advertisement


Roe vs Wade overturned

From what I understand, emergency contraception (morning after pill or copper uid) are not considered abortion by law. They are both highly effective. I only mention this is as it has some bearing on the rape situation.

You mean IUD? If so, it's not something that works after the fact.
 
From what I understand, emergency contraception (morning after pill or copper uid) are not considered abortion by law. They are both highly effective. I only mention this is as it has some bearing on the rape situation.
Medical abortion and IUD are both targets of the Christian Taliban. They interrupt future life formation and are, therefore, murder.

Within this paradigm, there can't be an exception for rape or incest, since the intent is immaterial to life formation. If a fertilized egg has all the rights (and more) of a 20-30 year old human being, then its' future life can and will be considered more important than the life of an actually existing person. There is a number of well-recognized philosophical, religious and moral oxymorons imbedded in that view, but current incarnation of mysoginist Christianity ignores it.

Ironically, this radical view of life threatens the technology developed to help infertile couples (like us) to have children (now 22 years old). While IVF treats embryos with respect, it will fall far short of the Christian Taliban requirements to treat a single cell as a human being. IVF clinics will close in Republican states - but at least there will be a lot of unwanted pregnancies and even more unwanted children there.

This view also runs afoul of the Jewish religion, which values actual life over potential life and requires abortion in many circumstances, including psychological well-being of the woman. This rational religious approach neatly alligns with the views of the American public overall, but Christian Taliban's stranglehold on American politics makes this irrelevant.

Taliban has already started a campaign to convince the American Christian public that Jewish religion should be ignored on abortion - because most Jews are just too damn secular. I am sure the Catholic Supreme Court will put the Jews in their place soon.
 
Ironically, this radical view of life threatens the technology developed to help infertile couples (like us) to have children (now 22 years old). While IVF treats embryos with respect, it will fall far short of the Christian Taliban requirements to treat a single cell as a human being. IVF clinics will close in Republican states - but at least there will be a lot of unwanted pregnancies and even more unwanted children there.
The tragedy is that the people who talk about banning abortions mainly talk about the scenario of "promiscuous young woman of some means who should know better but basically uses abortions as a contraceptive because she's lazy and inconsiderate" which may happen, but definitely isn't common as far as I am aware. The reality from the people who actually work at the clinics that are now closing seems to be that for most women who have abortions it is a) a big decision, b) a tough decision, and c) something that happens once or twice at the most.

To add to that there are literally dozens of scenarios where termination of the pregnancy is the safest choice all round (physically and mentally for the mother and considering the environment the child would grow up in, impact on siblings etc.) I hadn't even considered the impact on IVF, which just further underscores how blind, stupid and regressive a decision this really is.
 
People make conscious decisions to engage in activities that can result in a range of consequences, many undesirable.

I think that you do that, like everyone else.

Do you deny yourself an opportunity to correct the undesirable consequence of your actions? Or do you just say "oh well, I can't do anything about that?"
100% agree. We should deny treatment to people who have traffic accidents if they chose to venture out into traffic by their own free will then!
 
Sort of - it (unnecessarily) needs approval from two doctors. In the more catholic areas this has regularly been used to restrict access, while NI is 'different'.

Here's a historical time line - Fifteen per cent of maternal deaths were due to illegal abortion in the 20s and 30s.

https://abortionrights.org.uk/history-of-abortion-law-in-the-uk/
Honestly, it sounds restrictive to me - though we (US) got nothing now. Needing doctor's approval doesn't seem like a rights-based model we would like to see.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_Kingdom

Our elder church friend tells us she had two abortions, both before R.v.W. The first was through a doctor declaring her to be an unfit mother and the second was an illegal kind with the hanger.
 
Abortion is a fundamental right for all women. It must be protected. I wish to express my solidarity with the women whose liberties are being undermined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” Emmanuel Macron (Twitter).

A pretty punchy statement from a president. I know Britain Trump has come out in an interview yesterday as pro-choice, but a similar statement actually condemning the Supreme Court would be welcome.
 
Supreme Court's decision on abortion could open the door to overturn same-sex marriage, contraception and other major rulings

The majority opinion from Justice Samuel Alito attempted to wall off its holding in Friday's abortion case from those other rulings, but Justice Clarence Thomas wrote separately to call explicitly for those other rulings to be revisited. "In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell," Thomas wrote, referring to decisions on contraception, sodomy and same-sex marriage.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/06/24/politics/abortion-ruling-gay-rights-contraceptives/index.html

Unbelievable. If I was a queer person living in the US I'd be making plans to move to a liberal state now.
 
