Roe v Wade is on deck

[starwater]

Hundreds of US women charged with pregnancy-related crimes since fall of Roe

Study finds prosecutors targeting low-income women mainly in US south – and figure likely to be an undercount

www.theguardian.com

Fetuses have more rights then women do. Just wait until they arrest pregnant women for smoking cigarettes.

 

[Emily Lake]

I know for sure that I do none of your “somebody” things, and don’t know anyone who does.

Um... you insinuated that I hate women simply because I want to uphold the exact same standards for abortion that existed under RvW.

Except your standards would sometimes kill women. Even ones that weren't at 6 months yet. We've already seen the sort of deaths your position would lead to: the doctors won't act unless they are certain of the situation and are certain they can prove they acted properly. Medical judgment goes out the window.

Yes, yes, all the masses of women who were totally killed when RvW was in place. Yep. Totally.

 

[Emily Lake]

I know for sure that I do none of your “somebody” things, and don’t know anyone who does.

Um... you insinuated that I hate women simply because I want to uphold the exact same standards for abortion that existed under RvW.

Except your standards would sometimes kill women. Even ones that weren't at 6 months yet. We've already seen the sort of deaths your position would lead to: the doctors won't act unless they are certain of the situation and are certain they can prove they acted properly. Medical judgment goes out the window.

Let's suppose you're correct for the sake of argument. So what? Why do you think that has any bearing on the point in dispute? Emily and Elixir aren't arguing over whether Roe v Wade is good policy. They're arguing over whether Elixir infers hatred of women from opposition to abortions. Irrespective of whether Emily is right about abortion, do you in fact think Emily hates women?

I don't even oppose abortion! Elixir infers that I hate women because I SUPPORT RvW.

 

[Elixir]

"transgender people are much more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators"? That's true of pretty much any demographic

Patent bullshit.

What demographic of people in the US is more likely to be a perpetrator than a victim of violence?

Uh … prison populations?
Previously addressed.

I don't even oppose abortion! Elixir infers (sic) that I hate women because I SUPPORT the eventual “camel’s nose” effect of the loopholes and defects of RvW.

FIFY. If that implies that you hate women, there are people who can help you with that.

 

[Emily Lake]

I wasn't trying to address whether she hates women. Rather, I was addressing why people distrust her claim of support for the RvW position.

It's absurd to distrust my claim of support for the RvW position, when that's quite literally the only thing I've ever argued for.

 

[Emily Lake]

FIFY. If that implies that you hate women, there are people who can help you with that.

Like I said, you wrongly think I hate women because I've committed the apparently unforgivable sin of supporting the structure of RvW.

 

[Elixir]

Like I said, you wrongly think I hate women

You wrongly think you know what I think.
THAT seems to be the problem.
I do not think you are in any way ill-intended toward women.
Try to keep that in mind please.

They all say stupid shit, and I'd love it if they would knock it the fuck off. But I'm not interacting with any of them - I'm interacting with you.

Then stop saying stupid shit, like telling people what they think.
Most people KNOW what the fuck they think. Your accusations are only for your own benefit.

 

[Emily Lake]

Like I said, you wrongly think I hate women

You wrongly think you know what I think.
THAT seems to be the problem.
I do not think you are in any way ill-intended toward women.
Try to keep that in mind please.

They all say stupid shit, and I'd love it if they would knock it the fuck off. But I'm not interacting with any of them - I'm interacting with you.

Then stop saying stupid shit, like telling people what they think.
Most people KNOW what the fuck they think. Your accusations are only for your own benefit.

You fucking tell me what I think all the goddamned time. How about you take your own advice for a change?

 

[Elixir]

You fucking tell me what I think all the goddamned time. How about you take your own advice for a change?

Quote me stating what “you think” or telling you what “you believe” ANYWHERE.
Go ahead, do it. I don’t tell you what you believe, I tell you what outcomes become more likely from choices younevince, presumably based upon what you believe.
You’re confused Emily, and that’s the benign assumption.
I can’t count the times you have conflated observations of results with personal attacks on your intent.

 

[Elixir]

You fucking tell me what I think all the goddamned time.

Utter bullshit. QUOTE ME!
You cannot quote me saying "you think (x)" or "you believe (x)" and yet you keep making that dishonest assertion.
Conflating being told what the consequences of your expressed position is, with being told what you think, is either dishonest or stupid or both.
Get that through your skull, and you might yet become an honest broker in discussion.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I know for sure that I do none of your “somebody” things, and don’t know anyone who does.

Um... you insinuated that I hate women simply because I want to uphold the exact same standards for abortion that existed under RvW.

Except your standards would sometimes kill women. Even ones that weren't at 6 months yet. We've already seen the sort of deaths your position would lead to: the doctors won't act unless they are certain of the situation and are certain they can prove they acted properly. Medical judgment goes out the window.

