Can't wait till the dems do literally nothing about this so they can use the subjection of women as a campaign opportunity.

Dems don't have the votes in Congress to pass any legistlation to codify reproductive rights before the midterm elections this fall. Overturning Roe v Wade, SCOTUS has stolen GOP defeat from the jaws of electoral victory. Will the Dems pass the legistlation in 2023? They're fucked in 2024 if they don't. :shade:

Dems don't this, dems can't that. Dems do have excuses for decades of failures and right wing cheerleading.

These kinds of excuses are simply covers for their complete and willing complicity.

If they do nothing they are not fucked in 2024 because they only exist to run interference for their co-rulers in the Republican party.

:roll:

One day you will stop making relaying excuses for people who are actively trying to fuck you over, and you will feel much better.

:yawn:

In defense of pro-lifers, I'd point out that Roe vs. Wade happened in 1973. It's now 2022. That's 49 years. To put things into perspective, fashion changes every year! In other words, the Roe vs. Wade ruling needs to be updated - the field of neonatology, obstetrics & gynecology have undergone dramatic transformations and it only seem natural that any laws/rules that depend on them should also be adapted to the new realities of these disciplines, oui?

Panta rhei. — Heraclitus

Anicca!

WASHINGTON — Republicans have spent decades attacking the landmark Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide, but with the toppling of Roe v. Wade seemingly imminent, their leaders in Congress and around the country have grown suddenly quiet on the issue, part of a bid to avoid a backlash against their party ahead of the midterm elections.

As I said - if this happens it will go against the GOP in the Mids.

@Literature_Lady comments:

@bykenarmstrong comments:

Is this really the move in the US? :sad: If so, then I suggest females in the US relocate.

Can't wait till the dems do literally nothing about this so they can use the subjection of women as a campaign opportunity. — Streetlight

It's been a campaign opportunity for both parties for a while now.

With a simple majority vote (50 plus 1 from Kamala), Democrats could change the filibuster that would allow for a legislative codification of Roe v. Wade to pass with another simple majority, rather than the current rule that requires 60, which, to be clear, the Democrats will likely never achieve in decades. Democrats technically have the votes to accomplish the above, but nominal Democrats Manchin and Sinema have stated explicitly that they will not vote to end the 60 vote filibuster and there doesn't seem to be much pressure from Biden, who campaigned on the promise to codify Roe v. Wade, or from the Democratic party at large to get them to do so.

I can't help but compare the Democrats apathy towards their two congressional colleagues unwillingness to conform to party lines with the reaction to GOP congressman Madison Cawthorn's accusations that members of his party engage in Eyes Wide Shut orgies and coke binges; the subsequent photo and video leaks was certainly done by GOP operatives to punish an insubordinate party member.

It's all probably moot anyway, since whatever legislature the Democrats could pass would likely be struck down by a hostile Supreme Court.

"A republic – if you can keep it." :fear:

With a simple majority vote (50 plus 1 from Kamala), Democrats could change the filibuster that would allow for a legislative codification of Roe v. Wade to pass with another simple majority — Maw

Republicans will eventually be in the majority, and can then easily strike down that law, not to mention the ACA

Some numbers ...



The Majority of American Muslims Believe Abortion Should be Legal in All or Most Cases
Institute for Social Policy and Understanding
May 5, 2022

America’s Abortion Quandary
Pew Research Center
May 6, 2022

Would the numbers be substantially different if put to a vote?
I can picture campaign circuses and people on soapboxes... :D

The personal sphere is private and not a proper object of governmental intrusion.
— Bitter Crank

If the people judge that murder is taking place in private, then it's most definitely a governmental issue. — frank

This seems to be the point that needs to be discussed.

I see conservatives making the argument that Roe v Wade was all about some federal judges in Washington DC deciding for everyone what they can do, but that was the opposite if what Roe v Wade did. Under Roe v Wade if you didn't want an abortion you didn't have to get one, and if you did you could get one. So the conservatives are the ones imposing their will on others by taking away the personal choice and giving that choice to state governments.

I have also found hypocrisy on the left as most vegans are left-wingers and are vegans because they want to reduce suffering of animals. If animals with small brains can suffer, then what about fetuses in the womb? The brain and nervous system form in the first trimester and fetuses are shown to react to external stimuli.

There is also this celebration of abortion that the left has, as if having an abortion is a badge of honor rather than a tragedy. Abortion is invasive and can be dangerous. It should be a last resort because the use of other less invasive forms of contraception failed, or that the mother was raped or her life is in danger.

I see both sides talking past each other and making it a black and white issue in that you are either totally against abortion in all cases or totally for abortion being made for any reason and at any time even up to the point of birth. I don't believe that most Americans see it as a black and white issue. As usual it is the extremists on both sides dominating the conversation.

