What do you see as the end game on abortion access in the United States?

The impact in Arizona is OB/GYNs will be leaving and the dinosaurs in government, don’t connect the dots.

Just control women, people of color and poor. . . .

End game is Federal laws reversing the right wing controlled states, Roe v Wade will return.

I really think this is coming down to the battle between the religious right and the rest of the country. The religious right began in the 1960s to infiltrate the Republican party. They made strong inroads during the Reagan years and took over during the reign of Newt Gingrich in the 1990s. What we have now is the natural outgrowth of that sequence.

Their aim is to subjugate women and concentrate wealth in the hands of white cismen.

The religious right is the dying old world order, and they are fighting tooth and nail to retain power that they enjoyed for more than 2000 years.

I do not know what will replace them, but I’m hoping it is more nurturing of diversity.

The population overall is in favor of abortion rights.

The legal moves in the opposite direction are the results of Trump loading the SCOTUS with bozos to pander to the “evangelical” bozos in his base.

I don’t think the MAGA/Trump wannabe dictator thing is going to last another 10 years. I think Trump is destined for jail/nursing-home/implosion, and I hope no MAGA successor will overcome the general unpopularity of most MAGA bullshit. It’s reaching public consciousness more and more that the remaining Republicans are mostly cowards pandering to fools and Russian manipulation, and I expect that to crumble within the next 10 years, and the abortion nonsense along with it.

However, undoing the SCOTUS decision that the states choose, may leave certain states with anti-abortion laws for a while, and women there will have to endure that in those places until then. If your daughter stays on the West Coast, she may not have to face the madness on a personal level.

Isn’t there a state ballot measure on this issue headed for voting soon in Arizona?

I anticipate many more fights in the courts and many more ballot measures. So far, Kansas and Ohio have voted directly and indirectly, respectively, on the issue, and even though both states are majority Republican, the result was in the direction of keeping abortion legal.

From my perspective, left-wing politics is getting absurd and wacky with all this focus on identity politics, police defunding, and general America hating banter. You may disagree and that’s fine but a lot of people see it starting to be cult-like and that’s not good. This has caused a window to open for fringe Republicans to gain favor and become the new right wing “mainstream.” This won’t last, They have their own wackadoodle issues that people won’t should not stand for either. If people want abortion rights restored then politics has got to settle down and we have to kick out the ideologues. They’re toxic and destructive. I would want to think huge swaths of the population are much further in the center than the two parties are representing. It depresses me to think about it all to be honest. It still baffles me just how many people are deeply involved with some formal religion. Don’t be surprised when it gets on the ballot in certain states, that the population won’t just vote these rights away. I passed a couple of those brown tourist signs that the DOT puts up in Kentucky yesterday on the way back from the eclipse for the Creation Museum and then one for the Ark encounter. That’s essentially a state endorsement. These people vote, there are way too many of them and that should scare you. It scares me.

New Jersey has made abortion a state Constitutional protected right:

“Abortion will remain legal in New Jersey. In 2022, New Jersey enacted a statutory protection for abortion as a fundamental right and the state’s highest court recognized the “fundamental right of a woman to control her body and destiny” under the New Jersey constitution.”

New Jersey – Center for Reproductive Rights

I think abortion rights will be like a ping pong ball for the next few years.

I think states will keep putting abortion on the ballot, and more often than not, abortion stays legal to some extent in each state or goes back to being legal to some extent if it is banned right now.

My guess is within the next five years there will be a religious pro-life woman, or maybe even some pro-life women and men, who are well known, have some status, either wealthy or powerful or celebrities, who have something horrible happen to them or a family member regarding lack of access to terminate a pregnancy and are brave enough to speak up and out. That’s partly what happened with HIV to eventually get some things to change.

It was a woman dying in Ireland that helped push making abortion legal there. A woman happy to be pregnant and already miscarrying, but became septic and could not get medical help, because of a heartbeat law.

I think right now the extreme pro-lifers see the stories in the news about girls and women not being able to get an abortion as liberals trying to scare people. We need a well known pro-life Republican who the Republicans trust and respect to have something bad happen for it to matter to them. I don’t wish anything bad on anyone, but I do think that will help them wake up.

In ten years I think abortion will be legal in all 50 states and DC, but in the meantime it will take a while to get there.

If Trump is elected president will he sign off on an abortion law at the federal level? I think he will if it is 15 week. Will he do it for 6 weeks, heartbeat, or no abortion at all? Maybe, if it will make him money. If Biden is president will he sign a law to keep abortion legal in all 50 states? I think so, I think he will sign a Roe type of law. I think the bills need to be “moderate” to make it through. Viability was moderate to me, but even 15 weeks with exceptions is better than nothing, and over 90% of abortions are done in the first 12 weeks anyway. I much rather it be 22 weeks, which covers CVS prenatal testing and amniocentesis with some time to make decisions and find a doctor who does a later D&X or D&E. Even under Roe it was difficult in some states to find a doctor to do the second term procedure even when the fetus had severe abnormalities making it impossible for it to live.

I have said since Roe was overturned that the Republicans are full of crap that they are fine with states deciding, and the main goal is to get a federal law. The average Republican might buy into the states’ rights story, but I firmly believe the people at the top of funding pro-life initiatives are liars when they use the states’ right line, and they always wanted an anti-abortion federal law.

The irony of turning over Roe is Roe limited abortion!

@janbb I don’t see how state law can protect women if the federal law makes abortion illegal in the United States of America. Hopefully, we never get to the point that all abortions are illegal in the US.

In one word – Control.

Very uncertain future for sure. A constitutional amendment is exactly what is needed here. In fact, without government reform, the control of this issue by a powerful minority may persist for years. This is an example where the theory and rhetoric that has fueled elections is being laid bare when put into practice, and hopefully voters are realizing that they’ve allowed so much of their own power to slip away, that even a vast majority cannot achieve the change it desires, and we will get the structural changes we need to make government work again.

I think that the right are waiting for Jesus to come back with clarification on the bibles loose ends?

I think that, as with so many other topics, the pendulum will swing too far one way and then too far back the other to over compensate. We saw things go too far with the RvW ruling and now things are swinging back the other way. But not everywhere. As was mentioned, your daughter is in California where she can get an abortion. Might want to ask why having an abortion is so necessary, though. Rape is relatively rare for a reason as is incest. The vast majority of abortions are for convenience. Apparently convenience is not a good reason for using birth control and not conceiving though.

But looking at AZ laws there seem to be quite a few that tend to argue with one another. The one that should be most concerning is the 1864 which banned abortion except in the case of where the mother’s life was in danger. But there are so many others that, if you view them as unacceptable, you might need to check your moral compass.

I’m proud of Kansas for once.l

From Google:
*While the Legislature has strong anti-abortion majorities, the state Supreme Court declared in 2019 that the state constitution protects abortion rights, and Kansas residents decisively affirmed that position in a statewide August 2022 vote.”

I hope MTG gets knocked up on accident.

I think we’ll weed out the nut cases in the next 10 years.

@Dutchess_III I think she is playing around with House Rep GAETZ! That would interesting . . . !

Help I agree with Trump on this…

@Lightlyseared….are you male or female?

I don’t have a crystal ball, but I think there will be radically different laws between states. There will be court cases that probe the Supreme Court to find out where the most restrictive laws finally hit the wall with the SC. Many of the most conservative states will push for similar laws. Women in those states will have much higher risks during pregnancy, I would imagine the best OBs will leave those states for ones that embrace healthcare providers instead of second-guessing their medical decisions and threatening incarceration at every turn.

The data will reflect such outcomes with higher mortality and complication rates, greater number of premature and unhealthy babies being delivered, higher infant mortality, much higher costs resulting in higher premiums in such states. Rich women or their daughters will travel to other states for abortions. Poor women and girls will be forced to carry infants to term. This will lead to higher costs for programs such as WIC and school lunch subsidies.

@Lightlyseared – you do not. Trump doesn’t have beliefs. One cannot agree with him, fundamentally.

@Lightlyseared Trump was a Dem who bragged that he believed in abortion until he found out that he could become President if he said otherwise. When his 2nd wife was his mistress, he got her pregnant & he attempted to FORCE her into having an abortion. She refused & went public with his demands. He left his wife & 3 small children to marry his mistress after she had the baby. That’s why he treats Tiffany like shit. He can’t stand her because he didn’t want her. In order to continue to live a life of luxury, Marla signed away her soul to protect that baby!!! You have a wonderful roll model!!!

@Caravanfan I don’t have a real response to your Q other than that there’s a lot of right wingers who are in for a shock. I pray a LOT that we come back to our senses & STOP the madness!!!

@Smashley & @LadyMarissa Yesterday Trump slammed the Arizona decision saying it went too far. Which I agree with.
I’m fully aware that Trump is a despicable example of a human being and the fact that 50% of Americans think he’s both electable as and the best candidate for president is quite frankly terrifying. But that doesn’t change the fact that I agree with the statement that the Arizona court decision went too far.
Now I understand that some Americans will take the view that they disagree with Trump on everything on principle and that perhaps in this case they think the Arizona court’s decision was perfectly reasonable and acceptable…

@wulfie. What do you mean I need to check my moral compass? I am choosing to ignore your veiled insult at my daughter but I did note it.

@seawulf575 You don’t seem to understand how many women need “abortions” due to pregnancies having significant problems. You are essentially trapping women in their bodies. Most women get pregnant on purpose during their lifetime, so almost all women take on the risk of pregnancy. You don’t see pregnancy as a risk obviously. You don’t respect the actual medical and health situation of pregnancy.

@Caravanfan I apologize if you thought I was insulting your daughter. But you said you were glad she was in California where she can readily get an abortion basically at any time for any reason. That points to the idea of using abortion as a contraception.

You asked a question about Arizona abortion laws. I posted a citation listing all the various laws on abortion in AZ. Most of them are fairly reasonable. What it looks like is that they have a mish-mash of laws, some of which tend to conflict with others, that they need to iron out. Take out the one archaic law and most are fairly reasonable restrictions. If you disagree, I believe you need to check your moral compass. Most of these laws allow reasonable time in the pregnancy to get an abortion, they have restrictions that protect the woman, they have laws that spell out when an abortion is specifically illegal such as partial birth abortions, they have laws against using abortions to traffic in human body parts…most are laws that a normal sane person could live with and are, in fact, beneficial for everyone involved including the baby.