Yes, yes, all the masses of women who were totally killed when RvW was in place. Yep. Totally.

Except your precautions against supposed late term abortions would in the real world result in deaths. You are setting a burden that's sometimes impossible to meet in ER conditions.

 

[Emily Lake]

You fucking tell me what I think all the goddamned time.

Utter bullshit. QUOTE ME!
You cannot quote me saying "you think (x)" or "you believe (x)" and yet you keep making that dishonest assertion.
Conflating being told what the consequences of your expressed position is, with being told what you think, is either dishonest or stupid or both.
Get that through your skull, and you might yet become an honest broker in discussion.

Assuming you're not going to rely on the cowardly "oh I didn't technically say exactly those specific words in exactly that order" defense...

The solution put forth by Emily is that law enforcement shall act instantaneously to intercede to save the fetus if "law enforcement" instantly deems it inappropriate. See? No time delay. YOU introduced the time delay!

And Ems isn’t about commit to any safeguards - she just wants them to magically appear and be kind and effective at preserving the mother’s health, and most importantly, keep the fetus alive.

So, she just wants to kill smaller “hordes”.

It illustrates Emily's advocacy for reproductive health decisions to be mandated by criminal statute, to be made by an unnamed third party's opinion about when blue becomes red.

If your elected official sez they’re “viable” then they are people in Emilyworld.
If the doctor disagrees and acts on their professional opinion, they may be jailed.

We all agree that “personhood” is an acquired trait. The difference is that you want politicians to be the arbiters of which fetae are “people”.
I’d love to hear some cogent rationale for that obviously stupid choice of arbiters.
You can’t answer the question of fetal “personhood”. That’s the bottom line.

Emily’s crazy position:
Pass it off to the politicians - doctors are less trustworthy, and besides, they’re unduly influenced by being PRESENT WITH THE PATIENT AND THEIR FETUS, WHERE THEY CAN MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS AND ACT ON THEM.

I’m sure Emily will protest that her “actual” position is something else. But it isn’t.

Yeah yeah. Repeating that stupidity doesn’t get your fav politician out of the exam room, Emily.
He’s only there to decide if the fetus is “most likely” viable.
YOUR chosen Xpert.
If your congresscritter says it’s viable, it’s a person. Got it. Can’t trust the doctor because doctors are more likely to be on the take or ideologically driven than politicians are.
Fuck that shit Emily. Even YOU can do better.
If you can’t answer the question without the help of a politician, you can’t answer the question “is a fetus a person?” to any practical end.
Your position, in summary is “I’m too much of a weenie to commit to an answer”.

 

[Emily Lake]

I know for sure that I do none of your “somebody” things, and don’t know anyone who does.

Um... you insinuated that I hate women simply because I want to uphold the exact same standards for abortion that existed under RvW.

Except your standards would sometimes kill women. Even ones that weren't at 6 months yet. We've already seen the sort of deaths your position would lead to: the doctors won't act unless they are certain of the situation and are certain they can prove they acted properly. Medical judgment goes out the window.

Yes, yes, all the masses of women who were totally killed when RvW was in place. Yep. Totally.

Except your precautions against supposed late term abortions would in the real world result in deaths. You are setting a burden that's sometimes impossible to meet in ER conditions.

Again... all those real world deaths that were rampant when RvW was in place, and all the tons and tons of real world deaths that happen throughout Europe and Australia and New Zealand and every other developed nation. Streets awash in blood all over the place.

 

[Derec]

Except your precautions against supposed late term abortions would in the real world result in deaths. You are setting a burden that's sometimes impossible to meet in ER conditions.

Again... all those real world deaths that were rampant when RvW was in place, and all the tons and tons of real world deaths that happen throughout Europe and Australia and New Zealand and every other developed nation. Streets awash in blood all over the place.

I would like to know that as well. Loren, do you have any stats on deaths due to denied medically necessary late-term abortions in jurisdictions that have gestational limits for "on demand" abortion in place?

 

[Elixir]

Assuming you're not going to rely on the cowardly "oh I didn't technically say exactly those specific words in exactly that order" defense...

No, I am taking the "you are un-truthing what I said.
You say I am telling you what you believe "all the time".
I say that you are ... uh ... fabricating (being the strongest permissible euphemism).
SO QUOTE ME.

"The solution put forth by Emily is..." Like the rest of your screed, directly referencing your own "solution", which is the subject of all of those complaints. "You want politicians to be the arbiters of which fetae are “people” addresses your immediate recommendation that legislation be invoked in cases of third trimester abortions.

