• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Roe v Wade is on deck

steve_bank said:
Toni said:
steve_bank said:
I would think a woman dying after being denied abortion would lay the grounds for another legal approach. Sue the state for a wrongful death due to denial of life saving medical procedures.
Click to expand...
How very comforting. I wonder how many women would need to die in order to more legislators or courts. Women di d for hundreds of years due to inadequate care related to pregnancy, miscarriage and childbirth, abs the aftermath. Women used to routinely die from mastitis, which is treated with antibiotics these days. It took until 1973 for the US Supreme Court to rule in the Roe V Wade case, a necessity because states refused to allow women to seek appropriate health care.

My mother in law who grew up and raised her young family on NYC’s upper east side, told me of some of her friends who could not face another pregnancy and were turned away by their doctors—only to find the same doctor in the room whose address was provided by a friend of a friend. Oh, some went to other countries but sometimes that was not practical.

In my high school, sometimes girls took a trip to NY to visit an aunt. And some were forced to drop out of high school. The fathers of their babies continued on the basketball team.. a neighbor around the corner had her younger sister from out of town live with her for a summer.

People have not really changed in the last 50 years….
Click to expand...
More like 50,000 years. Evolution made us horny and capable of conception 24/7. We fuck like rabbits.

From a show on the history of contrceptives in the 19th century it was not uncommon for a woman to get marrid utterly ignorant of sex.

In the 80s a woman who woked with an international birth control said condoms were distributed to some people who for some reason would not use them. It turned out the color of the condoms was a special color to the people. Connecting the color to sex was somehow offensive. Change the condom color and they used them.

To me a large part of the problem is the bizarre twisted views of sex derived from the three Abrahamic relgions. Women as property good for making babies and pleasure and nothing else.

There was a pope who hacked the penis off Vatican statues and put fig laevs on nude paintings.
Click to expand...
I’m not convinced that other religious or atheist religious traditions give rise to healthier views of women and/or sexuality.
 
Toni said:
steve_bank said:
Toni said:
steve_bank said:
I would think a woman dying after being denied abortion would lay the grounds for another legal approach. Sue the state for a wrongful death due to denial of life saving medical procedures.
Click to expand...
How very comforting. I wonder how many women would need to die in order to more legislators or courts. Women di d for hundreds of years due to inadequate care related to pregnancy, miscarriage and childbirth, abs the aftermath. Women used to routinely die from mastitis, which is treated with antibiotics these days. It took until 1973 for the US Supreme Court to rule in the Roe V Wade case, a necessity because states refused to allow women to seek appropriate health care.

My mother in law who grew up and raised her young family on NYC’s upper east side, told me of some of her friends who could not face another pregnancy and were turned away by their doctors—only to find the same doctor in the room whose address was provided by a friend of a friend. Oh, some went to other countries but sometimes that was not practical.

In my high school, sometimes girls took a trip to NY to visit an aunt. And some were forced to drop out of high school. The fathers of their babies continued on the basketball team.. a neighbor around the corner had her younger sister from out of town live with her for a summer.

People have not really changed in the last 50 years….
Click to expand...
More like 50,000 years. Evolution made us horny and capable of conception 24/7. We fuck like rabbits.

From a show on the history of contrceptives in the 19th century it was not uncommon for a woman to get marrid utterly ignorant of sex.

In the 80s a woman who woked with an international birth control said condoms were distributed to some people who for some reason would not use them. It turned out the color of the condoms was a special color to the people. Connecting the color to sex was somehow offensive. Change the condom color and they used them.

To me a large part of the problem is the bizarre twisted views of sex derived from the three Abrahamic relgions. Women as property good for making babies and pleasure and nothing else.

There was a pope who hacked the penis off Vatican statues and put fig laevs on nude paintings.
Click to expand...
I’m not convinced that other religious or atheist religious traditions give rise to healthier views of women and/or sexuality
Click to expand...
Perhaps not, but at least atheist traditions don't explicitly exclude the possibility.
 
Where Americans Stand On Abortion, In 5 Charts | FiveThirtyEight

Noting that "Americans' views on abortion often contradict" each other.

First trimester abortion generally legal: 60%, second trimester: 28% -- thus broadly agreeing with most countries with legal abortion.

Don't overturn Roe vs. Wade: 69%, do overturn: 29% -- even though RvW protects both 1st and 2nd trimester abortions.

It Can Already Take Weeks To Get An Abortion | FiveThirtyEight - "And the Supreme Court could soon make it take even longer."

Starting off with how difficult it is to get an abortion in Oklahoma -- all the Texans going there for abortions have resulted in long wait times there.
... one administrator said in an email, “Our wait times at the beginning of March for the [abortion] pill was about 3 weeks and for surgical procedure about 3-4 weeks. … We did not stop scheduling at any point.”