But given all the options for birth control these days including Plan B pills, why are you, as a medical doctor, so hot to push abortion as another form? I would think at least you might consider the spread of STIs as a strong reason for using condoms.

@seawulf575 I have learned in leadership training that when ever anybody writes or says something, followed by a “but” and then something else, what they really mean is the something else. So I do not accept your apology.

Where did I say I was hot to push abortions?

@Caravanfan Where did you say you were hot to push abortions? With your entire question. You attacked the AZ laws (which I know you didn’t research) because they limited abortions but felt relieved your daughter was in CA where they are readily available.

My point is and always has been that abortions have a place, but being used as a contraception effort in lieu of actual personal responsibility is not it. You, apparently, believe that personal responsibility is secondary to having abortions. STIs also are a by-product of unprotected sex. Yet you still seem to believe that pushing condoms is less preferable than pushing abortions. If you disagree with this, then why don’t you, as a medical professional, put out a public service announcement right now telling people that having protected sex is better than abortions?

As for my apology for your daughter, my answer to you is “whatever”. Accept it or don’t, I really don’t care. Let me point out that you are the one that brought her into this discussion. If you don’t want her discussed, don’t add her to your question.

@seawulf575 A woman should be free to choose if she wants an abortion regardless of the reason why she wants an abortion. The reason why she wants an abortion is nobody else’s fucking business. Full stop. Contraception, by the way, should also be fully legal and freely available to anybody who wishes to use them. And the decision to use contraception or not is (checks notes) nobody else’s fucking business.

@Caravanfan And yet, many people view that thing growing inside the woman as a human being. Even legally it is treated as a human being…except when the term abortion is applied. Then it is no longer a human being. So does a woman get to determine who is and isn’t a human being? As a medical professional, what is your opinion? The zygote has unique DNA. At a point in the development it has a heart beat, it can react to external stimulus. It begins moving on its own without the mother making it move. At what point do you, as a medical professional, view it as life? OB/GYNs treat them as living things. They show this by tracking health stats of that thing growing inside the mother differently than they do the stats of the mother. The courts have ruled this is a living being when it is killed by someone other than the mother and her medical provider. Kill a pregnant woman and you get two murder charges. Murder is defined as the taking of a life. If it is a life for that aspect why is it not a life for abortion? Abortion is the ONLY time people refuse to admit it is a life. So go ahead, educate us as a medical professional. When does life start?

@Caravanfan The whole problem with the entire abortion topic is the inconsistencies involved surrounding the unborn child. That is why we have had to put laws into place…because of those inconsistencies. And in some cases, it is the laws that create the inconsistencies.

@seawulf575: “And yet, many people view that thing growing inside the woman as a human being.”

Who gives a shit?

I knew a guy who was convinced that Robert Redford and the FBI had conspired to implant a device in his head that allowed them to read his thoughts and talk to him.

@hat “Who gives a shit?” Many people. If it is a human being, killing it is wrong. To ask “Who gives a shit” is something a psychotic or sociopathic person would say. So which are you?

@seawulf575: “If it is a human being, killing it is wrong.”

But you don’t believe that. You just don’t. I’ve been here since 2011 listening to you explain why it’s not wrong to kill a human being.

@seawulf575 Lets say the fetus is a human being, does the government make YOU keep other human beings alive at the expense of your own body?

So, I’m not afraid to call abortion murder, we are usually ending a life. I believe the line between fetus and person is very grey and not binary as people want to argue. But, I’m honestly ok with it as are many people. It’s a decision that should be between the parents of the child and the doctor treating them with a heavier emphasis on the needs/desires of the mother. This is something the gov’t has no business in other than ensuring adequate medical care (another discussion). There needs to be better support after as well. Abortion has to be traumatic for most who make the decision. It’s not generally something people do all willy-nilly on a whim. It’s more often a medical necessity. Collectively as a society, we need to be ok with abortion. We just don’t have to like it.

@Lightlyseared – I’m saying that despite the fact that Trump recited a position that you agree with – this is not policy, it is not belief, it is not a platform, and it is not a promise. Everything he says is only, has always been, and always will be, an angle, and it will be discarded whenever necessary. You cannot support Trump without being a bad person.

If abortion were truly an issue of murder and killing, then there are no “acceptable circumstances” or exceptions. A blanket ban is the only option. People are not okay with “some murder”. If killing an unborn child is wrong, then it should not be allowed under any circumstances, which is what many anti-abortion people believe. Saving the life of the mother (the only exception allowed by the new Arizona law) is potentially an exception because now we are dealing with another person who may lose their life, which is generally the only situation in which we view killing as acceptable (in self-defense).

To me it seems perfectly logical that the debate either rests on a total ban or few restrictions. The “middle ground” options are inherently unstable and tend to gravitate toward one or the other over time.

@Demosthenes ” People are not okay with “some murder”.” But they are. Most people are even though they won’t readily admit to it. An example would be the mental gymnastics they use to define their position on if/when a fetus is a person. Hint, it’s not a person at conception and it is a person sometime before birth. People who give this a hard line are experiencing cognitive dissonance. Most people are in favor of abortion and also realize there is no hard line between a clump of cells and a human being. They’re essentially ok with murder and I’m one of them. I’ll just fess up to it though. There are other examples like factory-farmed meat. I do believe we murder animals, but I also believe it’s necessary to a degree. Then there is war which can be justified in rare occasions, and capital punishment which I’m generally against but many people are for.

I think the government will pivot to semi-support the limited abortions (incest, rape, mothers health) because of population decline and the economic decline.

@Blackwater_Park I think semantics are important here because “murder” is unlawful killing. Most people accept that sometimes, killing is not murder, such as in the case of self-defense (which the legal system does not consider to be murder, same goes for manslaughter). I don’t know many people who try and argue that a fetus is not alive—of course it is. But in determining whether it’s murder or an acceptable form of ending a life, an admittedly fairly arbitrary line is drawn. But if you truly believe that an abortion is murder and wrong, then the only situation in which it could be acceptable is when it is not murder, i.e. when it is to save the life of the mother. Other exceptions, like incest or rape, have to be argued from a different standpoint.

Semantics are how people deal with again, their cognitive dissonance on some of these issues. Semantics are not that important in my mind.

Most people who believe abortion is murder probably don’t believe killing someone who broke into your house is murder, even if both are killing. So it does matter, but I brought it up to show that I wasn’t really disagreeing with you. Most people are okay with “some killing”, yes, which may or may not include abortion. Calling it “murder” is generally making a statement about whether you believe it is acceptable or not.

@JLeslie Let’s say a fetus is a human being. Do you actively seek to kill human beings that did nothing to you? That is cold blooded murder. That baby did not ask to be born, did not ask the mother to have unprotected sex, did not do anything wrong at all. And yet that mother looks to kill it because it is inconvenient. My neighbor is inconvenient, do I get to kill him? My boss as inconvenient, do I get to kill him? My ex-was inconvenient for a long time, should I have been allowed to kill her?

@hat When have I ever suggested it is not wrong to kill a human? I have never said any such thing. In fact, when it came up if it was okay to kill in self-defense, I believe my response was that it is never okay to kill, but it is sometimes necessary. Are you suggesting killing an unborn baby is necessary for the convenience of the mother who was too irresponsible as to have unprotected sex as her preference?

Please, jump right in. You have tried comparing a guys delusions to saying a fetus is a life growing inside a woman. Your penchant for bouncing off the proverbial walls is well noted.

@Demosthenes I’m not really disagreeing with you either. Those same people who don’t think killing a person who broke into their house is murder are using the same cognitive dissonance that those who don’t think killing an unborn fetus is murder. Semantics are rigid so they don’t often work in grey area situations, yet people still try to justify certain actions with them as an out, especially politically.

@Blackwater_Park “There needs to be better support after as well. Abortion has to be traumatic for most who make the decision. It’s not generally something people do all willy-nilly on a whim. It’s more often a medical necessity.” I would disagree with that. There are some women that have abortion after abortion after abortion. They are not traumatized by it. They, in fact, get upset if they are questioned about it. And statistics show that most times abortions are not for medical necessity. They are for some version of convenience, whether it is “not ready to have children” or “interferes with career/life goals” or “can’t afford a baby at this time”, or many others like this. All really great reasons to avoid getting pregnant, but apparently not so important as to taking precautions to avoid pregnancy.

@seawulf575 Some women are indeed psychopaths so… Even if it is a decision of convenience it’s not going to be an easy one to make, but you will feel content in believing it is.

@seawulf575 And all of those reasons that you listed that a woman may have an abortion is (checks notes) none of your fucking business. If they do or do not use contraception is (checks notes) none of your fucking business. If they get repeated abortion it’s (checks notes) none of your fucking business.

And no, @Blackwater_Park it is not murder to have an abortion and I am surprised that you succumb to those far right talking points.

@Blackwater_Park It might just be me, but I find it hard to believe that it is that difficult of a decision that eats at the one making it when they do it over and over and over again, never once trying to stop getting pregnant up front. Those two things don’t fit together at all.

@Caravanfan Huh. So how do you feel about gun ownership? Do you have an opinion? Isn’t that none of your fucking business? How did you feel about wearing masks during Covid? Again, isn’t that none of your fucking business? How about getting the vaccines? Again, none of your fucking business? Isn’t it handy to pull that out when you want to shut down discussion? I could come up with just about every single topic and tell you it is none of your fucking business.

Your stance is that anyone can do anything without anyone else having any say in it. That is irrational. Do you practice medicine with that kind of outlook? See another doctor doing something illegal and not say anything? After all, it’s NOYB, right?

@Caravanfan Oh, I don’t subscribe to them. I’ll also say killing animals for food is murder. I’m just not going to fit killing/murder in this convenient little box where we are all supposed to view it as ok and outside of it it’s not. Abortion is fuzzy, it’s fuzzy as hell, so it simply does not fit in that convenient box.

@seawulf575 I think it is actually you, and a few people who think like you, that want to believe those people are common so you can use them as a straw man argument.

@Demosthenes I basically agree with you. I never understood why some people who are “pro-life” are ok with abortion for incest and rape. The one explanation I can come up with is they are basically saying to the pregnant female: you shouldn’t have had sex or you should have been more careful, and since you were a slur and weren’t careful, now you have to live with the consequences. If the girl was raped or a child dealing with incest, they can argue it wasn’t her fault. They are judging and punishing women.

@seawulf575 You didn’t answer my question. You are saying the fetus is a life equal to a full fledged human being. So, I am asking you, can I make a law where YOU have to support another life? Every male in the US must donate blood and be signed up for bone marrow match and liver kidney donation and liver donation. How does it sound?

Your question to me doesn’t square with the premise I live by. I don’t feel a 6 week fetus is a full fledged human being. I think the person already here, the mother, her life is more important and more likely to stay alive than the fetus if I am forced to choose. I rather not have to choose.

I also feel once the baby is viable snd able to be independent outside of the mother then it is a person, even if the baby is still in the womb. I would never support killing an 8 or 9 month healthy fetus, that is a baby to me, but I do support a woman asking to be induced or having a c-section if she doesn’t want to be pregnant anymore. That would be a delivery not an abortion.

I also would say life of the mother there is no question at all that the mother comes first. Making a woman have to change hospitals to get an abortion when her life is in danger is cruel and unusual punishment, but it happens. Republicans are all for stand your ground and defend yourself, except when it comes to pregnant women.

Wulfie is the king of straw man argument. Not going to hit. If you want to ask a question about any of those other topics be my guest. Not relevant to this thread.

^^Oh, just realized this is the thread about where will laws regarding abortion be in ten years. Sorry for straying off topic. Multiple Q’s on similar topics. I doubt seawulf will answer my Q to him anyway. He won’t view a pregnant woman equal to a man.

@Blackwater_Park I like that you think well of people. That is a good thing. But the statistics don’t really bear out your belief. Let me give you an excerpt from this article:

“For 57% of U.S. women who had induced abortions in 2021, it was the first time they had ever had one, according to the CDC. For nearly a quarter (24%), it was their second abortion. For 11% of women who had an abortion that year, it was their third, and for 8% it was their fourth or more. These CDC figures include data from 41 states and New York City, but not the rest of New York.”

Now throw out the first abortion since it doesn’t speak to repeated usage. But 42% of the women that had abortions in 2021 were on their 2nd, 3rd, or 4th abortion. That’s a lot. Even if you get rid of the 1st and 2nd abortions, you are still looking at 19% having either their 3rd or 4th. That’s almost 1 in 5 abortions fall into this category. That’s still a lot.

To say they are so rare as to be a strawman argument is either uninformed or disingenuous.

@seawulf575 That same data shows 93% were in the first trimester. Yes, it is a much easier decision to make then. Also, the abortion rate itself is going down, it’s nearly half of what it was 40 years ago. The data also does not give a reason why people had multiple abortions. You want to think they’re all convenience abortions but it could be for a host of other reasons.

Wulf. You keep making value judgements like “it’s a lot”. Whether it is or not is (checks notes) none of your fucking business. A woman could have 10 abortions in a year and it would still be none of your fucking business.

@seawulf575 Who the hell uses abortion as a “contraceptive”? No one. That’s who.
Do you have any idea what an abortion does to your body?? Thought not.

Really, @Caravanfan‘s notes say all that needs to be said on the subject.

@Caravanfan – what of eugenics, racism and coercion in this no-questions-asked future? While some abortions are good and proper health care decisions, others are not. Some decisions are made for good reasons, some are made for bad reasons. Some are crimes perpetrated upon the mother and the potential child, and some are crimes against society. I’m not making statements about numbers or percentages, but a “see-no-evil” approach is not helping anyone in finding a useful middle ground here.

^ The “middle ground” is the least-defensible position, as is often the case. Honestly, it’s not at all dismissive for @Caravanfan to check his (very accurate and appropriate notes) for the proper response to any talk of reasons or frequency or anything other than what a woman decides to do and conversations she may have with a doctor. Period.

^ Right, but that’s also the position that a racial purist, or genetic perfectionist would take, and you would offer shelter.

^ Complete nonsense.

But again – the “middle ground” with those topics would be morally indefensible as well.

Note: I believe you and I have gone through this specific topic in the past and didn’t get very far. I am not under the impression that I can convince you to change your position. I am just very concerned that people have fallen into the confusion that there is something to be respected about a “middle ground” on most topics.

I am going to use little words. The reason why a woman decides to have an abortion is up to the woman. Period.

@Smashley Eugenics? Are you serious? In 2024 in the US? We aren’t sterilizing women without their consent or holding a gun to their head to get an abortion. No one is forced to have an abortion in the US except maybe if you count a parent pushing their kid to do it. I think it is pretty awful that pro-life compares planned parenthood to people like Hitler. It’s offensive to every Jewish person, Gypsy, and disabled person killed in the Holocaust, and add in Black women in the South in the 1950’s who actually were sterilized without even knowing a lot of the time. A woman controlling her own fertility is not eugenics.

Are you ok with birth control to prevent pregnancy? Is that eugenics?

Women do sometimes get coerced into having abortions by their families and partners. It is a real thing, and I think it is something worth considering.

^^I mentioned the family putting pressure on a girl to abort, are you saying that is eugenics?

I even agree with the pro-lifers that some women use abortion like birth control, getting multiple abortions. but they make it sound like that is 99% of abortions, which of course is not true.

@JLeslie – I’m not debating the numbers. It happens, and the general position of pro-choice is a big shrug. People also abort their pregnancies, or are coerced into aborting, for the fetus being the wrong race, gender, or for being non-terminally defective. The last one, people freely admit to, but you know the other ones happen too. The no-questions-asked thing is stupid and unreasonable. When you come in for a gunshot wound, it’s not your fault and you are entitled to health care, but we’re still going to ask you a few questions. I don’t see why adding some safeguards is so unreasonable. You don’t have to be as hard line as the crazies that have brought us to this point. They were always double loud, but they had nearly half a point. My position is a minority one I know, but it comes from a place of personal experience, and I feel like it’s a portion of what pro-choice needs to grapple with before we can put this issue away forever.

Human genetic engineering is happening now. Countries are culturally rooting out genetic disability to the point where we see precipitous drops in births of children with Down Syndrome and similar non-terminal genetic differences. Genetic child selection is on the horizon. Democrats and Republicans are falling over themselves to protect IVF, because having a child with the right genetics is very important to everybody. Racial animosity is up, so is tribalism, fear of the future and of resource scarcity. People talk about how the movie Idiocracy Is supposedly prophetic. We have cutting edge genetic technologies with ethical implications we can only begin to grasp. Is it really hard to imagine that the promise, and the evil of eugenics could come back?

@Blackwater_Park For the multiple abortions, you want to think they are NOT for convenience. Yet think about that. You said that 93% of abortions are in the first trimester. This is true. So most of those abortions were decided long before the baby had developed enough to determine if it was healthy or not and it likely did not present a major health concern to the mother. To claim anything else is using a strawman argument. So if the choice for abortion is NOT for convenience, what is it for? I can’t come up with anything else. So what this tells us is that for roughly 20% of all abortions, they are done repeatedly by the same woman for convenience. That puts your claim of abortion being so traumatic to the test, doesn’t it? If it is so traumatic, why are the women having 3 and 4 abortions instead of using birth control?

@Caravanfan Well gee, let’s carry your NOYB garbage out. After all, why go stupid only halfway? Statistically, black women have a majority of the abortions. Even though they only make up roughly 13% of the population, they have 42% of the abortions in this country. That could be construed as supporting abortion to be a racist outlook, right? You want to continue to kill a disproportionately large number of blacks before they can be born. But hey, that’s none of my business, right? So if that is the case, then every single claim of racism or homophobia or xenophobia or any of the other labels the left loves to throw around so much become moot. Their views are “None of Your Business”.

This is good to know. You will see this answer again in basically any other thread I feel like using it on.

Oh! and using “little words” is condescending. You have said it multiple times and obviously your vauted medical opinion isn’t getting you the worship you are craving. But look at it this way, other people have their views that disagree with yours but it’s none of your business.

OMG. All these men chiming in on a situation they will never face.
Shut up.
Not you RareBear.

@Smashley I am completely against a government deciding whether a fetus can be or should be aborted or not in the first 6 months. Actually, I don’t want the government in it at all, but no one is aborting/killing babies in the last trimester except in cases where the baby cannot survive anyway. A woman should not have to say why she is aborting to get an abortion pill.

Again, I ask you, is a woman using birth control so she doesn’t get pregnant eugenics? Including condoms, BC pills, diaphragm, all forms of birth control that prevent pregnancy.

I know some countries are pressuring women to abort Down Syndrome babies, I’m against that pressure, but even without government pressure here in the US we abort about 90% of those developing babies. That’s even with the Religious Right pushing memes of how wonderful children with these genetic disabilities are and that abortions are eugenics and that all abortions are bad. Other genetic abnormalities it’s more like 60% abort. Anyway, you can bet pro-life women are also participating in those abortions. In fact I personally know a woman who had to travel to the US to get one of those abortions, and she would never abort otherwise and wanted to be pregnant. In her country she would be forced to have the baby.

Even God sets it up so that in many cases people with these genetic abnormalities are sterile or very low chance of being able to conceive.

Some of the possibilities with genetic engineering is unnerving for sure, but if we can genetically select embryos that don’t have Cystic Fibrosis or Tay Sachs, or other horrible diseases, I’m all for it.

That was the dumbest reference ever @seawulf575.

@Dutchess_III What was dumb about it? The numbers or my skewed take on what they tell us? To be fair, I didn’t come up with that take on things…I’ve actually heard that one put forth before. But it does say something interesting when it comes to @Caravanfan‘s “None of Your Business” nonsense. He isn’t a black woman, so why is he chiming in? It’s none of his business. That’s what I was really doing with the citation…is showing how stupid that comment from him is.

Like it or not, abortion is a societal issue. Anyone that believes that it doesn’t impact everyone is fooling themselves. It increases insurance costs, it stresses marriages, it denies the guy any say at all even though that is potentially his progeny. The woman shares responsibility with the man for the fertilization of the egg. But then she takes all the authority to make a decision on what to do with it. His feelings are not considered. Yet if she decides to keep the baby, he is suddenly held responsible again. Why remove him from the decisions if you want to hold him accountable? I know, it isn’t his body, blah, blah, blah.