"Yeah yeah. Repeating that stupidity doesn’t get your fav politician out of the exam room, Emily.
He’s only there to decide if the fetus is “most likely” viable.
YOUR chosen Xpert.
If your congresscritter says it’s viable, it’s a person. Got it. Can’t trust the doctor because doctors are more likely to be on the take or ideologically driven than politicians are.
Fuck that shit Emily. Even YOU can do better.
If you can’t answer the question without the help of a politician, you can’t answer the question “is a fetus a person?” to any practical end.
Your position, in summary is “I’m too much of a weenie to commit to an answer”."

^^^ Where am I telling you what you believe? I'm telling you what you SAID and RAMIFICATIONS of what you said.

When I said "The difference is that you want politicians to be the arbiters of which fetae are “people”", that was the closest thing to evincing YOUR BELIEFS, and I apologize for that poor choice of words but in reality, you had just advocated for politicians to be the arbiters of which fetae are “people”.

Can you not tell the qualitative difference between that and you saying I told you you hate women because of some shit I can't even remember?

TIP: TELL me what you mean if you don't mean what you have already said. "An expert" was what you specifically demanded at the time. If you quoted full context you'd see that I am telling you what the consequences are of what you have already expressed. That should be clear even from what you failed to clip:

"The solution put forth by Emily is..."
"It illustrates Emily's advocacy..."

OTOH, some are just flat re-phrases of your own statements, e.g.
"you want politicians to be the arbiters of which fetae are “people”.

Some are just flat observations, e.g.
"Your position, in summary is “I’m too much of a weenie to commit to an answer”."

If you want to re-litigate every observation of every comment on your expressed position(s) either of us has made, go ahead and have at it.
At least trying to dissemble doesn't expose your positions to further critique.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I can see it being a dignity issue. You were raised with shame about nudity. But I do not believe it's the law's job to protect that.

I don't have shame about nudity. I was raised to very strongly believe that I had an absolute right to consent when it comes to my body. Nobody gets to look at me naked without my consent. Nobody gets to show their naked bodies to me without my consent. Strange men should absolutely not have a right to show up in my gym locker room and walk around with their dicks out just because they say that they have a woman feeling in their minds.

It's great that you, a male, seem to think that it's perfectly fine for males to flash females, as long as they say the right magic phrase and maybe toss on some lipstick first. Stupid uptight prude bitches, being offended because some stranger does something so innocuous as showing off their dicks to women who don't want to see it, am I right? Stupid women just need to STFU and let the males do whatever makes them happy, yeah?

The problem is you think existing nude is flashing.

 

[Emily Lake]

My horrible, horrific, evil position that RvW was a really good policy, and that I'd even be willing to raise the gestational limit for non-medically-necessary voluntary abortions a bit.

 

[Emily Lake]

I can see it being a dignity issue. You were raised with shame about nudity. But I do not believe it's the law's job to protect that.

I don't have shame about nudity. I was raised to very strongly believe that I had an absolute right to consent when it comes to my body. Nobody gets to look at me naked without my consent. Nobody gets to show their naked bodies to me without my consent. Strange men should absolutely not have a right to show up in my gym locker room and walk around with their dicks out just because they say that they have a woman feeling in their minds.

It's great that you, a male, seem to think that it's perfectly fine for males to flash females, as long as they say the right magic phrase and maybe toss on some lipstick first. Stupid uptight prude bitches, being offended because some stranger does something so innocuous as showing off their dicks to women who don't want to see it, am I right? Stupid women just need to STFU and let the males do whatever makes them happy, yeah?

The problem is you think existing nude is flashing.

The problem is that you seem to think that women shouldn't have a right to consent.

But let me clarify for you: I don't think existing nude is flashing. For example, I don't think that men in male single-sex showers are flashing, nor do I think that women in female-specific changing rooms are flashing, nor do I think that members of both sexes at a mixed-sex nude beach are flashing.

On the other hand, I think that male people, regardless of how they identify in their minds and/or souls, going into female-specific intimate spaces with their dicks out is flashing.

Do you think that ALL gyms and showers and prisons should be made mixed-sex by law?

 

[Elixir]

My horrible, horrific, evil position that RvW was a really good policy, and that I'd even be willing to raise the gestational limit for non-medically-necessary voluntary abortions a bit.

The road to the hell we're in was paved with such lovely intentions.
I don't know that a solution exists as long as misogynist billionaires rule the world.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I wasn't trying to address whether she hates women. Rather, I was addressing why people distrust her claim of support for the RvW position.

It's absurd to distrust my claim of support for the RvW position, when that's quite literally the only thing I've ever argued for.

The devil is in the details.

You proposed some onerous requirements on third trimester abortions--things that simply couldn't be met in smaller facilities. And as we have seen with other quests to ban "improper" abortion it comes down to whether they can prove it's proper, rather than the best medical estimate. How do you know how far along a pregnancy is? It's sometimes impossible to prove it's at less than 6 months. You argued for RvW with booby traps.