations that hide behind states rights have often been cowardly attempts to spurn the rights of the people of those very same states as guaranteed by the constitution, constitutional amendment, and judicial interpretation/ruling. See slavery or civil rights. Here's the thought experiment I suggest for you: substitute slavery for abortion and see how the SCOTUS leak reads:

Quote:
We end this opinion where we began. Slavery presents a profound moral question. The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting slavery. Roe and Casey (Decisions) arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected representatives. The judgment of the Fifth Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.

.........................................
  quote
Anonymous Coward
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-05-04, 13:43

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Bobsky View Post
I think you’re missing my point: a joint has as much ill effects on the world as a sip of wine does, a glass of wine can kill. The notion that the extended war on drugs has any moral basis is stupid. If it had a moral basis, you might see proportionate regulation of drugs according to their social use risks, but we don’t.
I'm not missing your point, because it was not clearly expressed until this post, which is valid. The previous post was phrased more as an attack on a specific group to manufacture an argument for hypocrisy between their ritual use of a specific alcohol product and a stance advocating pro-life.
  quote
709
¡Damned!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Purgatory.
 
2022-05-04, 13:45

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quagmire View Post
( you can have a view of the relevancy of the electoral college though....)
I was specifically thinking of the Electoral College being un-democratic. Even the thought of McConnell gives me heartburn.
  quote
Quagmire
meh
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-05-04, 13:54

Quote:
Originally Posted by 709 View Post
I was specifically thinking of the Electoral College being un-democratic. Even the thought of McConnell gives me heartburn.
Gotcha!
  quote
Capella
Dark Cat of the Sith
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Send a message via AIM to Capella  
2022-05-04, 15:00

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quagmire View Post
Or you going to argue since there isn't an amendment that strictly states same sex marriage is a right so that should be left to the voters and the state? Yet if we want to ban straight marriages in return because I may view marriage as an out of date practice to control women( note: this is hypothetical), that runs afoul of the 1st amendment. Funny how that shit works......
I haven't been sure if I should start a separate thread for "the domino effect of Roe V Wade falling" or keep it in here, but it's spelled out! in the draft opinion! That they are planning to go after contraception and after same-sex marriage next. They're actively working to overturn a number of seen-as-settled rights. If you want fewer abortions why the fuck are you overturning contraceptive rights?

Marriage isn't protected in the Constitution - either straight or gay marriage. I just got married to a lovely Australian man. April 23, 2022 - after being in the immigration queue since July 23, 2020. His ability to stay here in the US hinges on immigration law tied to our marriage. I'm aware that existing marriages in NY, a state that allows it, may be grandfathered in to stay valid in the state - but will my marriage not be valid in, say, TX or FL? Immigration is a federal concern; will the federal government recognize a gay marriage in New York state for its purposes, or no? If they overturn the marriage equality decision, is my existing marriage dissolved at a federal level and does that mean he is in-eligible to stay with me? Or would be he eligible for a green card as long as we're in New York, but if we moved to a state without the law, we would lose his eligibility? (Not that I would move to a state to jeopardize it, but you see the problem that this patchwork would cause, right?)

I hope all of you will forgive my prickliness this week, but staring down the barrel of losing the ability to make my own reproductive choices, looking at states attempting to legislate healthcare for people like me out of existence, and contemplating the possibility the marriage I spent $2500 and waited 2 years for may become invalid and deport my husband, is a hell of a lot of things to consider losing in a single month. When's this assault on my rights going to end? How much else can I lose? Are we going back to "women can't have bank accounts without their husbands permission" now too? Am I going to be allowed to exist outside my fucking home in 2 years? This news is shocking and scary to a lot of people but the brunt of it is going to be viscerally enacted on my body in a way it never will be for many of you.