My stance on this issue is very simple. If adults would act like adults, show restraint and responsibility before having sex, this issue would shrink to a very small issue. We’d also see a drop in STIs as well. That is the viewpoint that, if more people had, would do more to settling this issue.

@Dutchess_III Men are fully 50% responsible for all pregnancies, so to me their input is essential on this subject. They are also more affected legally in many cases due to child support responsibilities with practically zero recourse due to ‘my body, my choice.’ The number of men paying or being given judgements with no rights to the child is ridiculous.

Additionally most lawmakers are still men, so that perspective is important whichever ‘side’ your’e on. A lot of men have strong opinions and cogent arguments, too, from my experience.
If men were empowered perhaps they’d take more responsibility during intimacy to protect all parties involved. Acting as if they aren’t part of the conversation is irresponsible imo.

@Smashley Eugenics is very much part of the abortion debate for many people, not just the Right. Anyone with strong opinions should understand the legal aspects if nothing else, as part of the reason precedents were recently overturned.

https://harvardlawreview.org/forum/vol-134/abortion-as-an-instrument-of-eugenics/

@KNOWITALL I take your comments about eugenics as you being informative for people on the Q, which I appreciate your commentary and the link, but I am not sure if that reflects your opinion on the topic.

Do you think birth control is eugenics? Regarding limiting race or traits, what is the difference between preventing a pregnancy or aborting a pregnancy? There is none. Both situations you are limiting births.

It was dumb @wulfie because it only counted Black and White females and nothing in-between.
In my case my boyfriend pushed me to abort. I was scared, uncertain…and his was the only advice I had.

@JLeslie I do think eugenics plays a role, perhaps more so in the past than now regarding race. Now people simply can’t afford or want to choose to keep a viable fetus with disabilities for varipus reasons.
Preventing a pregnancy, to me and many others, is the responsible and ethically correct path to prevent the ‘need’ for abortion. The fact that we as a society choose to dehumanize a fetus (acting as if science has not proven a fetus can feel pain and moves away from surgical instruments) is incredibly sad, and statiistically unnecessary.
Due to rising infertility and low birth rate, we’re already seeing military and workforce shortages, as more Boomers pass out of the working stage of life and are not being replaced woth new babies. The writing on the wall, including immigration policy, shows that legal abortion is no longer as favorable to society as had been hoped.

I don’t buy that opposition to abortion is primarily driven by concern about a low birth-rate. As stated, it is much more likely that people of a lower socio-economic status get an abortion. The more affluent and educated you are, the more likely you are to use birth control and the fewer children you are likely to have. Given the grim statistics about my generation and the younger ones unlikely to ever own a home and more likely to be saddled with debt, the incentives to start a family aren’t there (obviously plenty of people are still doing so, but for many it is not going to happen). Abortion has little play in this, other than that most Americans support keeping it legal. Increase the social safety net, lower the cost of living and health care and you might see more families and fewer abortions. But little will change as the socio-economic prospects for many Americans, especially those born into poverty, remain dim.

There is a vast difference between a zygote, and an embryo, and an actual fetus @KNOWITALL.

Damn @Demosthenes
I used birth control, had an abortion and had 2.5 children by choice because I was worried about overpopulation.
What does that say about me?

@Dutchess_III I’m sorry that happened to you. Bullying by family and sperm donor is quite common and often unreported thus hard to quantify/prove sadly.

@KNOWITALL My point is, preventing pregnancy is the same as aborting if you take out the discussion about whether abortion is ok from the perspective of “life” and just focus only on eugenics.

If someone is using birth control they are limiting more babies like themselves from being born.

@JLeslie Well if you aren’t black I suppose you may not see a difference. Not trying to imply you are a racist or anything but it does get ignored a lot in abortion discussions, even here.

Black babies are aborted 4x more than whites, and many facilities are located in their neighborhoods. They are not given an equal opportunity to even be born.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7436774/

And why might abortion be more common among black women? I think I know why.

The eugenics argument centered on Planned Pregnancy clinics seems to be political and targeted at a Black audience and not primarily about babies with genetic defects. That’s my perception anyway. Just a continued pursuit by the extreme religious right in the Republican party to try to get more votes over to the Republican party. A high percentage of Black people are religious, so the abortion issue is probably a tricky one for them politically.

Are Black women getting pregnant more often with unwanted pregnancies? If they are then if they just use birth control that problem goes away, and still the same amount of Black babies in the end.

Edit, birth rates among Blacks in America are higher than Whites even with all of those abortions. https://www.marchofdimes.org/peristats/data?reg=99&top=2&stop=4&lev=1&slev=1&obj=1

@JLeslie – You asked if I was serious about eugenics in modern America, and my answer is yes. There is no government program requiring children with Down Syndrome to be aborted in Iceland, it just happens nearly every time for some reason. The access is there, and the social pressure is there, so it happens everywhere there is access and social pressure. We have similar social pressures – like you stated. Our abortion rates of fetuses with Down Syndrome and similar non-terminal genetic differences are high, but not Iceland high. I’m not 100% sold that this can’t be worked out culturally, by removing the disincentives for female, dark skinned, and genetically different fetuses being brought to term, and I dislike the idea of bureaucracy in health care, but I’m more upset when vulnerable people are left unprotected.

People are always trying to read into my eugenics concerns as trying to use some kind of wedge to break down abortion rights. It is true that Roe was flawed in it’s reasoning, and it left an obvious moral blind spot, but I don’t want to end access to abortion. I just want there to be accountability and moral clarity. If Roe was right, terminating a fetus for being a girl would be legally acceptable. Opening a clinic called “Free-Abortions-Of-Dark-Skins-R-US” would be legal. The second example is an extreme, the first is not, but both were legal under Roe.

I think there is a difference between contraception and abortion, though both can absolutely be used as tools of eugenics. These aren’t the only tools of eugenics, but they are some of them. Contraception cannot, however, be used to choose particular genders. If it were being weaponized as a tool of eugenics, I think there aught to be consequences. Ultimately, contraception is about the choice to become pregnant with acts of personal free choice with the help of a consenting partner, and abortion is the choice to become unpregnant through a medical procedure. Medicine is exercised differently than other things you have a right to. You have a right to anti-biotics, but not if you don’t need them, that creates harm to society. Why is abortion so much different? All health care is deeply personal, but the state and society still have an interest in it.

@hat – when you’re dealing with extremists, I think it’s reasonable to not pursue a middle ground. The proper position of compromise is going to be a lot closer to the non-extremists version that the true middle. The extremists can be brought into compromise however, when you stray far enough from your side to see a glimpse of their truth, and incorporate it into your own in a way that neutralizes their position without conceding much. When they only have the loudness, but don’t have any point, they can be dealt with. My “middle ground” is to treat abortions like any other form of health care. Available to everyone as needed, when a qualified physician agrees, using guidelines designed to protect the mother from abuse or coercion, and protecting society from a decision based on protected reasonings (gender, skin color, non-terminal genetic difference).

In the end, compromise is worth pursuing. We have to live together, so we have to get over this issue. If we don’t, we’re done.

@Smashley: “when you’re dealing with extremists, I think it’s reasonable to not pursue a middle ground.”

Couldn’t disagree more – on both pragmatic and philosophical grounds. But this is far greater a topic than this thread, which honestly, I have checked out of.

@JLeslie Hitler would be pleased to see his ideas come to fruition. I see it as mass genocide of Hispanics and Blacks over decades. Either way the results of abortion are the same, more whites, less other races.

Of all live births in the United States during 2020–2022 (average), 23.9% were Hispanic, 51.9% were White, 14.5% were Black, 0.7% were American Indian/Alaska Native and 6.4% were Asian/Pacific Islander.

Available to everyone as needed, when a qualified physician agrees, using guidelines designed to protect the mother from abuse or coercion, and protecting society from a decision based on protected reasonings (gender, skin color, non-terminal genetic difference).

I wouldn’t disagree with that, but I think the last part there can get a bit dicey because determining the reason for an abortion is not necessarily going to be easy or clear. A woman doesn’t necessarily need to state a reason, as far as I know, as long as she is within the legal window for an abortion. Are we going to institute some kind of survey like when you cancel your streaming subscription: Are you aborting for a) financial reasons, b) changed my mind, c) I don’t like my baby’s race, and if you choose c) you get denied? Who then would be honest?

Protecting from abuse or coercion is more workable and I have no problem with doing so.

@Smashley A clinic can’t discriminate that way, so it would not be legal, just like you cannot only serve food at a restaurant to white people.

So, what do you think is the goal of the eugenicists you are talking about present day? What is the evil you see? What are they promoting? Health? Race? As I pointed out above, the birth rate of Blacks is still higher than whites even with Black people having a much higher abortion rate. Looking at the whole picture there is not discrimination.

Why are you so concerned about children with significant genetic abnormalities? I am the first to value them as human beings when born, and I want to support them and help the families, but if we have them all born, first their proportion to the population will be higher now than in nature, because we do use birth control and women have fewer babies and often start later with having babies than what would occur without birth control. Without birth control, and without abortions, many more babies would be born to young mothers and the ratio of downs syndrome would be very low.

I’m just saying family planning of any sort manipulates births.

Some of these children lead a life of suffering, depending on the abnormality or disease. Would you want a child to having unending suffering over not being born?

@hat – so you think pursuing a middle ground with extremists is a good idea? Doesn’t this just incentivize extreme positions? Did you misspeak or do I totally not understand you? I thought you were just saying compromise was unacceptable in general, which is what I was responding to, but now it’s something you strongly believe in, even with extremists?

I misspoke. (and misread your response). Didn’t see the “not” in your sentence. Way too distracted today.

@Dutchess_III The graph listed white, black, Latino, and other along with totals. It pretty much covered everything. Whites at about 68% of the population have 30% of the abortions, blacks have 42% of the abortions, Latinos have 22% of the abortions and other is at 7% Not sure what you are seeing on that link.

@KNOWITALL Of all live births in the United States during 2020–2022 (average), 23.9% were Hispanic, 51.9% were White, 14.5% were Black, 0.7% were American Indian/Alaska Native and 6.4% were Asian/Pacific Islander.

The breakdown of the population is 19% Hispanic, 58.9% White not Hispanic, and 13.6% Black. So, the Hispanics and Blacks are increasing faster than White people as a percentage to the population, not the opposite.