There is also this celebration of abortion that the left has, as if having an abortion is a badge of honor rather than a tragedy — Harry Hindu

Where did you see this happening? Just curious, because I haven't.

I saw a video of some protestors where two women were wearing "I had an abortion" T-shirts. I can't seem to find it now, but you can find the t-shirts for sale if you google it. There are also "I :heart: abortion" t-shirts for sale. There must be a market for such things if they are for sale on the internet and I'm willing to bet it's not Republicans, independents or moderate Democrats buying them.

I did find this:
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/i-had-an-abortion-t-shirt_n_1435234

The people selling the shirts tried to make the case that the t-shirts are meant to destigmatize abortion. This is a flawed argument because abortion has been legal for 40 years. It is not stigmatized by the majority of Americans, only the extremists on the right, which is a minority. This is a tactic used by both sides where they make themselves and their opponents appear to be larger or that their ideas are more pervasive than they actually are to make the case that their idea is necessary because of the size and power of the opposition. They attempt to group moderate party members with their extreme party members as if they hold the same position.

Then there is this:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-guest-make-sweet-love-to-scotus-leaker
where Laurie Kilmartin said she would "joyfully abort our fetus". She's a comedian, sure, but comedy is only funny if it has an element of truth, and it wasn't funny at all. Trust me, I know funny. I watch Impractical Jokers. :joke:

The ironic thing is that when you google this story you find it mostly on right-leaning sites, when it happened on MSNBC, as if they are trying to bury it.

where Laurie Kilmartin said she would "joyfully abort our fetus" — Harry Hindu

I would kind of prefer this to "a woman has a right to choose."

If you think abortion is moral, go ahead and say it. Normalize it. Otherwise it's like: "abortion is moral for some of us, but not all."

That doesn't make any sense.

This seems to be the point that needs to be discussed. — Harry Hindu

The question of whether abortion is murder or not hinges on whether one considers a everything from a just-fertilized egg on to a blastocyst on to a fetus with a beating heart but not much more than a neural tube for a brain on to a barely viable fetus, on to an entirely viable fetus is a "person" in the way a healthy new-born is a person.

The fetus-fetish folks think a just-fertilized egg is owed as much legal protection as a two-year od, Hence, the expected moves to outlaw 'day after' pills.

Many people do not grant personhood to a non-viable fetus; some grant personhood to a fully viable (7-9 month) fetus.

There is also this celebration of abortion that the left has, as if having an abortion is a badge of honor rather than a tragedy. — Harry Hindu

I've been among the left for the 49 years of Roe vs. Wade and I have NEVER witnessed abortion being "celebrated" or considered a "badge of honor".

Aborting a fetus may be considered a personal medical decision, but it is not a casual, pleasant procedure. Most women apparently consider it a difficult decision--far more fraught than other medical procedures.

where Laurie Kilmartin said she would "joyfully abort our fetus"
— Harry Hindu

I would kind of prefer this to "a woman has a right to choose."

If you think abortion is moral, go ahead and say it. Normalize it. Otherwise it's like: "abortion is moral for some of us, but not all."

That doesn't make any sense. — frank

It's not that abortion is moral. It's that it's morally neutral in certain circumstances. Helping an old lady cross the street is moral as is feeding the poor in that it's something to encourage and celebrate.

I would think that abortion would in most cases be a difficult decision and not something many (although maybe some) would think warmly about. The need for the abortion, after all, is typically the result of a mistake, in that they did not want to have a child at this time in their life, but they made choices that led to the pregnancy.

Any medical procedure that might become necessary as the result of my own negligence would be a matter of choice for me to undergo, but that doesn't mean I'm somehow heroic because I chose or don't choose a particular procedure. For example, my knee hurts because of the two years of kick boxing I did, but I'm not having it scoped because I don't want to. The decision isn't moral or not moral. It's just a matter of choice. What I would think would be immoral is if you got to decide for me

Just cross posted the same thing.

Otherwise it's like: "abortion is moral for some of us, but not all." — frank

We do not all have to agree on every definition of moral and immoral behavior. I'm OK with some people thinking that I, as a homosexual, behave immorally. I'm OK with some people thinking that my beliefs about god are immoral. I'm OK with some people thinking abortion is immoral.

What we have to agree on is whether behavior is legal and acceptable in a diverse society. Most people are willing to accept abortion is acceptable; ditto for single parenthood; ditto for non-married people living together as a couple; ditto for homosexuality and homosexual behavior.

Great minds think alike, I've heard.