"A blind, deaf, comatose, lobotomy patient could feel my anger!" - Darth Baras
twitter ; amateur photographer ; fanfiction writer ; roleplayer and worldbuilder

Last edited by Capella : 2022-05-04 at 15:17.
  quote
kscherer
The Ban Hammer
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-05-04, 15:05

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capella View Post
I haven't been sure if I should start a separate thread for "the domino effect of Roe V Wade falling" or keep it in here …
Let's keep it all in here, for now. Each is going to bleed into the other, anyway.
  quote
Capella
Dark Cat of the Sith
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Send a message via AIM to Capella  
2022-05-04, 15:14

Quote:
Originally Posted by turtle View Post
Plainly, I'm not going to engage in every question or finger wagging in my direction. I take no offense, I'm just not going to delve in. I'm not ducking away, just not engaging in everything.
As far as I'm concerned I haven't engaged in finger-wagging until right now. I've been trying to ask you questions to get you to clarify your positions because I want to see on what factual grounds you justify things, and because I'm genuinely curious as to how you reconcile statements you've made in previous threads about issues like vaccines and death penalty, with the issue under discussion now, because your views appear to contradict themselves. I do want to understand why you think state intervention is okay in Situation X but not Situation Y. I ask these questions because I can't understand what people on the "other side" are thinking if I don't ask them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by turtle View Post
I have already invested more time in this thread than I really should have to be frank.
This is my finger-wagging:

Same here, but the reason I'm investing my time and energy is because these are rights to my body going away. When you come in acting happy as hell my rights are being stripped away from me, and then talk about how you're just trying to be factual and not engage in "finger wagging", and make it seem like you're the better person because you're not getting emotional about it, it pisses me off. You can afford to not get emotionally engaged one way or another - these decisions will never cost you what they cost me. You will never be forced by the state to carry an unwanted life in your body. For you, this is a thought exercise in morality of murder or in how systems work at best and you can sit back and talk about 'facts' and 'without emotion' and 'why things should be left to the state'. For me, this is my control over my own physical personhood being threatened. It can't be cold and unemotionally talked about because it's my very autonomy over my body, and I have tried over and over to get advocates like you to sit and genuinely think about what you'd be doing if the state was in control over your body, and the only thing I can think of is that either:

a: it doesn't matter to you if someone else's bodily autonomy is violated, so long as yours isn't at risk of it ("I can't get pregnant so it doesn't matter to meeeee ~" - "but also Fuck You if you think I'm gonna be forced by the state into some Ex-peri-MENTAL vaccine")

b: you genuinely think in a contest between a fetus and the person carrying it, the fetus' life matters more and the person carrying it is now dedicated 100% to being an incubator. in which case, just fucking admit that one.

"A blind, deaf, comatose, lobotomy patient could feel my anger!" - Darth Baras
twitter ; amateur photographer ; fanfiction writer ; roleplayer and worldbuilder
  quote
Quagmire
meh
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-05-04, 16:12

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capella View Post
I haven't been sure if I should start a separate thread for "the domino effect of Roe V Wade falling" or keep it in here, but it's spelled out! in the draft opinion! That they are planning to go after contraception and after same-sex marriage next. They're actively working to overturn a number of seen-as-settled rights. If you want fewer abortions why the fuck are you overturning contraceptive rights?

Marriage isn't protected in the Constitution - either straight or gay marriage. I just got married to a lovely Australian man. April 23, 2022 - after being in the immigration queue since July 23, 2020. His ability to stay here in the US hinges on immigration law tied to our marriage. I'm aware that existing marriages in NY, a state that allows it, may be grandfathered in to stay valid in the state - but will my marriage not be valid in, say, TX or FL? Immigration is a federal concern; will the federal government recognize a gay marriage in New York state for its purposes, or no? If they overturn the marriage equality decision, is my existing marriage dissolved at a federal level and does that mean he is in-eligible to stay with me? Or would be he eligible for a green card as long as we're in New York, but if we moved to a state without the law, we would lose his eligibility? (Not that I would move to a state to jeopardize it, but you see the problem that this patchwork would cause, right?)

