10 ms·

We have regressed by overturning abortion, enacting subversive election laws and in general destroying the fabric of democracy.

by sg47 4y ago

rayiner 4y ago
> overturning abortion More accurately, the US Supreme Court returned the situation in the US to the status quo in most advanced countries: regulating abortion as a legislative matter, not a “right.” It did what the EU Court of Human Rights has repeatedly done in declining to recognize a “right” to elective abortions,[1] that can override legislation. A putative right that, 100 years from now, may well be seen alongside eugenics (alongside which it originated) as a mistaken wrong turn in the arc of progress. [1] In a series of cases, most recently RR v. Poland, the EHCR has declined calls to overturn Poland’s near ban on abortions, deciding them on narrow grounds that the government had prevented abortions that were legal under exceptions to Polish law. It has gone only so far as to suggest there is a right in case of risk to maternal life.
- markdown 4y ago
  Did you just liken abortion to eugenics?
  - stn8188 4y ago
    I'm no expert on the topic but there are articles that contain both words... https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/08/14/432080520/fact-check-was-planned-parenthood-started-to-control-the-black-population https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/08/14/43208...
  - merlincorey 4y ago
    The history is that it did start that way and one of the current discussion points is whether or not to allow people to abort children that are found to have genetic abnormalities such as pre-natal screening for Down Syndrome. Oxford Languages defines eugenics as "the study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable." Of course the unspoken corollary here is that to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics one must prevent the reproduction of undesirable heritable characteristics. It's plainly obvious to many of us today that such a policy is dangerous if we decide to select on characteristics such as color of skin, but as the GP says, maybe in 50 years we will find that people with Down Syndrome will consider today's approved abortions for their condition to be just as barbaric.
    - vkou 4y ago
      Abortion has a millennium-long history that precedes eugenics.
      - merlincorey 4y ago
        "Recent history" if you would prefer. They say Sparta practiced eugenics with late-term abortions according to legend though we don't have any physical evidence of this to my quick search. Wikipedia offers this quotation as a source[0] Haeckel, Ernst (1876). "The History of Creation, vol. I". New York: D. Appleton. p. 170. "Among the Spartans all newly born children were subject to a careful examination or selection. All those that were weak, sickly, or affected with any bodily infirmity, were killed. Only the perfectly healthy and strong children were allowed to live, and they alone afterwards propagated the race." [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_eugenics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_eugenics
        vkou 4y ago
        Sparta was a small, barbaric slave city state that after a flash in the sun, quickly faded into obscurity due to its ossified economic and political structures. There's six orders of magnitude more people who have lived in political, and ethical systems over those thousands of years that had nothing to do with Sparta. I'm not sure why you are cherrypicking needles out of haystacks, but it's as much a fallacy as pointing out that since Ghenghis Khan wore pants, ergo, pants are evil.
        merlincorey 4y ago
        I'm not sure what you think my position is as you seem to be arguing past me about something else completely. My position is that I agree with a specific claim of the GP whose exact words were "A putative right that, 100 years from now, may well be seen alongside eugenics (alongside which it originated) as a mistaken wrong turn in the arc of progress." The specific parts that I agree with are that: 1) Abortion and Eugenics are related and originated somewhat together, and 2) 100 years from now Abortion as a Right instead of as Legislation may be seen as a wrong turn much like Eugenics is now In your first response to me you only addressed point #1 by stating erroneously that "Abortion has a millennium-long history that precedes eugenics". I clarified in my response that I meant "recent history" in which Abortion and Eugenics were very intertwined; however, I also provided a link to a Wikipedia page that starts out telling us that Plato in Ancient Greece was a proponent of Eugenics which shows that concept also has a millenium long history. I didn't quote that section, but instead, I quoted a section referring to the legendary tales of Sparta engaging in eugenics and late term abortion. In your second response you failed to read the source link I provided detailing the history of Eugenics and pick up on your mistake; instead, you have gone down some strange argument disparaging Sparta and claiming I am cherry picking needles out of haystacks. It doesn't matter that you view Sparta as a "barbaric slave city state" which "faded into obscurity" -- that doesn't change the fact that they are a millenia old example of eugenics and potentially very late term abortions. Even if it did, none of this works to refute my position that possibly 100 years from now Abortion as a Right instead of as Legislation may be seen as a wrong turn much like Eugenics is now. The specific example I gave of Down Syndrome stands as a current issue that may turn into a future view of our current peoples as barbaric for aborting babies with Down Syndrome. Do you have any arguments against that, or do you think I'm just anti-abortion in general and you're having a general argument with me about abortion? Because I am neither anti-abortion nor am I arguing against abortion.
  - rayiner 4y ago
    Abortion legalization is an offshoot of the same early 20th century progressive anti-natalism as eugenics. Planned Parenthood was, of course, founded by a eugenicist. In most of the developing world, like my home country of Bangladesh, abortion is still justified primarily to avoid poor women having too many children. There’s other justifications for it now, of course, but I’m not drawing a novel comparison here. In those hypotheticals of “what do we do that future generations will view as evil” eating meat and elective abortions are probably near the top of the list. (In both cases, I suspect technological and economic change will make us forget why we did it in the first place.)
    - always2slow 4y ago