@seawulf575 You can take a look at the statistics I have written also.

Aren’t you one of the jellies who accuses minority women of using abortion as birth control? Are you against birth control to prevent pregnancy? Are you saying minorities should be making babies at faster rates than white people? How much faster will make you confortable that we don’t have to worry about being accused of eugenics?

@JLeslie Any Census or other search shows the US is still predominantly white as of now. And over 49.6 million genetically German heritage. Ironic.

People also ask
What race makes up most of the U.S. population?
Currently, the white population makes up the vast majority of the United States’ population, accounting for some 251.6 million people in 2022. This ethnicity group contributes to the highest share of the population in every region, but is especially noticeable in the Midwestern region.Oct 6, 2023

Fun fact: GenZ will be the least white population the US has had based on current data.

@KNOWITALL So what? More white people settled here originally. Why is the German statistic ironic? Plus, when I google I get 12% of the US population is German according to the census.

75% are white alone (meaning no other race reported). That would be your 250 million number. 58% are white not Hispanic, which would be roughly 191 million.

In your Gen Z are you counting white Hispanics as white?

There is a stat that in 2045 non whites become the majority in the US, but that is only if you count White Hispanics as not white.

The political right and left spin the statistics and leave out clarification on purpose. Don’t just accept the numbers. I am not saying they lie, I am saying they purposely don’t well define them.

So, we are back at, the birth rates are higher among minorities even with your statement about them getting more abortions relative to white people.

I seem to remember discussions about white culture a few years ago, I don’t remember exactly where you stood on that, but I find it ironic that some Republicans who are so concerned about what they call white culture and then they are concerned about minorities getting abortions and want to make sure they make more babies to catch up to the white population proportions? It makes no sense.

I just want women to get to choose whether they have a baby or not, I am not trying to promote one race over another why are you and seawulf doing that? Births probably have more to do with social class than anything. Maybe partly religiousity too. I want to raise everyone up economically, which usually results in fewer births and fewer abortions. Or, at least make sure every woman has access to birth control regardless of their economic situation.

@JLeslie The point is that most of the millions of babies killed via abortion are black by a large percentage. And I very much think that should be a concern as that particular race, as your own, has been systematically oppressed, targeted and abused enough. When clinics are profiting financially on oppressed communities, it is worth noting.

I do remember the white culture thread, as you said white culture didn’t exist, and I disagreed. I’m not sure how that relates to abortion.

So let’s see,
since I asked this question about woman autonomy over their bodies, I’ve been called a Nazi, a eugenecist, a racist who hates blacks, A Hitler lover, far left wing, far right wing, a money grubbing doctor,

@hat am I missing anything? I just want to be complete.

@Caravanfan It’s unbelievable. Is this the Q that you were called a lefty? That stood out to me. Lol.

@KNOWITALL I do care and empathize with Black people regarding being targets of hate, oppression, and violence, but to compare the number of Black people to Jews? Jews are 2% of the US population (just over 6 million people) and probably have one of the lowest birth rates in the US if I had to guess. Black people are 13% of the US population around 42 million people.

Jews are les than ¼ of of 1% of the world population (17 million) and Black people if I remember correctly are just over 1 billion around the world. Billion with a B.

@Demosthenes….why?

@JLeslie I see the statistics of live births you posted. That tells us nothing. I gave a citation of statistics for abortion which is, after all, the topic of the question.

@Caravanfan You didn’t ask a question about women’s autonomy over their bodies. You asked a question about how the laws concerning abortion with morph over the next ten years. And I, above all others, am oh so familiar with getting called a Nazi, a racist, and all the rest. Grow up.

Well, in your case it’s actually true.

^Ahh…so you really don’t have a problem calling people names on these pages, you just get pouty when it is directed at you. Got it.

@JLeslie The only comparison was shared oppression and continued targeting of both races.

We’ll see how each state votes in the next few years and go from there.

Arizona didn’t become a state until 1912. On the news (mainstream media news) they pointed out that irony, them reverting to a law that was made before they were even a state.

Well, it makes sense. The only way states can ban abortion is by avoiding a vote. Anything other than letting the people decide.

Wulfie if you thought that was pouty then you completely misread the intent of the post. But that’s not surprising to me.

@Caravanfan When you mention all the things you see as slights to you and then ask @hat for confirmation, that is pouty. Tell yourself whatever you need to, but it shows how pouty you were

@seawulf575 I didn’t mention the live births, @KNOWITALL did, and I responded by saying I don’t think live births has any significance looking at her stats. Her stats definitely don’t support the Republican eugenics argument, since her stats show more births among minority populations in the US.

That was part of the joke that went over your head.

@JLeslie Eugenics is an interesting term. It has been used in both a positive and negative way. Eugenics has been presented positively to promote childbearing by the better or fitter class of people and it was presented negatively to suppress reproduction in the inferior stock. How you define fit or inferior is up to you. In this nation’s past, it was generally along racial lines with the blacks being viewed as the inferior stock. Not my views, just how it was. You can thank the Democratic Party for pushing that idea for centuries.

You said in a previous post that I could look at your statistics too. The statistics you posted in that were all about live births. You posted a citation earlier from the March of Dimes that also dealt with fertility and birth rates. The one I posted showed abortion rates which is why I pointed out the difference.

You also asked me several questions and I apologize for not answering. I will do so now.

“Aren’t you one of the jellies who accuses minority women of using abortion as birth control?” No. I don’t put a distinction on race when it comes to using abortion as birth control. Never have. I have pointed out that blacks have disproportionally more abortions than other races but that was me being facetious about the idiocy of pushing abortions without pushing responsibility.

“Are you against birth control to prevent pregnancy?” Not at all. In fact if you go back and look I have suggested that be used to avoid having to get abortions. It is the responsible way to avoid pregnancy. I don’t see any logic in insisting to have unprotected sex and then saying the results are unacceptable, and then turning around and paying a bunch of money for an abortion when you could have spent far less on the pill or even less on a condom (which would also help protect against STIs).

Are you saying minorities should be making babies at faster rates than white people?” Not at all. As mentioned before, my views on abortion are race free. I have been very consistent in my view that punishing the innocent unborn baby for the idiocy of the mother and father is just wrong.

“How much faster will make you confortable that we don’t have to worry about being accused of eugenics?” Again, I’m race free in the idea of abortion. I did mention racism earlier to be facetious. I have heard that argument made before and in today’s world of being accused of being racist for everything under the sun including just being white, it fits when you see how disproportionate the number of abortions are. I find most claims of racism to be nothing but politically motivated. But then so are most arguments about abortion.

In the end I believe most people end up in relatively the same spot on the issue. Some abortions are going to be acceptable and that there should be limitations put on them. Things like this question where it is worried about an old law that kicked into being active again following the Dobbs decision are silly. Pretty much everyone in AZ, Democrat and Republican, recognize that as being a bad plan. Both sides are currently working on laws to replace the 1864 law that will fall somewhere in the middle of the debate. I know one of the Dems has proposed a bill similar to the one Tran offered up in Virginia…any abortion, any time, even during delivery. I have also heard that some Republican offered up a no abortions at all. Both of those are radicals in my opinion

^^Sounds like Eugenics shouldn’t be a concern for you regarding abortion in the US then.

If you are ok with birth control you are ok with women limiting how many children they have if any.

@JLeslie I think the problem I have is where the two things are used. Birth control is used up front, is relatively cheap, and shows adult responsibility when having sex. Abortion is done well after the fact, is more costly, doesn’t do anything about stopping STIs, and shows a completely lackadaisical attitude towards life in general. The former is what a healthy society embraces, the latter is what a sick society embraces.

There are other aspects of abortion that I feel are wrong which I have voiced on these pages for the most part. And as much as the pro-abortion rank and file want to vilify anyone that speaks out against abortions as being some sort of rabid radicals, it was their side that proposed legislation to allow abortions for whatever reason up to and including during birth. Some will say that is just silly, that no one would do that, but it was done. And the left will not readily admit nor condemn it. I’m sorry, call me old fashioned, but chopping up a baby as it is being born seems a bit gruesome to me. Ghoulish even. But hey, if you’re okay with that, more power to you.

I have been very clear that I’m okay accepting abortions to a point. But the danger there is the left is never happy with agreeing and holding to the agreement. If we said no abortions after 15 weeks unless the mother’s life is in danger and everybody agreed, within a year there would be a push to make it 15 weeks, but with whatever as the reason. Then it would be 20 weeks or 30 weeks and we’d be right back where we started. I’m sorry, the left are nuts. They scream they don’t want the government in their sex lives but then scream they want the federal government to control abortion. I’m exhausted trying to point out all the idiocy that comes out, the illogic, the randomness, the sneakiness and the personal attacks on anyone that disagrees with them.

Oy. Democrats just want abortion to be safe. No one is trying to kill a healthy fetus in the last trimester. That is just total crap. How do you get a safe abortion in TN if the fetus inside of you has no brain? You can’t! What if you find out in the seventh month? You need abortion to be safe, legal, and available if you want to abort that fetus. Pro-choice keeps abortion safe for the pro-lifers.

“They scream they don’t want the government in their sex lives but then scream they want the federal government to control abortion.”

No. We want no government to control abortion. It should be a decision by the woman and her health care provider

@JLeslie Thank you for proving my point. I already mentioned two states where the idea of abortion for any reason up to and even during birth were considered. And yet there you are, saying no one really wants that. Apparently there are people that want that. Look at @Caravanfan as another example. He is continuing to toot that same horn about how abortion should be between a woman and her healthcare provider. Yet he denies reality the same way you just did. He will not actually come out and denounce the facts either. He even goes the extra step to push for federalizing the issue. I don’t get it. The states are far easier to control than the federal. If you don’t like the laws in your state, it is much easier to vote change there than at the federal level. So let me ask you both: if the decision was at the federal level and it was decided that abortions were illegal, would that be okay with you? You’d both accept that? Think about it. All those that don’t think like you fought for years to change the path abortion was taking before. And now it is just controlled by the states.

My suggestion is that if you don’t like how abortion is being controlled in your state, get involved and implement change. If you are in FL why do you care how abortion is done in OH or AZ or IA? To quote @Caravanfan: It’s None of Your Business.

@seawulf575 Are you saying a pregnant women with a fetus inside of her than cannot live should be forced to continue her pregnancy through to when she naturally goes into labor?