I hope all of you will forgive my prickliness this week, but staring down the barrel of losing the ability to make my own reproductive choices, looking at states attempting to legislate healthcare for people like me out of existence, and contemplating the possibility the marriage I spent $2500 and waited 2 years for may become invalid and deport my husband, is a hell of a lot of things to consider losing in a single month. When's this assault on my rights going to end? How much else can I lose? Are we going back to "women can't have bank accounts without their husbands permission" now too? Am I going to be allowed to exist outside my fucking home in 2 years? This news is shocking and scary to a lot of people but the brunt of it is going to be viscerally enacted on my body in a way it never will be for many of you.

I would see any ban on marriage period as violating the 1st amendment since marriage is a religious thing as much as it is a government thing. So it would be the government preventing free exercise of religion.

Of course same sex marriage doesn’t have that defense. And before turtle or anyone wants to argue, “ we’ll just rename the government form of marriage as civil unions” we have had this debate and it would fall under the same pretext as Brown vs Edu where separate but equal is not equal. Marriage is just as much a societal thing as it is religious. Religion doesn’t own it. Civil unions would be anything, but equal.

giggity
  quote
Capella
Dark Cat of the Sith
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Send a message via AIM to Capella  
2022-05-04, 16:57

the best encapsulation I’ve seen so far.

"You cannot be forced to donate blood, or marrow, or organs... They cannot even harvest your organs after your death without your explicit, written, pre-mortem permission. Denying women the right to abortion means we have less bodily autonomy than a corpse."

"A blind, deaf, comatose, lobotomy patient could feel my anger!" - Darth Baras
twitter ; amateur photographer ; fanfiction writer ; roleplayer and worldbuilder
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-05-04, 18:07

What it really boils down to is that some of the people behind these moves don’t believe that women should have rights. As sick as that sounds, part of it comes from that.
  quote
Ryan
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Promise Land of Trustafarians
 
2022-05-04, 19:10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Bobsky View Post
More to the point: echoing what Capella has already said: Judaism values the life and wellbeing of the mother over any fetus. Forcing a Jewish woman to bear a child to the point of physical or emotional injury or death is a violation of her constitutionally protected right to practice her religion by devaluing her life. This doesn’t pass the sniff test.

Edit: I want to be absolutely clear on this: life for Jews doesn’t begin at egg fertilisation or implantation, it begins at birth; but we don’t even bother naming newborns until they’re over a week old because the likelihood is that they would die. There is no handwringing about this: women are encouraged to consult their elders and rabbi for counselling not to discourage them, because the religion has long recognised this is a fucking hard choice that the woman makes herself because it is her body and existence that are at risk.
This is pretty much where I land on it.

I genuinely don't know how I feel about abortion, but I come down on the side of keeping it legal and safe for the following reasons:

1) The Old Testament makes it clear that abortion is allowed under rabbinical law, at least in certain circumstances, so I don't believe it's murder. I'm not Jewish, but I consider myself a Christian and I don't believe the Bible prohibits abortion.

2) Abortion is often medically necessary for the life of the mother, including late-term. Nobody is having a late-term abortion for funsies.

3) This is not a situation I'll ever been in, so best to keep out of it.

Even if I'm not totally comfortable with abortion (I really just don't know, this shit is complicated), I've landed on the belief that abortion should be between a mother, her medical provider and whoever else she chooses to involve.

I also don't want to be on the same side as those who bomb abortion clinics or harass patients. I used to live across the street from one of the last remaining late-term abortion clinics in the country and the safeguards they had to take were intense. Armed security, 20ft security fences, bollards to stop cars from driving into the building, all sorts of stuff.

They should not have to be in that position.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-05-05, 11:11

I knew Michael Coren as a local pundit. Some years ago I saw signs of his coming around to my way of thinking on certain issues: one being that there is often a political agenda masquerading as religion.

