5 ms·

This is correct and illustrative of why the power centric version of Christianity in this country needs to be actively removed from all positions of influence.

by avs733 4y ago

This is correct and illustrative of why the power centric version of Christianity in this country needs to be actively removed from all positions of influence. All data shows that outlawing abortion does nothing to reduce abortion. It only makes it occur later in pregnancy and makes it more dangerous. It’s time we just call religious fascism what it is because this month has shown the scorched earth approach it takes in this country to its demand of power.

koheripbal 4y ago
- Fargoan 4y ago
  Religious tolerance is ok up to the point where they start pushing their beliefs on everyone else.
- Fargoan 4y ago
  Also, you are deliberately cutting off the end of the sentence in your quote.
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  What does the Constitution say about religious tolerance? The founders seemed to have a stronger opinion on keeping religion out of politics.
  - _-david-_ 4y ago
    Not really. Most of the states literally had state religions. Almost all of the founders were religious and wrote about it. John Adams even said the Constitution was only fit for a religious people.
    - rootusrootus 4y ago
      And yet, they made it the very first amendment, so any state with their own religion should have had it struck down quickly. Also, the term "separation of church and state" did in fact start with the founders. Who were mostly deists, not at all like today's Evangelical Christians.
      - _-david-_ 4y ago
        >And yet, they made it the very first amendment, so any state with their own religion should have had it struck down quickly. This is just incorrect. Before the 14th amendment the bill of rights did not apply to states. >Also, the term "separation of church and state" did in fact start with the founders. It started with a single founder not founders. Have you read Jefferson's letter? I would imagine you haven't if you think it meant a state couldn't have a state religion or that they couldn't push religious laws (not that abortion is strictly a religious thing). >Who were mostly deists, not at all like today's Evangelical Christians. Do you have a list? I am not sure that mostly is accurate. Episcopalianism (is that how you spell it?) was quite popular.
        rootusrootus 4y ago
        > This is just incorrect. Before the 14th amendment the bill of rights did not apply to states. "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." I forgot about that brief time before the civil war when states felt like they could pick and choose which parts of the Constitution applied to them. Why do you think it only applies to the bill of rights, though? I find it darkly humorous that it took an amendment to the Constitution to really drive home that the Constitution actually applies to everyone in the US. That seems like a bit of circular logic, but at the point of a gun it worked. Imagine if states could just choose that the second amendment did not apply to them today. Ha!
        4y ago
- LocalH 4y ago
  Downvoted for the disingenuous quote. The full quoted sentence, emphasis mine: "This is correct and illustrative of why the power centric version of Christianity in this country needs to be actively removed from all positions of influence." They're not saying that all religion is bad. However, religions have their place, and it is not in positions of power. Historically, the religiously-motivated have used their power to enforce their brand of religious belief above others. All religion should be banned from government, period.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > They're not saying that all religion is bad. However, religions have their place, and it is not in positions of power. Historically, the religiously-motivated have used their power to enforce their brand of religious belief above others. All religion should be banned from government, period. Do you think that religious people should be denied the right to vote or hold office? Because if you want "all religion should be banned from government, period," that's what you'll need to do. Otherwise, only actions can be controlled, not motivations.
    - LocalH 4y ago
      If that’s what it takes, so be it (regarding holding office, at least - voting is not something I would restrict in that way). This government is not supposed to let religion dictate policy. If a person can’t demonstrate that they can consistently legislate or rule on law without letting their religion interfere, then we should not allow them to hold such positions. Human rights are what is important here, and we are seeing the result of unfettered access of organized religion to government - we roll back hard fought legal rulings. Look at the history of other nations that let religion rule the day - that power becomes useful then as a tool for oppression. Look at the modern world theocracies. They usually have abhorrent track records of human rights for women, homosexuals, people of the “wrong” ethnicity, and a whole range of other traditionally oppressed people.
      - tablespoon 4y ago
        >> Do you think that religious people should be denied the right to vote or hold office? > If that’s what it takes, so be it (regarding holding office, at least - voting is not something I would restrict in that way). Shades of "you can vote for whoever you want to represent you, so long as they're a Communist who will govern according to the will of the party." > This government is not supposed to let religion dictate policy. I think you have a serious misunderstanding of the establishment clause.
- pstuart 4y ago
  It needs to be removed from the law -- personal faith is fine. A simple test for those that disagree: are you okay with Islamic Law becoming codified in our legal system too?
WillPostForFood 4y ago
All data shows that outlawing abortion does nothing to reduce abortion The abortion rate in the US was far lower pre-Roe. It went up 5x in the decade after it was nationally legalized. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_United_States#CDC_surveillance_reports https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_Uni...
- jimkleiber 4y ago
  The link says that the CDC compiles data on legal abortions only, so I don't know how much those numbers prove the point.
- divided 4y ago
  Wrong and naive. Wrong because Roe v Wade was decided in 1973, the rate went from roughly 14 to 23 (a 64% increase). Naive because as Jim said, the article clearly states the numbers are voluntarily given and therefore would not include illegal abortions. And the recording started in 1969, so it wouldn’t be surprising for it to take time before clinics even began reporting. In other words, abortions in states where it was legal probably didn’t DOUBLE between 1970 and 1971, but rather reporting of them improved.
- pmoriarty 4y ago
  The numbers went up because people started coming out of the closet and admitting that, yeah, they were doing something that was previously illegal but was now legal. It doesn't mean that fewer of them were doing it before it became legal. They were doing it and hiding it. It's the same as when gay people finally started coming out of the closet, once the laws and stigmas against being gay were reduced. Now they could finally admit what they were doing all along, with less fear of being stigmatized, arrested, imprisoned, or killed.
- qalmakka 4y ago
  "Yes, hello, I'd like to report the crime I've committed". Come on. That's the exact same reason why there are no openly gay people walking in the streets in Saudi Arabia. You don't report something that you did illegally.
- 4y ago

