Jump to content

Official Thread for Abortion Demagoguery

bad_teammate

By bad_teammate
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Bama Chick
Bama Chick

No. Fuck off with that. Not every abortion is about trauma and tragedy and using that framing plays into the christofascist’s hands. Women are humans. Humans have bodily autonomy. Ergo, women have b

Brisketexan
Brisketexan

I do love this argument. I really do. It’s as convenient a way to label yourself a drooling moron as exists, outside of towing around a giant neon “I’M A MORON” sign. No, they didn’t teach us that

hayden_horn
hayden_horn

of course you do. thing is, i would support that. if they choose that. and the real thing is, i'm actually pro life. both my sons were very premature, and had they been born in the 80s, they

Posted Images

Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27436

Posted
Posted

Watch the linked video. Woman miscarried at around 10 weeks, verified by in office Sonogram. Ob Gyn  sent her for 2nd outside study, I guess to have independent verification in case of whistleblower suit. Then for some reason wanted her to get a third before D&C. She wound up going to another doc. Ridiculous. If I were an ob in texas I would move

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104628

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Ridiculous. If I were an ob in texas I would move

IIRC, a poster here is involved in physician recruitment/placement, and out of state OBs are flatly telling him "no placements in Texas."  In a few years, we're going to have a real fucking problem on our hands.  Maybe sooner than a few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MC Fresh Breath

MC Fresh Breath 4074

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

IIRC, a poster here is involved in physician recruitment/placement, and out of state OBs are flatly telling him "no placements in Texas."  In a few years, we're going to have a real fucking problem on our hands.  Maybe sooner than a few years.

tangentially related:

 

spacer.png

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38127

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

IIRC, a poster here is involved in physician recruitment/placement, and out of state OBs are flatly telling him "no placements in Texas."  In a few years, we're going to have a real fucking problem on our hands.  Maybe sooner than a few years.

Some higher education institutions have had meetings about issues with recruiting minorities and women in the past month or so. Lot of declines. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104628

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Some higher education institutions have had meetings about issues with recruiting minorities and women in the past month or so. Lot of declines. 

Fucking DUH.  If you were a female or minority with two functioning brain cells, would you relocate to Texas if you had any choice in the matter?

Texas business is also eventually going to feel the pinch in hiring and recruiting.  We are both consuming our seedstock and discouraging a shitload of transplants.  That doesn't end well.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dutchrudder

Dutchrudder 11115

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, Gap03 said:

And Josh Hawley gave away their gameplan:

Fucking morally repugnant cunt.

That quote by Hawley is interesting.  I think the current battleground states that will be crucial in the 2024 and 28 Presidential elections are Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. We might see Nevada or Texas come into play in 2024/28 too, but I doubt either flip. 

Of those BG states the abortion guidelines are:

Arizona - Complete ban, currently being fought in court
Georgia - Ban after 6 weeks, currently being fought in court
North Carolina - 20 week ban which was not changed by Dobbs, however it is not in effect or enforced. Dem governor signed an EO to protect residents from abortion laws of other states
Wisconsin - Complete ban, but the Governor and AG are trying to block it or not enforce it
Michigan - Legal for now, Governor and AG are protecting the right to choose, legislatures are controlled by Rs and will try to pass law against it
Pennsylvania - ban after 24 weeks, Dem governor will not sign any legislation banning it further

Here's a visual of the current standing from the NYT:  https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/us/abortion-laws-roe-v-wade.html

image.thumb.png.7b3538ee1a57f2208a13554fc25b635e.png

 

If we see a shift in population due to this legislation, then Arizona and Georgia may become more red over time, so they may be out of reach for Dems in the future. However, North Carolina could get bluer, which would be a pretty huge change in the electoral map. NC gained an EV in the last census and is now worth 16 EVs. The MoV in NC in 2020 was 74k votes for Trump, or a 1.3% difference. That could be in play if demographics continue to shift, and NC net gains another 80-100k US migrants every year. It has been a popular destination among people migrating out of California, Illinois and New York, that could be a big factor in 2 years. 

Wisc and Penn were very close in 2020. The difference was 20k votes in Wisc and 80k in Penn. Both were about 1% margins of victory for Biden.  Michigan was a 150k difference in votes, which is a 3% margin. Certainly any of those states could flip regardless of abortion, but it could be a factor in the long term. 