Something for the Christians to read, from an Anglican minister no less: What does the Bible actually say about abortion?

.........................................

Last edited by Matsu : 2022-05-05 at 11:30.
  quote
709
¡Damned!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Purgatory.
 
2022-05-05, 11:57

I almost posted the Barnhart quote yesterday since it's been making the rounds again, but since the above article mentions it right off the bat it's worth quoting in full:

Quote:
“The unborn” are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It’s almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.

Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.

― Pastor David Barnhart

So it goes.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-05-05, 12:33

Isn't it amazing how little the religious right reflects the Gospel Jesus's example with respect to the most vulnerable populations?

Last edited by Matsu : 2022-05-05 at 18:26.
  quote
kscherer
The Ban Hammer
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-05-05, 12:35

Things have been going good in this thread. Please don't let it degrade into another religious debate.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-05-05, 13:07

It is difficult to avoid, since the vast majority of the opposition to abortion is from religious groups. While Christians are the most vocal group, other religious groups are also in that camp. Then again, so are some non-religious people, but I'd hazard as guess that it is a small minority.

I very much agree with the sentiment that religion is being used to cover a political agenda. Spent my teen years as a devote Christian, and worked several churches for over 10 years after that, and that is my first hand experience as well.

In the long run nobody here is changing anyone else's mind, by either reason or presentation of information. This debate has essentially run it's course.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-05-05, 13:14

They are not really separable here. Public sentiment against abortion is steeped in moralistic appeals that heavily imply a religious origin. They conveniently ignore the multitude of ways in which their case is not consistent with the foundational text of their own religion, and this is by design: It allows the Republican leaders and voters to act and feel Christian by shifting all of the weight of the faith onto a cherry-picked set of issues while pursuing a politics that actively antagonizes all the other teachings that should define that same faith.

.........................................
  quote
709
¡Damned!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Purgatory.
 
2022-05-05, 13:17

🎶 Come, mister Taliban, tally me fatwa 🎶


  quote
kscherer
The Ban Hammer
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2022-05-05, 13:33

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matsu View Post
They are not really separable here. Public sentiment against abortion is steeped in moralistic appeals that heavily imply a religious origin. They conveniently ignore the multitude of ways in which their case is not consistent with the foundational text of their own religion, and this is by design: It allows the Republican leaders and voters to act and feel Christian by shifting all of the weight of the faith onto a cherry-picked set of issues while pursuing a politics that actively antagonizes all the other teachings that should define that same faith.
As a man of faith and a devoted believer in God, I couldn't agree more. Still, if this devolves into a religious debate it's gonna go downhill quick, and the name-calling is going to explode. We don't want that.

Debate away, but please keep it civil.

- AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :)
- Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9)
  quote
Bryson
Rocket Surgeon
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Whitby
 
2022-05-05, 14:30

Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM View Post
In the long run nobody here is changing anyone else's mind, by either reason or presentation of information. This debate has essentially run it's course.
Absolutely agreed.
  quote
Capella
Dark Cat of the Sith
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Send a message via AIM to Capella  
2022-05-05, 15:36

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan View Post
I also don't want to be on the same side as those who bomb abortion clinics or harass patients. I used to live across the street from one of the last remaining late-term abortion clinics in the country and the safeguards they had to take were intense. Armed security, 20ft security fences, bollards to stop cars from driving into the building, all sorts of stuff.

They should not have to be in that position.
Yeah, there's a lot fewer (if any) pro-choice advocates bombing "crisis pregnancy centers" or shooting at legislators who are passing these laws. Compared to anti-abortion activists who shoot providers, drive into buildings, set off bombs...

So, in 2014, I needed a same-day ultrasound to determine if the cyst that was about half the size of a golfball and hanging out on an ovary had ruptured and if I was bleeding internally. I'd actually gone to an urgent care clinic, but they said "if we refer you to a regular imaging center, it will take weeks to get a scan" and called up Planned Parenthood, who agreed to see me the same day because they had ultrasound equipment and they could evaluate me.