Typo: that cannot live.

@seawulf575 Sorry for a third post. Why do I care that women are safe and free in other states? Are you serious?

@seawulf575 No, of course not. If the Federal government decided abortions were illegal of course I would be opposed. I am mostly a libertarian, and I believe that people should have the right to choose what they want to do and not have the government interfere.

Abortion during birth?? Are you nuts @seawulf575??

@seawulf575 is just parroting his supreme leader !

“It must be remembered that the Democrats are the radical ones on this position because they support abortion up to and even beyond the ninth month. The concept of having an abortion in the later months, and even execution after birth — and that’s exactly what it is. The baby is born, the baby is executed after birth — is unacceptable, and almost everyone agrees with that.” Donald J Trump

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4580775-read-trump-abortion-statement/

@JLeslie Do I believe a woman should carry an unviable child to birth? Nope. And I have said as much if that unviability would present a severe health hazard for the mother. But define unviable. See, that is the rub. Is a baby having Down’s Syndrome considered unviable? A Zika baby? How about one that has an abnormality like an underdeveloped arm? The problem I have with a lot of this is that folk arguing in favor of abortion don’t want to get into the details. And then, later on, the window starts to move again. Well a baby that dies in the womb should be aborted (though technically it is already dead). But then it moves to “well, I don’t want to have a baby that has Down’s Syndrome because it would never have any kind of quality of life and I’m not up to raising it properly.” It all ends up coming back to what the woman decides is unviable. So let me ask you: Would you be okay with a law that outlined specific definitions for what is unviable and would you support never changing those definitions unless medical science made them viable?

As for why you should care about women in other states, ask @Caravanfan. He doesn’t believe anyone has any say in a woman’s thoughts on abortion. It is strictly between her and her healthcare provider. So really, showing concern for society is not a valid reason to have an opinion. Saying you care about the well-being of others isn’t reason enough to have an opinion. My viewpoint is that as a member of society I should have a say in what we value as a society. But hey, @Caravanfan says I’m not allowed to.

@Dutchess_III Yep. I posted a part of the transcript on the thread about whether abortion should be decided at the state level. And despite @Tropical_Willie‘s unhinged beliefs, I have no idea what Trump said about this. I went to what someone in the know said. Go to about the 38:45 minute point of the video to get to the pertinent part. It was a suggestion proposed by delegate Cathy Tran in Virginia. She is, of course, a Democrat. One of the other delegates specifically asked her if her proposal meant that is a woman decided to get an abortion when she’s already dilated for birth and even in the process, she could? She affirmed that while that might be rare, that was on the table. Gov. Northam was asked about this as well. He dodged a bit but then stated that his understanding of the proposal was. In fact his answer almost made it worse:

“if a mother is in labor I can tell you exactly what would happen the infant would be delivered the infant would be kept comfortable the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

That almost sounds, in answer to the question he was asked, like he is actually supporting post birth abortion. If the baby was determined to be unviable, it would be delivered, kept comfortable, resuscitated if desired, and then the mother and the doctor could decide if abortion was where they wanted to go. So abortion would be legal even after birth if the mother determined she wanted an abortion. He, of course, walked this back after he was challenged on this, but that was what his understanding of how a bill that he favored would work.

@seawulf575 I’m ok with a law that is 20 weeks for any reason and health and life of the mother or fetal defect after that. I would not be ok with defining specific defects and situations, because being perfect about naming every situation is impossible.

The spirit of the law matters and the spirit is to protect a woman from being trapped in her body with a pregnancy, while still recognizing at 7 months a baby becomes viable outside of the womb, so at that point, in my mind, it is its own person. At 6 months I’m still inclined to say the baby should not be aborted, except in an extreme circumstance. I recognize the baby is fairly well developed, but if the baby is born it is likely to need extreme measures and have some permanent problems, so the 6th month I even contradict myself and say I feel abortion should not be done on a healthy fetus.

Here’s the big difference between you and me, you think woman want to abort at 9 months and kill their babies, even though that is a pretty sick notion and it is proven over the last 50 years that when women can abort up through viability that over 90% of abortions are done the first 12 weeks. After 12 weeks the majority of abortions are pregnancies that have problems.

The Florida stat I read was 94% within 12 weeks before DeSantis changed the law. Florida was an abortion state. We did abortions for Floridians, CALA, and other parts of the South.

Really tired of pro-life people framing Democrats as people who will and want to kill fully developed babies and that doctors are happy to do it too. It’s a lie and offensive.

So tired of pro-lifers implying Democrats enjoy getting abortions. Like it is a fun experience.

There is no slippery slope for abortion.

Turn your focus to the pregnant woman.

@wulfie. You are correct. You are not allowed to have a say on what a woman does with her body.

@Caravanfan And yet you do. Isn’t that just amazing.

@seawulf575 How is @Caravanfan saying what a woman should do?

@JLeslie “The spirit of the law matters and the spirit is to protect a woman from being trapped in her body with a pregnancy,” That is the crux of where we different. There are plenty of ways for a woman to avoid a pregnancy. Yet so many don’t. If that is such a crisis, why aren’t the people pushing abortion pushing birth control, especially condoms, as well as personal responsibility before sex?

As for me believing women all want to abort late in the pregnancy, you are wrong. But there are some that do. And when people are pushing laws to make it all legal, it points to an attitude that is prevalent enough to make it to the halls of government. That is the part you are failing to acknowledge. People keep pushing for more and more and more in the way of abortions. RvW stated pretty clearly that in the first trimester, having an abortion should be okay, in the second trimester, there needed to be some medical reason for an abortion, and in the third trimester, because the babies were now mainly viable, the life of the baby needed to be considered and abortion should ONLY be if there was a life threatening issue to the mother. But that wasn’t good enough for the abortion proponents. With Casey v PPP they chiseled away with needing parental consent for minors to get an abortion as well as removing the need for a married woman to tell her husband unless it was an emergency as well as strengthening (or maybe introducing) the idea that abortions could be done for any reason. After that the abortion pros pushed the idea that medical advances kept moving forward allowing women to get abortions into the 3rd trimester for whatever reason. And it is the “for whatever reason” that has a sticking point for many.

What is truly ironic is that those for abortion were upset that RvW was overturned by a case that came against Louisiana (I believe…might have been Mississippi) because the state laws were almost identical to what RvW established. That alone should show how far to the left things got.

As for being tired of Democrats being blamed for wanting to kill babies, take it up with the Democrats. Every one of the absurd, radical ideas about abortion have come from Democrats. I have stated before that most people (Repubs, Dems, Indies) are okay landing somewhere in the reasonable range. But I also believe that moving the control to the states will allow the public to better control the laws in their area.

As for @Caravanfan, he is only saying what I should be allowed to have an opinion on. That is far more repressive than any of the abortion laws on the books.

I’m done.

OBTUSE !

DENSE !

FRIGHT WINGER ! !

@seawulf575 You are allowed to have a private opinion on abortion. I have a private opinion on abortion. Neither of us are allowed to impose that opinion on a pregnant woman.

@Caravanfan I disagree. As a society we have a right and even an obligation to speak up when we see things we disagree with. That is part of how we grow. Shutting down discussion is Orwellian. It is what they do in dictatorships.

@seawulf575 Who is shutting down discussion? You and I have been arguing about this for days. But who are you (or me for that matter) as an old white man to tell a young woman what she can and can not do with her body?

@Caravanfan Yes, we have been going on at that for days. And in all that time you have tried fervently to shut down the discussion. Who am I to suggest anything about abortion? I’m a member of society. In this society I am allowed to voice opinions on topics even if they don’t directly impact me. I see the place abortion was going to be gross and evil. I have a right to speak out about that.

Who are you to deny me my right to an opinion on any topic? That is what tyrannical governments do…stop opposing viewpoints. In any discussion, if there is an opposing opinion to the one you carry, it should be easy enough to discuss and come to some common ground. If you can’t discuss because you can’t support your view as to whether abortion is okay or not and under what circumstances, then you need to revisit your own beliefs and how you came by them. If all you can do is try to shut down discussion, you are in that spot too.

I am not shutting down your discussion. I have found that to be impossible. What I am doing is saying that you are wrong.

deleted by me.

My opinion is that @seawulf575 should STFU about something HE will never have to face.

Actually I am totally fine with him continuing to write. I’m traveling so may be slow to respond but I will always respond.

@Dutchess_III Do you have opinions about gun control? Religion? Politics? Nod your head because the answer is yes. Are you a killer? A priest? A politician? No? Then why do you voice your opinions since you are talking about things you will NEVER have to face?

How do you know?

If atheists who talk about religion all the time “secretly believe in God” because “why would they even care about it?”, then men who constantly weigh in about abortion are secretly trans women.

Q.E.D.

@Caravanfan Gee, I could identify as a woman and then I could get pregnant. Isn’t that the logic I am not allowed to question? Are you going to question it? Besides, I’m willing to bet good money against all three on @Dutchess_III

@Demosthenes Yep. I identify as a woman. @Caravanfan You are not entitled to any opinion on Abortion since you are a man.

@seawulf575… to me _”..
you have opinions about Politics? Are you a killer? A priest? A politician? No? Then why do you voice your opinions since you are talking about things you will NEVER have to face,?_”
None of those are restricted to gender so what makes makes you think I’ll never have to face those things?

@seawulf575 Exactly! You finally get it! And neither do you.

@Dutchess_III You are right, none of those things are gender specific. So where is it written that you can only have an opinion if you share a given gender? I’ve seen you pipe in about men and yet you aren’t a man. Why do you do that? The reason is very simple: because you are human and you live in a society.

@Caravanfan Then why did you ask this question at all? You are a man. This is a topic that only women can comment on.

@Caravanfan – Remember you’re dealing with @seawulf575‘s logic, where wanting women to control their bodies is controlling women’s bodies, anti-racism is racism, being strongly capitalist is anti-capitalist, not invading other countries is imperialist, etc.

@seawulf read my question carefully again.

@Caravanfan I did read it. What do you care what the abortion situation will look like in 10 years? You’re a man. You aren’t entitled to an opinion…according to you.

Exactly. The decision should be by the woman and the woman only. Thank you for understanding finally.

In my opinion all males should be castrated at birth, so let’s make that a law.

Did I just witness @seawulf575 become pro-choice?

@hat Nope. It’s devolved again to whether any males have the right to have opinions on this subject. Odd since most lawmakers are still male. Shrug.

I think the argument is that the law should largely stay out of it.

In either case, the positions are unreconcilable. You either believe in the personhood of the unborn child or not. If you don’t, then it makes sense you see this issue as primarily about one person: the pregnant woman.

@Caravanfan Except you asked the question. You violated your own belief system to do that. So why did you ask the question in the first place?

^ Read the question again, comrade.

R I F @seawulf575

Reading is Fundamental

@seawulf575 You really need to read the original post again. You aren’t making sense. @Caravanfan didn’t give an opinion, he asked the collective for their guess at where the US will be on abortion in ten years.

@knowirall. Not exactly what I am saying. I am saying that NOBODY (regardless of gender) should render an opinion on a medical procedure except the person undergoing the procedure and her health care provider

Sorry about typos. Was typing on my phone with my glasses off.

Deleted by me.

@JLeslie I understand entirely what he asked. But why? He’s a guy that, according to himself, isn’t allowed to have any opinion on the topic. So why even ask a question about it?

^^This Q is not an opinion about whether abortion should be legal or not.

@seawulf575 – Read the question again.

@JLeslie Yes, but why does he care what the conditions of abortion is in 10 years? It is none of his business. Even if abortion is legal or not shouldn’t be his concern. That is strictly between a woman and her medical provider.

To ask whether abortion should be legal or not, or more accurately what he asked was what the status of abortion in the country would be in 10 years, implies that men do, indeed, have an opinion that does come into play. Any laws that were proposed would eventually be put to a vote. As a member of society I am allowed to vote by right. To say I have not right to cast a vote, which is what he is saying by saying any decisions are only between women and abortionists.

Another consideration is that many men feel that baby is theirs as well. The law sees that as well from many aspects except for abortion. I personally feel it is wrong to take something as precious as a baby from someone without giving them an opinion on whether it is okay or not.

And as I said before, as a member of society, I have a right to voice my opinion on things that are being proposed that influence society. I have a right to see my vision of society and to not support things that go against it.

@Caravanfan believes that as well. If he didn’t then he shouldn’t be asking questions like this. He has an opinion on the topic, but his opinion negates his opinion.

He still doesn’t understand the question apparently.

@seawulf575 – There have been so many comments, it might be tough to scroll all the way back to the top, so let me help:

QUESTION TITLE: “What do you see as the end game on abortion access in the United States?”

QUESTION DETAIL: “Another state, Arizona, just criminalized abortion. There is also a movement to have a state constitutional amendment to legalize abortion in Arizona.

Is this sustainable? No matter what your views are on abortion access, what do you think the landscape will look like in 10 years? I am glad my daughter who is reproductive age lives in California.”

@seawulf575 They’ll just continue to gaslight you, buddy. The votes are all that matters now.

@knowitall nobody is gaslighting anyone. He keeps bringing up issues irrelevant to my question and deflecting the issue.

And sadly, you are correct. The votes are what matters but they shouldn’t. This is an issue that shouldn’t be decided politically but personally by each individual woman.

And no Wulfiebaby the vaginal sperm depositor should have zero say.

Because Caragavanfan simply cares about people besides himself @wulf. Nice trait for a doctor, huh.

It’s not gaslighting. Let’s give an example with another issue: Do you think Chinese owned social media platforms like TikTok will be banned in ten years?

The Q is just a guess at where the laws are going. That’s it. That’s all @Caravanfan asked in the OP. Not whether you agree with where you think the law will wind up.

The difficulty for @seawulf575 is he wants to influence the law so much to prevent most abortions, and is so focused on the fetus and not focused on the woman, that he just thinks of the issue in terms of stopping abortions. He also doesn’t want to really take in that women do get denied medical care and have to suffer or even die sometimes when laws tie the hands of doctors. He just doesn’t believe it happens, he thinks it is fake news from the Democrats trying to fear monger.

It could be that in 10 years there could be a global ban on abortion. Or it could be allowed for all women. Or it could be a patchwork as it seems to be now.

Thats all the question is. Others blew it out of proportion to what I asked.

@Caravanfan Hopefully we will evolve to see it’s actually a very preventable situation in most cases. Remember that rape, incest and mothers health are less than 1% of all abortions. To keep harping on that 1% to justify the need for 100% of abortions is disingenuous at least and misleading at best.
Facts dont lie.

@KNOWITALL The same could be said of abortions at greater than 20 weeks of gestation,the total is less than 1%, yet Republicans keep crying about post birth abortion (no such thing according to the definition of abortion) and fully grown babies being hacked away at with knives. .

Link: (under “abortion”): CDC:

https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/index.htm

@jca2 I agree with you, that’s why you don’t see me ever post about late-term abortions.

@jca2 Right, so if you’re going to make a case for or against legal abortion, it has to primarily be about the usual cases, not the exceptions. The majority of cases are “I can’t afford to have another baby”, “I cannot raise a child right now”, “I never intended to get pregnant and this would ruin my life”. My best friend got his college girlfriend pregnant unintentionally. They decided together to abort the pregnancy. That is the kind of abortion that is most common, so the argument needs to focus on examples like that, and whether they should be legal. Even restrictive laws will have exceptions for rape or life-threatening complications. Even permissive laws will not allow a late-term abortion for just any reason.

Exceptions make the headlines because they can be egregious and they can illustrate problems with existing laws. But ultimately the questions is, if someone decides they want to abort a pregnancy before 20 weeks that is not a result of rape and the reason is that the woman simply does not want to have a baby at this time in her life, should she be allowed to do so? California says yes. Arizona says no. That’s what states are deciding right now.

@Demosthenes I understand. Some may talk about convenience, but it’s not just convenience per se, it’s that the woman can’t afford a baby, can’t afford to raise a child, (therefore if she has a child, there’s a great chance of the family ending up on public assistance and needing food stamps, shelter, etc.), maybe the mother hasn’t attended college and would like to do so without a child (which, of course it’s possible to attend college while one has a baby or child, but more difficult). Maybe the mother has mental health or addiction issues (which I saw a lot of in my time doing child protective for the local government), in which case, there is a higher chance the child will end up abused, neglected, or in Foster Care or with the family needing lots of supportive services such as therapy, parenting classes, inpatient mental health treatment, etc., or under the watchful eye of Family Court. I saw lots of all of the above while working for the local Social Services dept.

@jca2 All of which can be solved by giving the baby up for adoption. And adopting families will often pay all expenses, medical and help support the mother as well so she’s financially better off afterwards. I know that system is completely screwed up but it is a compassionate alternative.

@KNOWITALL Easier said than done. A lot of people, once they have a baby, love it and want to keep it, and do their best but they have lots of limitations.

THERE ARE NO LATE TERM ABORTIONS.

I should add that on here, on past questions, I’ve mentioned that I hope that states that are putting big restrictions on abortion access will also add to their social service budgets, in terms of public assistance (aka welfare), food stamps, Medicaid, mental health treatment, shelters, WIC (food and resources for women, infants and children – WIC),special ed budgets, etc. I am quite sure those states won’t, because their leaders may believe the women brought this upon themselves by opening their slutty legs, but everyone suffers – the parents suffer, the children suffer, society suffers, the educational system is strained, etc.

@jca2 Yes and having a death on your conscience isn’t easy for everyone to live with either. My aunt had one and never conceived again, it broke her. I’ve seen a hardened stripper cry over her abortion, as well as many others.

10% of women have trouble getting or staying pregnant.
More than 57% who use infertility services consider adoption.
LGBTQ couples are adopting more often to have a family.

@KNOWITALL I get it. I get all of it. I’m just saying it’s easier said than done, “just give it up for adoption.” Lots of people try their best, they try sincerely, but they have their limitations, many limitations they may not even be aware of (like severe mental illness, or addiction). I totally get what you’re saying, though.

It’s a big, big effort to take a child from the parents and put it into foster care, at least in my state. Lots of court dates and interventions, unless the mother willingly gives it up, which is not likely.

The 1% or I should say 8% matter. 8% who have serious complications during pregnancy. Woman who might not get help if they need it to save their body or life. That is not a small number. That’s not including what are considered not severe conditions secondary to pregnancy, but making a woman go through it is trapping her in her body.

See the video in the facebook tide pool of Kelly Clarkson talking about her own pregnancy with Hillary Clinton.

Most pro-life people I know don’t believe women are endangered by pro-life laws. They think the medical care will be available.

@JLeslie I never said they didn’t matter. But using 1% in 98% of abortion debates is misleading, as well.
Yes, most of us understand all life is precious, mother, baby, even those on death row. We don’t work to end abortion because we’re bored or hate women. We legit believe abortion is genocide by definition. Which you of all people, should relate to as Jews.

@knowitall I actually have never actually stated my own personal very complex opinions on abortion on fluther or pretty much anywhere. How I really feel would shock pretty much everybody. But I never will because my own beliefs are irrelevant.

@Caravanfan This is not a safe space, so I understand.

As a human being with a vote, I do find your opinion relevant. And of course, I am curious based on your experiences.

(Not so) Fun facts:
Abortion costs the US roughly 32% of GDP annually.
Abortion shrinks the workforce.
Abortion weakens the solvency of Medicare and SS.

Waysandmeans.house.gov

All irrelevant for reasons I have stated several times above. It should not be a political decision but a personal one.

And no, I will not state my opinions here nor discuss my experiences here ever. I’m sorry.

@Caravanfan I don’t need to know your opinion and didn’t ask. :)

How can it be personal and not political if its not judged on a case by case basis? I would support that as well as many Pro-Lifers, as opposed to abortion at will.

The point is that it should not be judged at all by anybody. It is nobody’s business but the pregnant woman and her health care provider.

Which is your opinion. Got it.
Genocide is certainly political.

Are we talking Gaza now – in an abortion thread?

Thank you for making my reasons clear for keeping my true opinions to myself.

@hat. No she thinks abortion is genocide.

@Caravanfan And thank you for reminding me that facts don’t matter to liberals, only feelings.

If it were Jewish babies instead of black and hispanic, maybe you’d consider it genocide, too.

@knowitall not sure what it has to do with anything but I am not a liberal (unless you mean a Lockean classical liberal)

Someone gets “triggered” by the word abortion and just goes off the tracks . . . nothing logical after the word @Caravanfan !

@willie. As expected. If I wanted to be a snit about the whole thing I would have the mods kill most of the thread since it is in general and most of the people sniping at me didn’t answer the question I asked. But the discussion has amused me.

Okay bedtime here in the UK. I’ll see what new meshuggah arises when I wake up tomorrow

@KNOWITALL: GDP is a monetary measure of the final value of all the goods and services produced by the country for a specific time period. I’m not following what abortion has to do with that. Also, the US GDP for 2023 was over 27 trillion. You’re saying abortion cost totalled almost 10 trillion dollars in 2023?

@KNOWITALL I have no doubt you consider the women to some extent, and also know pregnancies can have problems. You aren’t really the person I am talking about, except to say I really don’t know if you about worry women who need help might not be able to get it. I assume you do have some worry about that in the states that have extreme policies now.

@jca2 I posted the website so check it out. I can post the link tomortow, but essentially it’s about the financial costs to the country with legal abortion and long-term consequences. Its their numbers so it will make more sense for you to read it.

@JLeslie I do, but not to the exclusion or dismissal of another life. That’s why I’m conflicted about my vote. Believe it or not I’m leaning towards legalizing, which even writing hurts my heart.
Other people may consider me triggered, or too religious, or too concerned with how the procedures are handled but the fact is it’s a complex issue I do not take lightly.

@Caravanfan Oh well gee, yep you got me! Let’s review for a moment. In the original question it specifically says: ” No matter what your views are on abortion access, what do you think the landscape will look like in 10 years?” Yet when I give my view that same person that asked that question specifically told me that I shouldn’t have an opinion because the choice should only be between a woman and her medical provider.

So…which is it? Do you really want opinions or did you just want to spew your opinion as the only viable one? Which seems odd since you are not a woman so really you shouldn’t have an opinion. You are a medical professional but I didn’t think you did abortions so that is sort of out as well. Or are you just trying to drum up business?

You can keep dodging but you gave an opinion from a man and then said that men shouldn’t have an opinion since it should only be between women and their doctors.

@KNOWITALL I do believe it, and I understand why it is such a struggle. I know several women who have been conservative voters for many years who have been voting Democrat on a local level since Roe was overturned. I admire their strength, I am sure it is not easy. I am registered as a Republican right now, and it was hard for me to change parties. Really hard.

We have already seen that when abortion is literally on the ballot the majority votes to keep it legal, because the opposite extreme is too scary. It might actually help Republicans win if people can vote for abortion as a ballot item.

Interestingly, I don’t see memes going around about abortion from Republican friends, they are all passing around memes about student loan forgiveness and electric cars.

@KNOWITALL I went to their site and put “abortion” in the search, but I didn’t see anything like what you’re talking about.

@seawulf How old are you, 12? Read the room. We have moved on.

@Caravanfan Sorry old buddy, I was busy with life and wasn’t on the computer. Just responding to the claims I don’t understand the question. By the way, nice dodge. You still haven’t addressed that. But to answer your question, I’m 63. Your snide comment here brings to mind an interesting question though. You say you are a doctor, yet you seem to have an inordinate amount of time to spend on Fluther. Are you really a doctor? If so, how do you have soo much time to spend here?

@wulfie. You got me. I am faking being a doctor.

Omg. Literally saving lives in the ICU and @seawulf575 questions if @Caravanfan is a doctor.

@Caravanfan said he is on vacation just a few posts up, but that shouldn’t matter anyway. Many people on fluther work full time.

It’s okay. Nobody takes him seriously.

@JLeslie Do you know him personally or just from Fluther?

@Caravanfan And still you haven’t addressed your contradiction between the original question and your efforts to shut down dissenting opinions.

Anyway, @KNOWITALL I’ve been in your position where I once had a major shift in world view. Without giving details I once felt and voted one way and then had a complete frameshift. I do empathize. It was really hard for me to go against my principles to achieve a greater moral center and it took me a few years to reconcile myself to the fact (this was decades before Fluther). You’re one of my favorite people on here and perhaps someday I will tell you my story.

@seawulf575 I know him outside of fluther.

@Caravanfan Aw thanks, you’ve always been one of my favorites, too, even before you took such great care of the collective during Covid.

I’ve got some soul searching and praying to do but I feel confident the correct path forward will become clear. Above all my allegiance to God must always come first. And I know He only wants the best for His children. Thanks so much, and sorry we got contentious.

*I was told by my relative in politics we don’t want to pass the bad law in Nov on the ballot so I’m very interested to see what that contains.

@knowitall this may help.
https://reformjudaism.org/learning/answers-jewish-questions/what-reform-jewish-perspective-abortion

@Caravanfan It does, and from religious pov, the same as mine.
The choice to ‘sin’ or not must be left to the individual, as with Adam & Eve, and is between them and God. In other words we are not to judge or condemn as we are ALL sinners saved by grace.
It’s just difficult to vote because our Bible says we are to obey the law of the land, so if our vote determines that, aren’t we morally responsible for any deaths post vote?
That’s my conundrum.
Thank you.

I never followed the idea that if I claimed a particular political party, and I’ve voted both ways, I then had to blindly follow their claimed stances. I had the same problem when I was a Christian. I didn’t accept the virgin birth and other miracles. Someone said “Well you just weren’t a very good Christian.” Shrugs. I guess not.

@Dutchess_III On another thread, someone asked about something related to fundamentalist Christianity. This was one of my responses:

This question is an example of the difference between fundamentalists and others. I know lots of people lump Christians into one pile – “Christians believe this” “Christians do that” but I was raised a Protestant, so we believe in God but we’re not praising Jesus all the time or atoning for our sins or feeling it’s a terrible thing to miss church, or feeling it’s a terrible thing to never attend church at all, and I have never heard of the Armor of Christ or the Armor of God.

I just googled the armor of God. I had never heard of it before. I feel like everything is war lately in what is being preached by the very extreme fundamentalist Christians. War against evil, war against Democrats, rise up for war. It’s upsetting. I never heard things like this growing up, and I don’t think it is in Judaism, but I really don’t know. My closest Christian friends are some of the kindest, caring, and peaceful people I know. Something is way out of whack.

@KNOWITALL No, you are not responsible for other’s moral decisions. You are responsible for giving (or taking away) the power to allow people to make their own moral decisions. I personally think that’s a pretty neat thing. If you vote yes, say, to legalize a constitutional amendment allowing pregnancy termination, then you are empowering a woman to be in control of her own life, and not to be controlled by a an old white male official waving his gavel. It doesn’t mean she will get an abortion, but that she is ALLOWED to, and that changes everything. I will always choose liberty over tyranny. .

I was raised Generic Christian. Said grace at dinner and prayers at bedtime. I wish my folks were here so they could give me their opinion. Although both probably wouldn’t want to discuss it.

Late here again and going to bed. I’ll see what picks up here in the morning.

@Caravan Sound right, but I gotra clear it with the Big Guy. :)

@Dutchess_III Probably depends on their brand of Christianity. See I was raised hardcore Southern Baptist and Fundamental Baptist. Very strict even on dress code. They will never vote to legalize because to them it breaks God’s commandment, even if its not them having the abortion. I explained that above.
Most other brands would say if you asked for forgiveness, youre good to go. We all sin, repent, repeat.
I’m just sorry you had to go through that. Hugs.

What if a law you support kills a woman? Isn’t the dilemma in both directions? A law allowing abortion does not force anyone to get an abortion, it is the individual’s decision.a law prohibiting abortion forces a woman to stay pregnant even in dangerous conditions.

Edit: If the baby is killing her, it is self defense to abort. If she chooses to risk death for her baby, that should be her choice.

@KNOWITALL Mom was raised a Catholic, but walked away when she got a letter saying she was excommunicated cuz my dad had been married before, right out of HS, to some chick named Trixie.
She never declared another religion.
I have no idea what religion my dad identified with.
When we went to church we went to a Methodist church.
All I remember is Mom nudging me to behave!
When she moved away she joined a 4 Square church.
My kids and I went to Bethal. I don’t even know what denomination it was! I kinda miss it tho.

@JLeslie – self defense is a completely different doctrine that cannot be applied here. Call it self preservation.

Anyway, the dilemma you describe isn’t really a dilemma if you believe embryos to be children. Yes, some adult lives will be lost, but adults are fundamentally less valuable than children (to some people), and overall there will more net births than deaths. It’s just a Spock thing: the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few.

More news. Women are suffering.

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2024-04-20/emergency-rooms-refused-to-treat-pregnant-patients-leaving-one-to-miscarry-in-a-lobby-restroom

shit country

@Smashley Just the opposite. Young adults are better at sustaining their lives than embryos and fetuses. 20% of known pregnancies miscarry, it is estimated that 30% of total pregnancies miscarry. Also, infant mortality in the US I think is 5 per 1,000. Adults are likely to already be part of the fabric of society, might already be caring for other children and so an unborn child is not the same as a child that is already born, and is not equal to an adult in terms of adding more population and caring for the population. A woman can go on to have another pregnancy in most circumstances, and she can try to get pregnant within months of the termination of the pregnancy. A new baby would usually have to wait at least 12 years to start making additional babies (hopefully they would not get pregnant so young) and more realistically won’t become pregnant for >18 years.

In Judaism terminating a pregnancy that is causing great harm to the mother is in self defense.

At the time when religious law was written the infant mortality was extremely high, so they knew how unstable new life was. Back 50+ years ago they told women to wait for two missed periods before testing if they were pregnant, because so many pregnancies were lost anyway. Even now, most women are advised to not tell people they are pregnant until after three months, because so many miscarriages happen.

Oh my God @Caravanfan….

Yep. This was totally predictable

@JLeslie – you sound like you’re trying to convince me of something. I’m just saying that your dilemma isn’t one, if one values children above adults and embryos as children.

@Smashley Not trying to convince you, I understand now that you were just stating how some look at it, I was just saying there is a completely different way to view it, especially regarding the benefit of the many. The societal benefit (the many) is with saving the mother in most situations, especially if she already has other children.

How was it predictable @Caravanfan? And why was Kansas dragged into it? Ks sucks in so many ways but they about to make me proud since we got a new governor. Laura Kelly.

I don’t know why Kansas was dragged into it. Kansas rocks

Its starting to.