There is also this celebration of abortion that the left has, as if having an abortion is a badge of honor rather than a tragedy
— Harry Hindu

Where did you see this happening? Just curious, because I haven't. — frank

I don't know how "leftist" those people were, but I have seen several cases of women or fictional female characters being proud or otherwise thinking positively about having had an abortion.

For example, in a mainstream youth book (I forgot the title by now) about a teenage girl (15 or so), abortion is described as a rite of passage to adulthood and normalcy.
One of the characters in "Sex and the City" didn't think anything much about having had two abortions.
In a French documentary about the availability of abortion in post WW II France (it was illegal then), a woman vividly complained and bemoaned how her husband had to be more careful and couldn't enjoy himself properly during sex because abortion wasn't legal.
I personally know some women for whom having an abortion is entirely normal. I know one who said she wanted to get pregnant just so that she could have an abortion.


As usual in this dicussion, women have the least say. And most of those who do talk, represent interests that benefit the men most.

What we have to agree on is whether behavior is legal and acceptable in a diverse society. — Bitter Crank

As long as, in practice, our idea of democracy amounts to



what hope can there be ...

The need for the abortion, after all, is typically the result of a mistake, in that they did not want to have a child at this time in their life, but they made choices that led to the pregnancy. — Hanover

There is enormous societal pressure to engage in sex, regardless whether one wants to have children or not. Regularly engaging in sex is even considered by many as the mark of a healthy relationship, and of psychological normalcy to begin with. Not engaging in sex is seen by many (including psychologists/psychiatrists) as pathological.

The choice isn't actually between engaging in sex or not. It's between having a relationship or not; or between being seen as normal and worthy, or not.

For example, my knee hurts because of the two years of kick boxing I did, but I'm not having it scoped because I don't want to. The decision isn't moral or not moral. It's just a matter of choice.

You wouldn't have that freedom of interpretation in every country/culture. Not even when it comes to bum knees.
If anything, people are expected to trust medicine unquestioningly, and if they don't they get regarded as irrational. Refusing a suggested medical treatment could even get one categorized as a negligent patient and one could lose one's medical insurance.

What I would think would be immoral is if you got to decide for me

Depends who that "you" is. If it's "society", the legislative body, someone more powerful than you, how can you still say that it's immoral if they decide for you?

I'm OK with some people thinking that I, as a homosexual, behave immorally. I'm OK with some people thinking that my beliefs about god are immoral. I'm OK with some people thinking abortion is immoral. — Bitter Crank

If some people think sexual abuse is OK, should they be allowed to do it?

What I would think would be immoral is if you got to decide for me — Hanover

My point is that if you believe a certain act is immoral and seek to make it illegal, I need to address your concern one way or another.

Saying that it's a matter of choice does not address your assertion.

The choice isn't actually between engaging in sex or not. It's between having a relationship or not; or between being seen as normal and worthy, or not. — baker

The argument that all sex is coerced due to societal pressures is pretty stupid. It categorizes all sex as rape and it defies my personal experience in that I actually did want to have the sex that I did.

You wouldn't have that freedom of interpretation in every country/culture. Not even when it comes to bum knees.
If anything, people are expected to trust medicine unquestioningly, and if they don't they get regarded as irrational. Refusing a suggested medical treatment could even get one categorized as a negligent patient and one could lose one's medical insurance. — baker

If there is a hypothetical country where they condemn those who don't receive knee surgeries as immoral, i stand in opposition to their morality.

I don't know why you're sharing with me the underwriting policies of a hypothetical health insurer as if that has something to do with morality.

Depends who that "you" is. If it's "society", the legislative body, someone more powerful than you, how can you still say that it's immoral if they decide for you? — baker

I'm saying that it violates my conception of morality for someone else to dictate the treatment of my bad knees. The power of that someone else is irrelevant to the moral question.

My point is that if you believe a certain act is immoral and seek to make it illegal, I need to address your concern one way or another.

Saying that it's a matter of choice does not address your assertion. — frank

I took your point to be that if someone is pro-choice, they should be able to proudly announce all the abortions they have had. I was saying it's not a matter of pride or celebration because abortions are not a moral event, and they likely involve a very difficult and painful decision.

I agree that I've taken a pro-choice position, which is why I was offering the logic behind the seemingly paradoxical views of (1) I believe people should be permitted to have abortions, and (2) having an abortion is not cause for celebration.

#2 only follows if abortion is NOT a morally positive act (like feeding the poor). That's what I'm saying. Abortion is not a morally positive act.

. I know abortion isn't like feeding the poor

It would be a little odd to have a party to celebrate having your gallbladder removed, but I'm accustomed to people doing strange things.

If abortion is different, that is, if you feel people really shouldn't be casual about it, that implies some ambivalence about the morality of it. Doesn't it?