5 ms·

and you'd think the majority are going the be disgusted by the idea of a 10-year-old rape victim being denied access to healthcare by her state, but counsel for

and you'd think the majority are going the be disgusted by the idea of a 10-year-old rape victim being denied access to healthcare by her state, but counsel for the National Right to Life argued she should keep have kept the child

throwaway894345 4y ago
Of course, some legislation could ban abortions while make exceptions for 10-year-old rape victims or other extreme cases. There's a lot of middle ground between banning all abortions and allowing all abortions. We don't need to legislate according to extremes.
- spread_love 4y ago
  I wish National Right to Life felt the same way. > There's a lot of middle ground between banning all abortions and allowing all abortions Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others?
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    > Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others? As a rhetorical tactic, do you have a lot of luck with obvious deliberate obtuseness?
    - spread_love 4y ago
      I'm simply repeating the mantra of the disciples of Kang and Kodos. If you have a problem I suggest you take it up with them.
- ModernMech 4y ago
  We don't need to, but that's the way things are going. Allowing abortion for rape and not in other cases is ideologically inconsistent with the idea that fetuses are persons, and so what we are actually seeing is that state legislatures are passing extreme legislation to maintain consistency with that premise. They are able to do so because states are so polarized that they can pass extreme legislation without any repercussions. Half of the problem here is that reasonable people think this will be a states' rights issue with reasonable exceptions that local people can all agree on, but with which others might differ. Whereas what's actually happening is that extremist state legislatures are seizing on the issue to pass the most restrictive abortion laws they possibly can, and the GOP at the national level is salivating over the prospect of a national abortion ban as soon as they regain control of the government (see statements from VP Pence, Mitch McConnell, and various House republicans). People thought throwing the issue back to the states would be the end of it, but it's clearly not.
  - throwaway894345 4y ago
    > Half of the problem here is that reasonable people think this will be a states' rights issue with reasonable exceptions that local people can all agree on, but with which others might differ. It wasn't like we had a referendum and reasonable people voted for this to be a states' rights issue. Rather, we never had an abortion law or anything in the constitution that could reasonably be interpreted as a right to abortion, so the Supreme Court overturned RvW. What we need is a federal law (Amendment?) that protects abortion access for the most extreme cases (i.e., the cases where a healthy majority of Americans agree).
    - ModernMech 4y ago
      And yet, what we had was a reasonable state of affairs: there was a sliding scale between more permissive and restrictive abortion options as a pregnancy progressed, and every person could make up their minds as to whether they would seek an abortion based on their circumstances and health within those limits. The status quo was that 99% of abortions were performed in the early stages where the fetus is still not developed, with virtually none of the morally complicated late term abortions actually occurring. What then happened is that a president elected by a minority of the country appointed extreme Justices, who were confirmed by a Senate that also represented a minority of the country, and they made a unilateral decision based more on their personal religious beliefs than the actual law. Rather than settle the issue as they thought it would, they have thrown the whole country into abject chaos. A lot of reasonable people, and in fact highly distinguished legal scholars (including decades of Justices) interpreted the Constitution as supporting Roe, so calling them unreasonable is, I think, not right and adds insult to injury. What is certainly unreasonable is where we have landed. State legislatures are passing the most extreme laws they can possibly can, with no exceptions for rape or incest. Forcing 10 year olds to flee a state to get an abortion because she was raped is not reasonable. Forcing mothers to wait until an ectopic pregnancy has ruptured before providing abortive care just because a heartbeat is detected on an unviable fetus is not reasonable. Just this weekend the Idaho GOP moved so far as to advocate for no exceptions at all even to save the life of the mother. That's not reasonable, that's extremism. Far from this being an issue thrown to the states, now the GOP is turning toward a nationwide abortion ban if they retake the government. This is completely unsustainable and will likely tear this country apart.
tsimionescu 4y ago
Well, yes, the majority of people are disgusted by the idea of a 10-year-old girl is being forced to carry a pregnancy (the fact that she was trapped makes it all the more monstrous). That the NRL is of a different opinion only shows that they are an extremist organization, way out on the fringes. Even in this extreme case though, if said 10-year-old victim were 1 hour away from being able to give birth, I don't think it would make sense to allow an abortion (though of course a C-section can be performed at any time). So clearly there is some line, even for the most extreme cases.
- spread_love 4y ago
  > That the NRL is of a different opinion only shows that they are an extremist organization, way out on the fringes It's the oldest and largest national anti-abortion organization in the United States, hardly the fringes. They do a lot of campaign financing.
  - tsimionescu 4y ago
    The Catholic Church is one of the oldest and richest institutions on Earth. Its views on contraception are still way out on the fringes of public opinion.
    - spread_love 4y ago
      There are about 70 million Catholics in the US, 20% of the population. Are a majority of their members' views on abortion out of line with the Catholic Church? They're a pretty sizable part of "public opinion."
      - tsimionescu 4y ago
        > Are a majority of their members' views on abortion out of line with the Catholic Church? Yes. Also, I was specifically talking about contraception, not abortion.
        4y ago

throwaway894345 4y ago

Of course, some legislation could ban abortions while make exceptions for 10-year-old rape victims or other extreme cases. There's a lot of middle ground between banning all abortions and allowing all abortions. We don't need to legislate according to extremes.