      Nice "Genetic Fallacy". Abortion gives women control of their body, no more reason or justification needed. I whole-heartedly disagree with elective abortions being one of those “what do we do that future generations will view as evil” things. I think the opposite is true and that forced birth is what future generations will view as evil. Younger generations are trending pro-choice. [1] 1. https://news.gallup.com/poll/246206/abortion-trends-age.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/246206/abortion-trends-age.aspx
    - markdown 4y ago
      LOL abortion has been done since before homo sapiens branched off into their own species. Christians believe that their god performs millions of abortions every day (they call them miscarriages). Abortions are in every culture on every continent. Claiming it stems from the 20th century is insane. You have it wrong, future humans will look back and wonder why we didn't abort more when we clearly couldn't even meet the needs of the babies we already had.
      - rayiner 4y ago
        > Christians believe that their god performs millions of abortions every day (they call them miscarriages). I’m pretty sure it’s not just Christians that distinguish between a child dying of natural causes and a deliberate killing. > Abortions are in every culture on every continent. Abortion restrictions also exist in a vast variety of cultures in every continent: https://vividmaps-com.cdn.ampproject.org/i/s/vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Abortion-1024x546-1.png https://vividmaps-com.cdn.ampproject.org/i/s/vividmaps.com/w.... It’s not something “Christians” came up with.
  - helloworld11 4y ago
    There's certainly a certain relation between them. What's more, as genetic screening of early-term pregnancies becomes more common, the inevitable abortions that result due to real or perceived defects or other random personal reasons are things that many eugenicists of the past would have probably been keenly interested in, and even applauded in certain ways.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - Jerrrry 4y ago
    Are you implying they aren't related at all?
  - mise_en_place 4y ago
    Well, what's the data on the types of pregnancies that get aborted? You could then use such data to make the argument that abortion achieves some of the same goals of eugenics, even if only loosely related in the currents that made these ideas mainstream. I predict this will become even more interesting when embryo modification becomes more popular and mainstream.
  - samatman 4y ago
    It's not not eugenic https://www.cbsnews.com/news/down-syndrome-iceland/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/down-syndrome-iceland/
- sg47 4y ago
  Should US also offer free healthcare like most advanced countries? Why compare where it's convenient? I'm talking about progress.
  - rayiner 4y ago
    Yes we should. We already took major steps in that direction with Obamacare. I hear it’s popular.
- vkou 4y ago
  I doubt that a century from now, eugenics and fundamental body autonomy will be spoken of in the same breath, despite the intervening efforts to conflate the two.
- wavefunction 4y ago
  Abortion has existed since before recorded history. Eugenics is 150 years old at most. I certainly wouldn't advance such a dishonest and immoral argument and it certainly illustrates why people like you should have little input into the definition of civil rights or society in general.
  - Rexxar 4y ago
    Sparta is much more than 150 years old.
  - merlincorey 4y ago
    It looks like you need to edit the wikipedia page on the history of eugenics[0] because it is claiming that Plato was a proponent of eugenics and he was born over 2000 years ago which seems like a lot more than 150. Similarly, you might want to contact Stanford so they can update the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy which is the source for the above statement. The way you are gatekeeping people while subtly insulting them makes me thankful that you are defending everyone's rights because you are so clearly thoughtful of everyone and forgiving. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_eugenics#cite_note-1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_eugenics#cite_note-... [1] Eugenics". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI), Stanford University. Jul 2, 2014. Retrieved January 2, 2015.
- standardUser 4y ago
  What a twisted version of reality you just presented. The US has in no way, shape or form returned to the "status quo in most advanced countries". Perhaps with some convoluted rhetoric you can argue that, but in practice the difference is undeniable. Policies regarding abortion have one gone in one direction in recent decades (in both advanced and less advanced economies) and there is only a single massive outlier that has jerked aggressively back in the other direction.
  - rayiner 4y ago
    You’re confusing the concept of “status quo” (the current state) with the direction of change. Roe took the US outside the mainstream among developed countries. Just a couple of years after Roe, the German constitutional court found that legalized abortion violated the Basic Law’s right to life. In the intervening decades, only a handful of other high courts recognized abortion as a right, rather than a legislative decision. The EHCR repeatedly rejected the idea, even though the EU Convention on Human Rights has an explicit right to privacy. So yes, undoing Roe returned us to the mainstream.
    - clairity 4y ago
      abortion has been a natural right for thousands of years. women cerainly don’t need you nor the state to intercede in what is essentially a right to bodily autonomy.
      - rayiner 4y ago
        It’s as “essentially” about human life as it is about “bodily autonomy.” As to “women”—they’re voting for these laws. The Mississippi electorate that voted in the 15-week ban at issue in Dobbs had 25% more women than men. And the large majority voted Republican.
        clairity 4y ago
        ah, well if mississippi is doing it, that just settles it once and for all i guess. diehard partisanship gets us nowhere. women wanting to coerce other women is nothing new, but it’s still against our natural rights. and yes, it’s essentially about the woman’s life too, i agree there.
- 0dayz 4y ago
  This might be something Americans think about legslislation, but in a European context legislation in practice is not something you just rip off, either you increment it or subtract it. Essentially you will notice a lot of European Supreme courts and constitution is very different than usa. But besides that, there are now calls in multiple European countries to make abortion a right.
totetsu 4y ago
Wow this guy really wants to divert the online conversations attention away from 90s Italian TV comics... I wonder what they're hiding..