It was in the inner city, a few blocks from a bus stop. Not too far from the school of music's dorms, actually. I was worried I wouldn't be able to find it. Turns out a large fence, multiple bumps in the road in front of the driveway and in the parking lot, security guard standing outside, RPD police car in the lot, all tipped me off. So did the twelve protesters outside at 3pm on a Thursday, holding up gruesome signs and screaming things like "whore", "murderer", "adultress" - and how they came up with a bunch of those I'm not sure, because at the time I was happily in a gay relationship and, again, getting a chronic medical problem looked at.

It still felt like shit to walk through that crowd. I can't imagine the psychological strength it would take to go through it if you were having an abortion. The guard took my ID and searched my bag, I had to go through a metal detector, and the place had an airlock door setup. That's an incredibly grim setting to go into when you're trying to find out if you're bleeding inside, running a fever, and generally pretty panicked. Isn't that pretty fucked up for a health care clinic?

And yes, the cyst had ruptured, and the PP sent me right to the ER to ensure I didn't bleed out, and I spent a very uncomfortable time getting blood drained out my pelvic area through a large needle and thinking about the fact that at least since I was at the ER I didn't have to hear the chanting, which I might have if they'd done it in-clinic.

I was getting ordinary health care done there, because Planned Parenthood does lots of stuff not abortions. In fact, remember that their federal funding is prohibited from going to the abortions side of their work. That means plenty of funding goes to them for doing STD testing, prescribing birth control, treating urinary tract infections, providing health screenings to babies and toddlers, providing free or low-cost health clinics to poor people who may not have health insurance or other places to be seen (not just for reproductive care but for other health care). When PP is conflated only with abortion, and with laws being passed to cut their funds and their work away, how many of their locations or of other clinics providing similar services will be shut down? How many people will no longer receive basic care, or have to walk this kind of shouting gauntlet to receive it? How many people who are "pro-life" are okay with getting all that other critical care shut down and leaving areas bereft of care because sometimes those clinics also do abortion - and is it truly pro-life to threaten, harass, intimidate, and remove access to care that keeps people alive?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM View Post
It is difficult to avoid, since the vast majority of the opposition to abortion is from religious groups. While Christians are the most vocal group, other religious groups are also in that camp. Then again, so are some non-religious people, but I'd hazard as guess that it is a small minority.
It's not like we're coming in here going "all religious people are evil and controlling our bodies", and saying non-religious folks will save us all, and calling religions liars here. Is it unfair to ask "if according to those beliefs this life is so important, why are other lives less important? How do you prioritize life and mercy?" - and these questions are being respectfully asked in this thread, and frequently ignored.

It's not just non-religious people who support abortion either, since multiple posts in this thread point out that much of the support for abortion right also comes from religious individuals and groups. There's already rumblings in the local Jewish community about being prepared to file lawsuits and run marches to stand up for the right to one's own body.

That's a hell of a quote that 709 posted, and I think it's exactly the attitude being expressed by people on the court and some posters in this thread. "With this law, more babies will be born" - because the baby matters, is perfect and thus can be upheld as something to protect, and the person whose health is sacrificed to maintain is less valuable and disposable. It's being said by what's not being said, because nobody has the balls to just straight up stand up and say "yep the fetus matters more than the carrier".

"A blind, deaf, comatose, lobotomy patient could feel my anger!" - Darth Baras
twitter ; amateur photographer ; fanfiction writer ; roleplayer and worldbuilder
  quote
drewprops
Space Pirate
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Atlanta
 
2022-05-05, 15:51

A friend worked in a clinic, doing their accounting.

Because the operation is so small, she did double duty helping with intake.

A woman from a neighboring state brought her 11 year old daughter in.

They did the procedure.

In another few years she brought the girl back, for another.

The third time they came over the girl was older and her personality had changed a lot.