Another change from the 2020 election is the reassessment of Electoral Votes. If the election played out the exact same way in 2024, the Ds lose 6 EVs due to population shifts. 
image.png.3a94386689538353054403d6d3e22d8b.png

 

There will be some shifts based on abortion rights, I know a few people who are leaving or not moving to Texas due to this law and the grid reliability issue. That may impact the net migration for some states with bans, but I think it will be several years before that's reflected in the results. If Arizona or Georgia continue to be blue, its a very hard path to 270 for the Republicans. 
 

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hpslugga

hpslugga 4044

Posted
Posted

As to this NC shit:

Quote

It is a matter of indisputable scientitic fact that a distinct and separate human life begins at the moment of fertilization

Except it isn’t. In fact there’s not a single OB/GYN that would argue this. Historically speaking, religious fanatics and republicans haven’t been very good at the whole science thing and really should stop using definitive phrases like “indisputable scientific fact,” especially when the less disputable a scientific fact becomes (i.e. Darwinian evolution, anthropogenic climate change, etc), the more they resist accepting them. 
 

Quote

Any person has the right to defend his or her own life or the life of another person. even by the use of deadly force, if necessary, from willful destruction of another person.

Yeah? And what’s gonna happen to that “baby” when it’s only in its 12th week of gestation and its mother just got blown away by an AR-15? 

See even blue states have laws that say when you murder a pregnant woman (or injure her to the point where she has a miscarriage) when she has the intention of carrying the child to term, that’s double murder (or manslaughter if the mother survives the attack).

So if this “defense killing” kills two people, do you charge him with one count of homicide or two? And if they charge just for the mother and he’s able to argue defense of others…what’s the legal status of the fetus at that exact point? I mean it’s either a person or it’s not. I have my own take on that issue, but you can’t go back and forth like that without looking like total idiots and/or hypocrites, not that they’re likely to care at this point. 

And if it is the case that the murderer would only be charged with the killing of the mother and can argue defense of others (i.e the unborn fetus he killed while defending it), congratulations NC, you just took a softer position on murdering pregnant women than blue states have!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89449

Posted
Posted
On 7/19/2022 at 2:04 PM, Brisketexan said:

Fucking DUH.  If you were a female or minority with two functioning brain cells, would you relocate to Texas if you had any choice in the matter?

Texas business is also eventually going to feel the pinch in hiring and recruiting.  We are both consuming our seedstock and discouraging a shitload of transplants.  That doesn't end well.

Almost like somebody is just fine with hurting the Texas economy as long as they please a bunch of nutcases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gyroprotagonist

gyroprotagonist 2591

Posted
Posted

is there anything definitive in the bible for the zealots to cling to when declaring they are pro fetus?

a little googling turns up this passage, which seems to indicate that a fetus is not in the same category of offense to warrant an 'eye for an eye' type justice.  

Quote

22 “If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely[e] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

but then again, later on in the chapter, you would only be out 30 shekels if your bull gores a slave  (male or female: equality holla!) so the Bible really codifies the whole sanctity of life am i right?

religion is the fucking worst and the choose your own adventure version is the absolute worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28713

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, gyroprotagonist said:

is there anything definitive in the bible for the zealots to cling to when declaring they are pro fetus?

a little googling turns up this passage, which seems to indicate that a fetus is not in the same category of offense to warrant an 'eye for an eye' type justice.  

but then again, later on in the chapter, you would only be out 30 shekels if your bull gores a slave  (male or female: equality holla!) so the Bible really codifies the whole sanctity of life am i right?

religion is the fucking worst and the choose your own adventure version is the absolute worst.

The Bible repeatedly refers to “the breath of life.” Nowhere in the Bible is an unborn child seen as a person and even after they’re born they’re essentially property. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NWBuck

NWBuck 8548

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

The Bible repeatedly refers to “the breath of life.” Nowhere in the Bible is an unborn child seen as a person and even after they’re born they’re essentially property. 

While I agree with you in a number of ways, many pro-life persons from Judeo-Christian frameworks will point to texts in the Psalms and Prophets (specifically Jeremiah) to support their "from conception" perspective. (I'd also note that, for Christians, this might be extended to include a passage from the Gospel of Luke)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gyroprotagonist

gyroprotagonist 2591

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, NWBuck said:

While I agree with you in a number of ways, many pro-life persons from Judeo-Christian frameworks will point to texts in the Psalms and Prophets (specifically Jeremiah) to support their "from conception" perspective. (I'd also note that, for Christians, this might be extended to include a passage from the Gospel of Luke)