Regardless, the impact of the Texas ban isn’t just being felt in Oklahoma. According to the research, waits of two or three weeks for an abortion appointment are common in eight states surrounding Texas — much longer than the waits in states further away.
Click to expand...
TX's neigbors:

NM: clinics 6 mmm 0,9,11 -- CO: clinics 21, mmm 0,7,17 -- OK: clinics 4, mmm (all booked) -- KS: clinics 4, mmm 8,8,16 -- MO: clinics 1, mmm 28, -- AR: clinics 2, mm 13,18,22 -- MS: clinics 1 mmm 14 -- LA: clinics 3, mmm 1,5,9

mmm = minimum, median, maximum numbers of days from appointment to abortion

"The data shows that while clinics in the states surrounding Texas are particularly taxed right now, wait times of a week or more are already fairly common in other parts of the U.S., even in deep-blue states like California and New York."
But it was clear that many of the country’s abortion providers are already stretched thin. Myers told me that it surprised her “how much time [the researchers] spent dealing with busy phone lines, returning dropped calls, being on hold for half an hour or more, being told to try back later.” Those challenges — much like a state’s abortion restrictions — are especially burdensome for low-income people.

...
Further restricting abortion will affect people all over the country, including in blue states. In fact, that may already be happening. Even in states where abortion access is protected, there were clinics with long waits in the data we analyzed.
Click to expand...
Like in CA and OR and IL. It's gotten so bad in CO that some CO abortion seekers have gone to other states.
 
Toni said:
steve_bank said:
Toni said:
steve_bank said:
I would think a woman dying after being denied abortion would lay the grounds for another legal approach. Sue the state for a wrongful death due to denial of life saving medical procedures.
Click to expand...
How very comforting. I wonder how many women would need to die in order to more legislators or courts. Women di d for hundreds of years due to inadequate care related to pregnancy, miscarriage and childbirth, abs the aftermath. Women used to routinely die from mastitis, which is treated with antibiotics these days. It took until 1973 for the US Supreme Court to rule in the Roe V Wade case, a necessity because states refused to allow women to seek appropriate health care.

My mother in law who grew up and raised her young family on NYC’s upper east side, told me of some of her friends who could not face another pregnancy and were turned away by their doctors—only to find the same doctor in the room whose address was provided by a friend of a friend. Oh, some went to other countries but sometimes that was not practical.

In my high school, sometimes girls took a trip to NY to visit an aunt. And some were forced to drop out of high school. The fathers of their babies continued on the basketball team.. a neighbor around the corner had her younger sister from out of town live with her for a summer.

People have not really changed in the last 50 years….
Click to expand...
More like 50,000 years. Evolution made us horny and capable of conception 24/7. We fuck like rabbits.

From a show on the history of contrceptives in the 19th century it was not uncommon for a woman to get marrid utterly ignorant of sex.

In the 80s a woman who woked with an international birth control said condoms were distributed to some people who for some reason would not use them. It turned out the color of the condoms was a special color to the people. Connecting the color to sex was somehow offensive. Change the condom color and they used them.

To me a large part of the problem is the bizarre twisted views of sex derived from the three Abrahamic relgions. Women as property good for making babies and pleasure and nothing else.

There was a pope who hacked the penis off Vatican statues and put fig laevs on nude paintings.
Click to expand...
I’m not convinced that other religious or atheist religious traditions give rise to healthier views of women and/or sexuality.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
 
The numbers I heard today as to pro abortio in general, about 30% of republicans and 80% of democrats.
 
steve_bank said:
Polls show at least a majoroty support for abortion.

The reponse shoud be voting for candidates who support abortion.

There is a Senate republican propsed law with a loop hole that allows individual providers to opt out of performing abortions. Of coyrse the democrats will never consider any kind of compromise bill for a federal law, and so the problem continues.
Click to expand...

Other than in emergency situations providers already choose whether they provide abortion or not.

And a doctor who refuses to provide one in an emergency should not be a doctor anymore.
 
Steve said:
the democrats will never consider any kind of compromise bill for a federal law,
Click to expand...

I don’t believe that’s true. They would vote for virtually anything that protects a right, as long as it doesn’t simultaneously rescind rights granted by RvW (or other rights previously upheld by multiple precedents for over a half century).
But the GQP is ALL about rescinding rights, so they will refuse to support anything that doesn’t rescind rights. Anything that grants them, no matter how small, is anathema to their Holy Quest to establish Taliban-like control over women’s bodies.
 
Elixir said:
Steve said:
the democrats will never consider any kind of compromise bill for a federal law,
Click to expand...

I don’t believe that’s true. They would vote for virtually anything that protects a right, as long as it doesn’t simultaneously rescind rights granted by RvW (or other rights previously upheld by multiple precedents for over a half century).
But the GQP is ALL about rescinding rights, so they will refuse to support anything that doesn’t rescind rights. Anything that grants them, no matter how small, is anathema to their Holy Quest to establish Taliban-like control over women’s bodies.
Click to expand...
On this I disagree. Cortez and the progressives and the Sander's crowd are all or nothing.

Plelosi has had to contend with the progresses in her part.
 
steve_bank said:
Plelosi
Click to expand...

Sanders is a dreamer. I give him credit for holding on to the far left territory he has always staked out, but it is not relevant to the basic dynamic I’m talking about; rescinding vs guaranteeing rights.

The respective parties have laid claim to their respective positions, extremists notwithstanding. Dems want to guarantee and Reps wand to restrict rights.
 
steve_bank said:
Elixir said:
Steve said:
the democrats will never consider any kind of compromise bill for a federal law,
Click to expand...