There appears a good correlation between states likely to ban abortion and state that have the death penalty.

There is a moral and logical disconnect between being pro life and pro death that reveals the the hypocrisy of the US Christian Right

Kind of. But really it is all just anti poor non-white people.
 
It would be interesting to explore a correlation between those who are pro choice when it comes to guns, but anti choice on abortion. Perhaps those vocal on banning abortion should be asked where they stand on banning guns? Maybe start with the Supreme Court?
 
It would be interesting to explore a correlation between those who are pro choice when it comes to guns, but anti choice on abortion. Perhaps those vocal on banning abortion should be asked where they stand on banning guns?

You'd be surprised how many seemingly educated liberals support the right to bear arms
 
There appears a good correlation between states likely to ban abortion and state that have the death penalty.

There is a moral and logical disconnect between being pro life and pro death that reveals the the hypocrisy of the US Christian Right

Not necessarily. There are plenty of ‘eye for an eye’ justifications for violence and murder in the old testament and in a book as conflicted and contradictory as the bible the religious fundamentalist will always opt for the most extreme. The pacifist/leftist teachings of Jesus will always be ignored if they contradict the violent white supremacy of the increasingly fascist Republican extreme right. They could happily use the Christian bible to justify lynchings, justify slavery etc, as the KKK etc do to this day. They will always find something in the old testament to support their extremism. It’s all in there.

PS No one should be in any doubt, the Christian terrorists in the US Supreme Court are coming for LGBTQ+ folk next. As a real minority group they won’t be able to fight back. If these far-right Christian fundamentalists can win against women, which represent half of the population, then the LGBTQ+ community stands no chance. They are in an exceptionally vulnerable position right now.
 
Not necessarily. There are plenty of ‘eye for an eye’ justifications for violence and murder in the old testament and in a book as conflicted and contradictory as the bible the religious fundamentalist will always opt for the most extreme. The pacifist/leftist teachings of Jesus will always be ignored if they contradict the violent white supremacy of the increasingly fascist Republican extreme right. They could happily use the Christian bible to justify lynchings, justify slavery etc, as the KKK etc do to this day. They will always find something in the old testament to support their extremism. It’s all in there.

PS No one should be in any doubt, the Christian terrorists in the US Supreme Court are coming for LGBTQ+ folk next. As a real minority group they won’t be able to fight back. If these far-right Christian fundamentalists can win against women, which represent half of the population, then the LGBTQ+ community stands no chance. They are in an exceptionally vulnerable position right now.
You can justify violence and the taking of life, and you can justify the sanctity of life. But you can’t justify both at the same time.
 
PS No one should be in any doubt, the Christian terrorists in the US Supreme Court are coming for LGBTQ+ folk next. As a real minority group they won’t be able to fight back. If these far-right Christian fundamentalists can win against women, which represent half of the population, then the LGBTQ+ community stands no chance. They are in an exceptionally vulnerable position right now.

The really depressing thing is that regardless of who is elected into power the Supreme Court is free to continue it's ultra-conservative agenda. We basically have to wait for them to die off. Trump's legacy could stretch into decades.

P.S. Justice Clarence Thomas is not a nice man. Remember Anita Hill?
 
The tragedy is that the people who talk about banning abortions mainly talk about the scenario of "promiscuous young woman of some means who should know better but basically uses abortions as a contraceptive because she's lazy and inconsiderate" which may happen, but definitely isn't common as far as I am aware. The reality from the people who actually work at the clinics that are now closing seems to be that for most women who have abortions it is a) a big decision, b) a tough decision, and c) something that happens once or twice at the most.

To add to that there are literally dozens of scenarios where termination of the pregnancy is the safest choice all round (physically and mentally for the mother and considering the environment the child would grow up in, impact on siblings etc.) I hadn't even considered the impact on IVF, which just further underscores how blind, stupid and regressive a decision this really is.

You are absolutely right. It is such a misogynistic perspective and I think intertwined with class and race. How can anyone not realise that having an abortion is a very difficult decision, not taken lightly. I know a few women who now in their 60s still shed a tear not in regret but in deep sadness.
 
You mean IUD? If so, it's not something that works after the fact.

I thought so, but no
  • The IUD can be fitted up to 5 days after unprotected sex, or up to 5 days after the earliest time you could have ovulated, for it to be effective.
  • The IUD is more effective than the contraceptive pill at preventing pregnancy – less than 1% of women who use the IUD get pregnant.
 


advertisement


Back
Top