I was going to keep the discussion going on this (Psalms basically implies that God is cool with 'crafting' horrific unviable fetuses and Jeremiah is really talking pre-conception and God has a plan for the unconceived) but why bother .  @Biff Tannen nailed it saying they just want a theocracy with White Jesus riding shotgun.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28713

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, NWBuck said:

While I agree with you in a number of ways, many pro-life persons from Judeo-Christian frameworks will point to texts in the Psalms and Prophets (specifically Jeremiah) to support their "from conception" perspective. (I'd also note that, for Christians, this might be extended to include a passage from the Gospel of Luke)

Of the quote from Jeremiah is an argument for personhood prior to birth then it’s also an argument to personhood prior to conception. I don’t think myths about prophets apply. And I don’t think assigning motivation to a kicking fetus in Luke is same as calling it a person with rights under the law. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hpslugga

hpslugga 4044

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Is "life begins at first breath" not a fairly universal tenet of Judaism?  Do some use Psalms and the Prophets to argue otherwise?  Those are Old Testament books.

Honest question.

Yes.

I could cite this again (way upthread), but Jewish law holds that for the first 40 days of gestation, what’s growing inside the woman is mere fluid (most commonly referred to as water). After that and until it has breathed the breath of life (day 41-birth), it’s considered to be a part of a woman’s body (most commonly referred to as a “thigh”). 

And speaking of the thigh, that’s exactly why that passage about the Test of the Unfaithful Wife in Numbers 5 is sometimes mistranslated to say that if the wife has been unfaithful, got pregnant, and drinks the potion “her thigh will rot and fall away.”

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45560

Posted
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

Yes.

I could cite this again (way upthread), but Jewish law holds that for the first 40 days of gestation, what’s growing inside the woman is mere fluid (most commonly referred to as water). After that and until it has breathed the breath of life (day 41-birth), it’s considered to be a part of a woman’s body (most commonly referred to as a “thigh”). 

Sorry to appear argumentative -- should you have answered that question "no"?  To put it another way, do any of the Jewish faith feel life begins BEFORE first breath?

Edited by jimmyjazz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NWBuck

NWBuck 8548

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Of the quote from Jeremiah is an argument for personhood prior to birth then it’s also an argument to personhood prior to conception. I don’t think myths about prophets apply. And I don’t think assigning motivation to a kicking fetus in Luke is same as calling it a person with rights under the law. 

That's one of the places I agree with you. These passages aren't 'law', but seem to be taken as such by modern folks with a need for selective inerrancy. 

Edited by NWBuck
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NWBuck

NWBuck 8548

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

Yes.

I could cite this again (way upthread), but Jewish law holds that for the first 40 days of gestation, what’s growing inside the woman is mere fluid (most commonly referred to as water). After that and until it has breathed the breath of life (day 41-birth), it’s considered to be a part of a woman’s body (most commonly referred to as a “thigh”). 

And speaking of the thigh, that’s exactly why that passage about the Test of the Unfaithful Wife in Numbers 5 is sometimes mistranslated to say that if the wife has been unfaithful, got pregnant, and drinks the potion “her thigh will rot and fall away.”

Wait... So when we comment 'thigh' on a photo hereabouts, we're really saying "fetus"? 

That certainly changes some of my... Uh... Viewing habits. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hpslugga

hpslugga 4044

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

Sorry to appear argumentative -- should you have answered that question "no"?  To put it another way, do any of the Jewish faith feel life begins BEFORE first breath?

My bad, you’re correct.

So to answer your amended question, I’m sure there may be this or that Jewish person who believes that life begins before breath, but that’s not what their religious text tells them and I would assume that by and large, that’s not what they believe.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChuckNorrisActionJeans

ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2659

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, HenryJames said:

 

This shit is just sadistic and insane. How do these extreme laws benefit anyone, including even the vaunted fetus? How?? It's just an exercise in monstrousness with no redeeming feature, an abomination before God, if you will. A woman in this situation needs to video the whole ordeal and publish it to multiple platforms, I think that's the only way to get through to the shitheads who can't imagine not pulling the R lever.

 

  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 104628

Posted
Posted
This shit is just sadistic and insane. How do these extreme laws benefit anyone, including even the vaunted fetus? How?? It's just an exercise in monstrousness with no redeeming feature, an abomination before God, if you will. A woman in this situation needs to video the whole ordeal and publish it to multiple platforms, I think that's the only way to get through to the shitheads who can't imagine not pulling the R lever.
 

She shouldn’t be such a dirty slut member of the gender that first ate the forbidden fruit.
You think it’s more complicated than that. It’s not.
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...