The mother and daughter were accompanied by a police officer or maybe a state trooper. The officer was there to preserve the "chain of custody" on the evidence to be used against the stepfather, the cause of the young girl's recurring pregnancy.

And that's just the one story she shared.


...

Steve Jobs ate my cat's watermelon.
Captain Drew on Twitter
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2022-05-05, 17:39

Quote:
Originally Posted by Capella View Post
It's not like we're coming in here going "all religious people are evil and controlling our bodies", and saying non-religious folks will save us all, and calling religions liars here. Is it unfair to ask "if according to those beliefs this life is so important, why are other lives less important? How do you prioritize life and mercy?" - and these questions are being respectfully asked in this thread, and frequently ignored.

It's not just non-religious people who support abortion either, since multiple posts in this thread point out that much of the support for abortion right also comes from religious individuals and groups. There's already rumblings in the local Jewish community about being prepared to file lawsuits and run marches to stand up for the right to one's own body.

That's a hell of a quote that 709 posted, and I think it's exactly the attitude being expressed by people on the court and some posters in this thread. "With this law, more babies will be born" - because the baby matters, is perfect and thus can be upheld as something to protect, and the person whose health is sacrificed to maintain is less valuable and disposable. It's being said by what's not being said, because nobody has the balls to just straight up stand up and say "yep the fetus matters more than the carrier".
I never got the impression that anyone here was thinking religious groups are evil, trying to control peoples bodies or full liars. That said, from first hand experience some of them are, as noted before I worked in the church for over 10 years, believe me, I've meet all kinds of people from all walks of life. I know full well that they are many religious people who are kind, honest, loving people to anyone and everyone. I also know that many of them believe that the decisions an individual makes is that persons choice (as are the consequences of said choices), and that they don't see any need to make laws out of their belief system and impose them on people who do not share that belief. What I do believe is that within, or hidden within, some religious groups there are some people who are using that faith to manipulate people for a political agenda. That is all. In this case, it is targeting a women's right to have an abortion.
  quote
drewprops
Space Pirate
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Atlanta
 
2022-05-05, 21:00

Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM View Post
What I do believe is that within, or hidden within, some religious groups there are some people who are using that faith to manipulate people for a political agenda.
Can confirm, 100%
Have seen these little kingdoms in action.

...
  quote
drewprops
Space Pirate
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Atlanta
 
2022-05-08, 12:44

Once, in WIRED Magazine, they showed comparisons of how often changes were made to Wikipedia entries. The number of changes to the abortion page was INSANE.

We will not succeed in changing hearts or minds here, only discussing viewpoints.

This seems to be the issue upon which Republicans have decided to affix their future.

A figurative "hill to die on".

It would have been fascinating to be in the room when Trump learned of this pending decision. It is inconceivable that someone like him personally supports overturning RvW (I have not looked to see his policy statements on this).

Many women are too angry right now to pivots of how this might affect midterm elections, but the political shows are going there now.

...
  quote
Quagmire
meh
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2022-05-09, 19:54

McConnell just destroyed the "state rights" argument..... GOP is shooting him down just for messaging, but see them change tune next year.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/09/polit...urt/index.html

giggity
  quote
turtle
Lord of the Rant.
Formerly turtle2472
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Upstate South Carolina
 
2022-06-24, 09:52

It is so ordered.

Official now, no longer a draft opinion.
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 3 of 5 Previous 1 2 [3] 4 5  Next

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2022 MacBook Pro Capella Apple Products 27 2022-06-16 18:24
2022 MacBook Air Capella Apple Products 21 2022-06-07 14:24
Wwdc 2022 Frank777 Speculation and Rumors 43 2022-06-07 08:47
Michael Jackson rushed to hospital in cardiac arrest (update: dead at age 50) PKIDelirium AppleOutsider 330 2009-08-31 17:01
Missing CNET Reporter (update: found dead) drewprops AppleOutsider 61 2006-12-10 17:29


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 15:00.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2022, AppleNova