I don’t believe that’s true. They would vote for virtually anything that protects a right, as long as it doesn’t simultaneously rescind rights granted by RvW (or other rights previously upheld by multiple precedents for over a half century).
But the GQP is ALL about rescinding rights, so they will refuse to support anything that doesn’t rescind rights. Anything that grants them, no matter how small, is anathema to their Holy Quest to establish Taliban-like control over women’s bodies.
Click to expand...
On this I disagree. Cortez and the progressives and the Sander's crowd are all or nothing.

Plelosi has had to contend with the progresses in her part.
Click to expand...
RvW is fine with the protections/limitations already within.
 
Here is an idea. If abortion and contraceptives can be banned why not go all the way.
men from getting snipped and women from getting ther tubes tied off.
 
Elixir said:
Playball40 said:
steve_bank said:
The numbers I heard today as to pro abortio in general, about 30% of republicans and 80% of democrats.
Click to expand...
It's not 'pro-abortion' - it's 'pro-choice', 'pro-healthcare', 'pro-safety'.
Click to expand...
Really. "pro abortion" is a major tell.
Click to expand...
Semantics and euphemisms. Whatever you call it, it amounts to the same thing. You can say abort or terminate a fetus if you are squeamish or you can say kill. A life in the process of development is ended. You can spin it and rationalize it as you please.

I support abortion to a point. I oppose late term abortion.
 
steve_bank said:
Elixir said:
Playball40 said:
steve_bank said:
The numbers I heard today as to pro abortio in general, about 30% of republicans and 80% of democrats.
Click to expand...
It's not 'pro-abortion' - it's 'pro-choice', 'pro-healthcare', 'pro-safety'.
Click to expand...
Really. "pro abortion" is a major tell.
Click to expand...
Semantics and euphemisms. Whatever you call it, it amounts to the same thing. You can say abort or terminate a fetus if you are squeamish or you can say kill. A life in the process of development is ended. You can spin it and rationalize it as you please.

I support abortion to a point. I oppose late term abortion.
Click to expand...
In so far as the Roe v. Wade judgement is about to be nixed, it is not a "current moral issue". You are just riding a hobby horse.

Also, since you regard 'pro-choice', 'pro-healthcare' and 'pro-safety' as euphemisms for the squeamish I suggest that 'pro-life' is a euphemism for control of women by the dishonest and some religious retards.

Now go and kill a life in the process of becoming a chicken.

This-is-not-that.jpg
 
steve_bank said:
Whatever you call it, it amounts to the same thing. You can say abort or terminate a fetus if you are squeamish or you can say kill.
Click to expand...

So you're just "anti-killing", and think that pro choice means "pro killing"?
I do not believe that more than a tiny fraction of those who are pro choice are actually "pro killing".
FWIW my wife had several ectopic pregnancies, any one of which would have killed her had not abortion been a safe and legal option. So maybe I am just a tad biased against the fascists.

steve_bank said:
I support abortion to a point. I oppose late term abortion.
Click to expand...

So you support this killing, "to a point"?
So do I.
Now, as to the determination of that point, I would never ask a woman to defer to me or to Steve.
And I'd definitely not leave it up to the government!
The natural, obvious and correct answer is that it is up to the woman whose body is hosting the fetus, embryo or whatever.
By the time it is a viable baby outside the womb, I think there are few who would endorse "killing".
 
steve_bank said:
Elixir said:
Playball40 said:
steve_bank said:
The numbers I heard today as to pro abortio in general, about 30% of republicans and 80% of democrats.
Click to expand...
It's not 'pro-abortion' - it's 'pro-choice', 'pro-healthcare', 'pro-safety'.
Click to expand...
Really. "pro abortion" is a major tell.
Click to expand...
Semantics and euphemisms. Whatever you call it, it amounts to the same thing. You can say abort or terminate a fetus if you are squeamish or you can say kill. A life in the process of development is ended. You can spin it and rationalize it as you please.

I support abortion to a point. I oppose late term abortion.
Click to expand...
So, you oppose an abortion for a woman whose 6 month fetus has died in her uterus? You prefer that she die of sepsis if the dead fetus is not expelled naturally? Is she allowed to have a d&c if all of the placenta isn’t expelled? Or does she have to die of sepsis?

Late term abortions are performed to save the life abs health of the woman.

Is that what you oppose? Women’s lives being saved?
 
Imagine not knowing that women’s lives are at stake in the 2nd and 3rd trimester when things go wrong in the pregnancy.

Imagine not knowing that nearly 100% of abortions in those cases are for the life and health of the woman and mostly for very much wanted pregnancies.

Imagine thinking so little of women that you didn’t even know that.
 
steve_bank said:
Semantics and euphemisms.
Click to expand...

No matter how you spin it and rationalize it, abortion zealotry is for people who don't know right from wrong so they can carry on pretending that their abhorrent, stunted, misogynistic, authoritarian world view is humane. Blind obedience to authority is easier and more comfortable than the struggle of conscience and figuring out right from wrong for themselves.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom