All Purpose News and Politics Thread Part IV: The Center Cannot Hold

[Tami]

Abolishing Abortion: The History of the Pro-Life Movement in America

This system of legal but quiet abortions fell apart in the mid-nineteenth century. The first “right-to-life” movement was not led by grassroots activists, but rather physicians, anxious about their professional status. Before then, physicians had been a largely unregulated bunch, without the institutional or cultural authority to corner the market on healing. In the early nineteenth century, a variety of other healers competed with physicians for business, especially the business of women’s reproductive healthcare. While many physicians believed that scientific medicine would benefit their patients, some, in order to hurt lay healers’ business, sought governmental licensing and regulation to weed out the competition. Physicians used anti-abortion laws, pushed in state legislatures, to increase their own stature and undermine their opponents.[1]

Of course, many would have narrated this story very differently. Some physicians claimed that this campaign was a product of superior medical knowledge. Many argued that women (and rag-tag group of healers who offered abortion) did not have adequate embryonic knowledge to determine when life began. But historians have noted that this medical insight was not a result of any advancements in embryonic knowledge. In fact, there were none during these campaigns.[2] Instead, the fetus was merely a stand-in for a broader cultural project. Here, the movement tapped into concerns over women’s increasing education, autonomy, and the extension of rights, as it reasserted women’s connection to and limitation by their own reproductive anatomy. Women’s bodies, not their words or actions, confessed to doctors the “naturalness” of uninterrupted reproduction and the “truth” about fetal life.[3] Bodily processes could “speak for themselves,” though they did need doctors to translate.

This effort largely succeeded. By 1900 every state had a law forbidding abortion at any stage, whether through the use of drugs or procedures. Almost all the laws passed during this time included a therapeutic exception, where licensed physicians could provide abortions at their own discretion as long as the abortion preserved the life of the mother. While this loophole allowed many women to obtain abortions, it also made doctors the ultimate arbiters of the morality and legality of abortions. These laws also created a large black market for women who could not access or obtain abortions through medical channels.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Ted Cruz Thinks the U.S. Needs to Defend Against Space Pirates

Did someone say “Space Pirates”? That got Ryoko’s attention!

[Ohnooze]

My views on life are much more existential, but with regards to this discussion, I think the mother has the right to choose since it's her body, and that the laws we have now set fair restrictions on said choice.

I'll add that I don't see it as murder as I don't see it as formed consciousness -- just potential for consciousness -- but that's my own personal view, which should not be forced on others who might not see it the same way.

Religious people have a bad habit of pushing their views on others and then using those views to justify horrendous behavior -- you do as you will, but I prefer not to walk down that road.

So you decide when consciousness begins?
So an unborn child that knows the sound of his mothers voice and feels stress has no consciousness...so if I feel like a 3 month old has no consciousness then I guess we just give him the needle. Everyone has a bad habit of pushing their views on others, stop pointing at people of faith for everything you don't like about the world.

[Kusanagi]

The laws being passed make it a crime to seek an abortion out of state.

How would that even work? Is there anything comparable on the books that could land you life in prison (or the death penalty!) and be completely legal in another state?

Drug laws would be the only thing I could think is comparable but no one is going to punish you for getting high in another state except maybe your employer.

[Ohnooze]

The same way that an execution is a murder. Again, this bit about preserving life is largely hot garbage once you take any sort of an actual look at it.

As for "You would stop someone...", it is also hot garbage. It's not like a law was passed to get serious about educating young adults on safe sex.

As for "That We Consider To Be A Human Being...", how is it that folks murdered during an execution fit into that picture? Have they stopped being human beings?

I don't even support the death penalty and your argument is ignorant anyway.

[numberthirty]

So you decide when consciousness begins?
So an unborn child that knows the sound of his mothers voice and feels stress has no consciousness...so if I feel like a 3 month old has no consciousness then I guess we just give him the needle. Everyone has a bad habit of pushing their views on others, stop pointing at people of faith for everything you don't like about the world.

Does it end once you have been sentenced to death?

You have no way of knowing what is in blue.

I can absolutely prove if someone who has been sentenced to death has consciousness.

[numberthirty]

I don't even support the death penalty and your argument is ignorant anyway.

It has nothing to do with what you personally believe.

If a state has no issue with ending life, it has no standing to try to use preserving life as a grounds to pass law.

[ed2962]

Ted Cruz Thinks the U.S. Needs to Defend Against Space Pirates

It's going to break his heart, but someone's got to explain to Ted that these Marvel movies are fiction not documentaries.

[aja_christopher]

So you decide when consciousness begins?
So an unborn child that knows the sound of his mothers voice and feels stress has no consciousness...so if I feel like a 3 month old has no consciousness then I guess we just give him the needle. Everyone has a bad habit of pushing their views on others, stop pointing at people of faith for everything you don't like about the world.

I'm not deciding anything for the woman who has to carry the child -- that's my point.

And your last statement is so full of irony that I'll just let it stand on it's own merits.

[Kusanagi]

So you decide when consciousness begins?
So an unborn child that knows the sound of his mothers voice and feels stress has no consciousness...so if I feel like a 3 month old has no consciousness then I guess we just give him the needle. Everyone has a bad habit of pushing their views on others, stop pointing at people of faith for everything you don't like about the world.

By they time an unborn child can hear is bare minimum 18 weeks (when ears develop) recognizing voices comes week 25-26. As already pointed out earlier later term abortion is usually limted to week 24 at the latest. 99% of abortions happen before week 24. So this argument doesn't really work.

If anything it strengthens Roe vs Wade comprimise, we recognize after around 22-24 weeks the fetus is developing into a human being and should be granted those rights.

[Gray Lensman]

Did someone say “Space Pirates”? That got Ryoko’s attention!

Bah. Everyone knows that the superior space pirate wears a miniskirt and has yuri undertones. Well, not exactly undertones when I think about it.

No pics from my phone sadly. Otherwise this post would be a little more...bodacious.

[Kusanagi]

Did someone say “Space Pirates”? That got Ryoko’s attention!

I was going to say I could buy Mihoshi as a Trump vote, but probably only by accident.

[numberthirty]

As for the importance of life, I'm fine with actually getting serious about creating a situation where there are no unwanted children being born.

- For starters, we are going to need a government funded vasectomy for every boy as soon as he hits puberty. It's not like they are of legal age to be making the calls.
- Once they are of legal age, they can have the vasectomy reversed. If they get a woman pregnant that doesn't want to keep the kid? They get a hundred and fifty years because clearly we need to create a legitimate deterrent if we are going to be serious about not potentially creating an unwanted life.

[Ohnooze]

The same way that an execution is a murder. Again, this bit about preserving life is largely hot garbage once you take any sort of an actual look at it.

As for "You would stop someone...", it is also hot garbage. It's not like a law was passed to get serious about educating young adults on safe sex.

As for "That We Consider To Be A Human Being...", how is it that folks murdered during an execution fit into that picture? Have they stopped being human beings?

I don't see an execution of an adult on death row as the same thing. But I don't know why you're even bringing executions anyway.

[numberthirty]

I don't see an execution of an adult on death row as the same thing. But I don't know why you're even bringing executions anyway.

Again, this is incredibly simple.

Provide a legitimate scenario where an execution is not taking life. If you cannot, you are deciding which instances in which taking life is acceptable. Once we have established that there are some scenarios where it is acceptable, you can take trying to dictate where it is and is not and shove it.