by avs733 4y ago

koheripbal 4y ago

Fargoan 4y ago
Religious tolerance is ok up to the point where they start pushing their beliefs on everyone else.
Fargoan 4y ago
Also, you are deliberately cutting off the end of the sentence in your quote.
rootusrootus 4y ago
What does the Constitution say about religious tolerance? The founders seemed to have a stronger opinion on keeping religion out of politics.
- _-david-_ 4y ago
  Not really. Most of the states literally had state religions. Almost all of the founders were religious and wrote about it. John Adams even said the Constitution was only fit for a religious people.
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    And yet, they made it the very first amendment, so any state with their own religion should have had it struck down quickly. Also, the term "separation of church and state" did in fact start with the founders. Who were mostly deists, not at all like today's Evangelical Christians.
    - _-david-_ 4y ago
      >And yet, they made it the very first amendment, so any state with their own religion should have had it struck down quickly. This is just incorrect. Before the 14th amendment the bill of rights did not apply to states. >Also, the term "separation of church and state" did in fact start with the founders. It started with a single founder not founders. Have you read Jefferson's letter? I would imagine you haven't if you think it meant a state couldn't have a state religion or that they couldn't push religious laws (not that abortion is strictly a religious thing). >Who were mostly deists, not at all like today's Evangelical Christians. Do you have a list? I am not sure that mostly is accurate. Episcopalianism (is that how you spell it?) was quite popular.
      - rootusrootus 4y ago
        > This is just incorrect. Before the 14th amendment the bill of rights did not apply to states. "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." I forgot about that brief time before the civil war when states felt like they could pick and choose which parts of the Constitution applied to them. Why do you think it only applies to the bill of rights, though? I find it darkly humorous that it took an amendment to the Constitution to really drive home that the Constitution actually applies to everyone in the US. That seems like a bit of circular logic, but at the point of a gun it worked. Imagine if states could just choose that the second amendment did not apply to them today. Ha!
        4y ago
LocalH 4y ago
Downvoted for the disingenuous quote. The full quoted sentence, emphasis mine: "This is correct and illustrative of why the power centric version of Christianity in this country needs to be actively removed from all positions of influence." They're not saying that all religion is bad. However, religions have their place, and it is not in positions of power. Historically, the religiously-motivated have used their power to enforce their brand of religious belief above others. All religion should be banned from government, period.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > They're not saying that all religion is bad. However, religions have their place, and it is not in positions of power. Historically, the religiously-motivated have used their power to enforce their brand of religious belief above others. All religion should be banned from government, period. Do you think that religious people should be denied the right to vote or hold office? Because if you want "all religion should be banned from government, period," that's what you'll need to do. Otherwise, only actions can be controlled, not motivations.
  - LocalH 4y ago
    If that’s what it takes, so be it (regarding holding office, at least - voting is not something I would restrict in that way). This government is not supposed to let religion dictate policy. If a person can’t demonstrate that they can consistently legislate or rule on law without letting their religion interfere, then we should not allow them to hold such positions. Human rights are what is important here, and we are seeing the result of unfettered access of organized religion to government - we roll back hard fought legal rulings. Look at the history of other nations that let religion rule the day - that power becomes useful then as a tool for oppression. Look at the modern world theocracies. They usually have abhorrent track records of human rights for women, homosexuals, people of the “wrong” ethnicity, and a whole range of other traditionally oppressed people.
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      >> Do you think that religious people should be denied the right to vote or hold office? > If that’s what it takes, so be it (regarding holding office, at least - voting is not something I would restrict in that way). Shades of "you can vote for whoever you want to represent you, so long as they're a Communist who will govern according to the will of the party." > This government is not supposed to let religion dictate policy. I think you have a serious misunderstanding of the establishment clause.
pstuart 4y ago
It needs to be removed from the law -- personal faith is fine. A simple test for those that disagree: are you okay with Islamic Law becoming codified in our legal system too?

WillPostForFood 4y ago

All data shows that outlawing abortion does nothing to reduce abortion The abortion rate in the US was far lower pre-Roe. It went up 5x in the decade after it was nationally legalized. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_United_States#CDC_surveillance_reports https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_statistics_in_the_Uni...

jimkleiber 4y ago
The link says that the CDC compiles data on legal abortions only, so I don't know how much those numbers prove the point.
divided 4y ago
Wrong and naive. Wrong because Roe v Wade was decided in 1973, the rate went from roughly 14 to 23 (a 64% increase). Naive because as Jim said, the article clearly states the numbers are voluntarily given and therefore would not include illegal abortions. And the recording started in 1969, so it wouldn’t be surprising for it to take time before clinics even began reporting. In other words, abortions in states where it was legal probably didn’t DOUBLE between 1970 and 1971, but rather reporting of them improved.
pmoriarty 4y ago
The numbers went up because people started coming out of the closet and admitting that, yeah, they were doing something that was previously illegal but was now legal. It doesn't mean that fewer of them were doing it before it became legal. They were doing it and hiding it. It's the same as when gay people finally started coming out of the closet, once the laws and stigmas against being gay were reduced. Now they could finally admit what they were doing all along, with less fear of being stigmatized, arrested, imprisoned, or killed.
qalmakka 4y ago
"Yes, hello, I'd like to report the crime I've committed". Come on. That's the exact same reason why there are no openly gay people walking in the streets in Saudi Arabia. You don't report something that you did illegally.
4y ago