We have regressed by overturning abortion, enacting subversive election laws and in general destroying the fabric of democracy.

by sg47 4y ago

We have regressed by overturning abortion, enacting subversive election laws and in general destroying the fabric of democracy.

rayiner 4y ago

> overturning abortion More accurately, the US Supreme Court returned the situation in the US to the status quo in most advanced countries: regulating abortion as a legislative matter, not a “right.” It did what the EU Court of Human Rights has repeatedly done in declining to recognize a “right” to elective abortions,[1] that can override legislation. A putative right that, 100 years from now, may well be seen alongside eugenics (alongside which it originated) as a mistaken wrong turn in the arc of progress. [1] In a series of cases, most recently RR v. Poland, the EHCR has declined calls to overturn Poland’s near ban on abortions, deciding them on narrow grounds that the government had prevented abortions that were legal under exceptions to Polish law. It has gone only so far as to suggest there is a right in case of risk to maternal life.

markdown 4y ago
Did you just liken abortion to eugenics?
- stn8188 4y ago
  I'm no expert on the topic but there are articles that contain both words... https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/08/14/432080520/fact-check-was-planned-parenthood-started-to-control-the-black-population https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/08/14/43208...
- merlincorey 4y ago
  The history is that it did start that way and one of the current discussion points is whether or not to allow people to abort children that are found to have genetic abnormalities such as pre-natal screening for Down Syndrome. Oxford Languages defines eugenics as "the study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable." Of course the unspoken corollary here is that to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics one must prevent the reproduction of undesirable heritable characteristics. It's plainly obvious to many of us today that such a policy is dangerous if we decide to select on characteristics such as color of skin, but as the GP says, maybe in 50 years we will find that people with Down Syndrome will consider today's approved abortions for their condition to be just as barbaric.
  - vkou 4y ago
    Abortion has a millennium-long history that precedes eugenics.
    - merlincorey 4y ago
      "Recent history" if you would prefer. They say Sparta practiced eugenics with late-term abortions according to legend though we don't have any physical evidence of this to my quick search. Wikipedia offers this quotation as a source[0] Haeckel, Ernst (1876). "The History of Creation, vol. I". New York: D. Appleton. p. 170. "Among the Spartans all newly born children were subject to a careful examination or selection. All those that were weak, sickly, or affected with any bodily infirmity, were killed. Only the perfectly healthy and strong children were allowed to live, and they alone afterwards propagated the race." [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_eugenics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_eugenics
      - vkou 4y ago
        Sparta was a small, barbaric slave city state that after a flash in the sun, quickly faded into obscurity due to its ossified economic and political structures. There's six orders of magnitude more people who have lived in political, and ethical systems over those thousands of years that had nothing to do with Sparta. I'm not sure why you are cherrypicking needles out of haystacks, but it's as much a fallacy as pointing out that since Ghenghis Khan wore pants, ergo, pants are evil.
        merlincorey 4y ago
        I'm not sure what you think my position is as you seem to be arguing past me about something else completely. My position is that I agree with a specific claim of the GP whose exact words were "A putative right that, 100 years from now, may well be seen alongside eugenics (alongside which it originated) as a mistaken wrong turn in the arc of progress." The specific parts that I agree with are that: 1) Abortion and Eugenics are related and originated somewhat together, and 2) 100 years from now Abortion as a Right instead of as Legislation may be seen as a wrong turn much like Eugenics is now In your first response to me you only addressed point #1 by stating erroneously that "Abortion has a millennium-long history that precedes eugenics". I clarified in my response that I meant "recent history" in which Abortion and Eugenics were very intertwined; however, I also provided a link to a Wikipedia page that starts out telling us that Plato in Ancient Greece was a proponent of Eugenics which shows that concept also has a millenium long history. I didn't quote that section, but instead, I quoted a section referring to the legendary tales of Sparta engaging in eugenics and late term abortion. In your second response you failed to read the source link I provided detailing the history of Eugenics and pick up on your mistake; instead, you have gone down some strange argument disparaging Sparta and claiming I am cherry picking needles out of haystacks. It doesn't matter that you view Sparta as a "barbaric slave city state" which "faded into obscurity" -- that doesn't change the fact that they are a millenia old example of eugenics and potentially very late term abortions. Even if it did, none of this works to refute my position that possibly 100 years from now Abortion as a Right instead of as Legislation may be seen as a wrong turn much like Eugenics is now. The specific example I gave of Down Syndrome stands as a current issue that may turn into a future view of our current peoples as barbaric for aborting babies with Down Syndrome. Do you have any arguments against that, or do you think I'm just anti-abortion in general and you're having a general argument with me about abortion? Because I am neither anti-abortion nor am I arguing against abortion.
- rayiner 4y ago
  Abortion legalization is an offshoot of the same early 20th century progressive anti-natalism as eugenics. Planned Parenthood was, of course, founded by a eugenicist. In most of the developing world, like my home country of Bangladesh, abortion is still justified primarily to avoid poor women having too many children. There’s other justifications for it now, of course, but I’m not drawing a novel comparison here. In those hypotheticals of “what do we do that future generations will view as evil” eating meat and elective abortions are probably near the top of the list. (In both cases, I suspect technological and economic change will make us forget why we did it in the first place.)
  - always2slow 4y ago
    Nice "Genetic Fallacy". Abortion gives women control of their body, no more reason or justification needed. I whole-heartedly disagree with elective abortions being one of those “what do we do that future generations will view as evil” things. I think the opposite is true and that forced birth is what future generations will view as evil. Younger generations are trending pro-choice. [1] 1. https://news.gallup.com/poll/246206/abortion-trends-age.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/246206/abortion-trends-age.aspx
  - markdown 4y ago
    LOL abortion has been done since before homo sapiens branched off into their own species. Christians believe that their god performs millions of abortions every day (they call them miscarriages). Abortions are in every culture on every continent. Claiming it stems from the 20th century is insane. You have it wrong, future humans will look back and wonder why we didn't abort more when we clearly couldn't even meet the needs of the babies we already had.
    - rayiner 4y ago
      > Christians believe that their god performs millions of abortions every day (they call them miscarriages). I’m pretty sure it’s not just Christians that distinguish between a child dying of natural causes and a deliberate killing. > Abortions are in every culture on every continent. Abortion restrictions also exist in a vast variety of cultures in every continent: https://vividmaps-com.cdn.ampproject.org/i/s/vividmaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Abortion-1024x546-1.png https://vividmaps-com.cdn.ampproject.org/i/s/vividmaps.com/w.... It’s not something “Christians” came up with.
- helloworld11 4y ago
  There's certainly a certain relation between them. What's more, as genetic screening of early-term pregnancies becomes more common, the inevitable abortions that result due to real or perceived defects or other random personal reasons are things that many eugenicists of the past would have probably been keenly interested in, and even applauded in certain ways.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Jerrrry 4y ago
  Are you implying they aren't related at all?
- mise_en_place 4y ago