spread_love 4y ago
I wish National Right to Life felt the same way. > There's a lot of middle ground between banning all abortions and allowing all abortions Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others?
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  > Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others? As a rhetorical tactic, do you have a lot of luck with obvious deliberate obtuseness?
  - spread_love 4y ago
    I'm simply repeating the mantra of the disciples of Kang and Kodos. If you have a problem I suggest you take it up with them.
ModernMech 4y ago
We don't need to, but that's the way things are going. Allowing abortion for rape and not in other cases is ideologically inconsistent with the idea that fetuses are persons, and so what we are actually seeing is that state legislatures are passing extreme legislation to maintain consistency with that premise. They are able to do so because states are so polarized that they can pass extreme legislation without any repercussions. Half of the problem here is that reasonable people think this will be a states' rights issue with reasonable exceptions that local people can all agree on, but with which others might differ. Whereas what's actually happening is that extremist state legislatures are seizing on the issue to pass the most restrictive abortion laws they possibly can, and the GOP at the national level is salivating over the prospect of a national abortion ban as soon as they regain control of the government (see statements from VP Pence, Mitch McConnell, and various House republicans). People thought throwing the issue back to the states would be the end of it, but it's clearly not.
- throwaway894345 4y ago
  > Half of the problem here is that reasonable people think this will be a states' rights issue with reasonable exceptions that local people can all agree on, but with which others might differ. It wasn't like we had a referendum and reasonable people voted for this to be a states' rights issue. Rather, we never had an abortion law or anything in the constitution that could reasonably be interpreted as a right to abortion, so the Supreme Court overturned RvW. What we need is a federal law (Amendment?) that protects abortion access for the most extreme cases (i.e., the cases where a healthy majority of Americans agree).
  - ModernMech 4y ago
    And yet, what we had was a reasonable state of affairs: there was a sliding scale between more permissive and restrictive abortion options as a pregnancy progressed, and every person could make up their minds as to whether they would seek an abortion based on their circumstances and health within those limits. The status quo was that 99% of abortions were performed in the early stages where the fetus is still not developed, with virtually none of the morally complicated late term abortions actually occurring. What then happened is that a president elected by a minority of the country appointed extreme Justices, who were confirmed by a Senate that also represented a minority of the country, and they made a unilateral decision based more on their personal religious beliefs than the actual law. Rather than settle the issue as they thought it would, they have thrown the whole country into abject chaos. A lot of reasonable people, and in fact highly distinguished legal scholars (including decades of Justices) interpreted the Constitution as supporting Roe, so calling them unreasonable is, I think, not right and adds insult to injury. What is certainly unreasonable is where we have landed. State legislatures are passing the most extreme laws they can possibly can, with no exceptions for rape or incest. Forcing 10 year olds to flee a state to get an abortion because she was raped is not reasonable. Forcing mothers to wait until an ectopic pregnancy has ruptured before providing abortive care just because a heartbeat is detected on an unviable fetus is not reasonable. Just this weekend the Idaho GOP moved so far as to advocate for no exceptions at all even to save the life of the mother. That's not reasonable, that's extremism. Far from this being an issue thrown to the states, now the GOP is turning toward a nationwide abortion ban if they retake the government. This is completely unsustainable and will likely tear this country apart.

tsimionescu 4y ago

Well, yes, the majority of people are disgusted by the idea of a 10-year-old girl is being forced to carry a pregnancy (the fact that she was trapped makes it all the more monstrous). That the NRL is of a different opinion only shows that they are an extremist organization, way out on the fringes. Even in this extreme case though, if said 10-year-old victim were 1 hour away from being able to give birth, I don't think it would make sense to allow an abortion (though of course a C-section can be performed at any time). So clearly there is some line, even for the most extreme cases.

spread_love 4y ago
> That the NRL is of a different opinion only shows that they are an extremist organization, way out on the fringes It's the oldest and largest national anti-abortion organization in the United States, hardly the fringes. They do a lot of campaign financing.
- tsimionescu 4y ago
  The Catholic Church is one of the oldest and richest institutions on Earth. Its views on contraception are still way out on the fringes of public opinion.
  - spread_love 4y ago
    There are about 70 million Catholics in the US, 20% of the population. Are a majority of their members' views on abortion out of line with the Catholic Church? They're a pretty sizable part of "public opinion."
    - tsimionescu 4y ago
      > Are a majority of their members' views on abortion out of line with the Catholic Church? Yes. Also, I was specifically talking about contraception, not abortion.
      - 4y ago