  Well, what's the data on the types of pregnancies that get aborted? You could then use such data to make the argument that abortion achieves some of the same goals of eugenics, even if only loosely related in the currents that made these ideas mainstream. I predict this will become even more interesting when embryo modification becomes more popular and mainstream.
- samatman 4y ago
  It's not not eugenic https://www.cbsnews.com/news/down-syndrome-iceland/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/down-syndrome-iceland/
sg47 4y ago
Should US also offer free healthcare like most advanced countries? Why compare where it's convenient? I'm talking about progress.
- rayiner 4y ago
  Yes we should. We already took major steps in that direction with Obamacare. I hear it’s popular.
vkou 4y ago
I doubt that a century from now, eugenics and fundamental body autonomy will be spoken of in the same breath, despite the intervening efforts to conflate the two.
wavefunction 4y ago
Abortion has existed since before recorded history. Eugenics is 150 years old at most. I certainly wouldn't advance such a dishonest and immoral argument and it certainly illustrates why people like you should have little input into the definition of civil rights or society in general.
- Rexxar 4y ago
  Sparta is much more than 150 years old.
- merlincorey 4y ago
  It looks like you need to edit the wikipedia page on the history of eugenics[0] because it is claiming that Plato was a proponent of eugenics and he was born over 2000 years ago which seems like a lot more than 150. Similarly, you might want to contact Stanford so they can update the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy which is the source for the above statement. The way you are gatekeeping people while subtly insulting them makes me thankful that you are defending everyone's rights because you are so clearly thoughtful of everyone and forgiving. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_eugenics#cite_note-1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_eugenics#cite_note-... [1] Eugenics". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Center for the Study of Language and Information (CSLI), Stanford University. Jul 2, 2014. Retrieved January 2, 2015.
standardUser 4y ago
What a twisted version of reality you just presented. The US has in no way, shape or form returned to the "status quo in most advanced countries". Perhaps with some convoluted rhetoric you can argue that, but in practice the difference is undeniable. Policies regarding abortion have one gone in one direction in recent decades (in both advanced and less advanced economies) and there is only a single massive outlier that has jerked aggressively back in the other direction.
- rayiner 4y ago
  You’re confusing the concept of “status quo” (the current state) with the direction of change. Roe took the US outside the mainstream among developed countries. Just a couple of years after Roe, the German constitutional court found that legalized abortion violated the Basic Law’s right to life. In the intervening decades, only a handful of other high courts recognized abortion as a right, rather than a legislative decision. The EHCR repeatedly rejected the idea, even though the EU Convention on Human Rights has an explicit right to privacy. So yes, undoing Roe returned us to the mainstream.
  - clairity 4y ago
    abortion has been a natural right for thousands of years. women cerainly don’t need you nor the state to intercede in what is essentially a right to bodily autonomy.
    - rayiner 4y ago
      It’s as “essentially” about human life as it is about “bodily autonomy.” As to “women”—they’re voting for these laws. The Mississippi electorate that voted in the 15-week ban at issue in Dobbs had 25% more women than men. And the large majority voted Republican.
      - clairity 4y ago
        ah, well if mississippi is doing it, that just settles it once and for all i guess. diehard partisanship gets us nowhere. women wanting to coerce other women is nothing new, but it’s still against our natural rights. and yes, it’s essentially about the woman’s life too, i agree there.
0dayz 4y ago
This might be something Americans think about legslislation, but in a European context legislation in practice is not something you just rip off, either you increment it or subtract it. Essentially you will notice a lot of European Supreme courts and constitution is very different than usa. But besides that, there are now calls in multiple European countries to make abortion a right.

totetsu 4y ago

Wow this guy really wants to divert the online conversations attention away from 90s Italian TV comics... I wonder what they're hiding..