|
Professor Beetus posted:It's not that far off from "safe, legal, and rare" which, to be clear, is bullshit framing which caves to the right wing framing of abortion as wrong or bad or something to be ashamed off. Counterpoint: the point of abortions ideally being rare is that getting an abortion sucks. Even if a woman makes the decision to have an abortion in the early stages, it's an expensive, inconvenient, and stressful process, and that's even before getting into the various moral/ethical dilemmas—which you may not possess, but many people do. Abortions should be rare because they shouldn't have to get to that point in the first place, meaning comprehensive sex ed and widespread availability of birth control methods. Professor Beetus posted:Only if you think aborting fetuses is a moral wrong, which I don't. And dude this is missing the point in a frankly horrifying way — yes, sex-selective abortions are a horrible wrong, not because they're abortions, but because it's a horrifically misogynic practice.
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 02:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:19 |
|
|
Abortions are bad in the same way that an Appendectomy is bad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 02:39
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I have to imagine there has been movement on those questions since that poll was done 5 years ago... Why? These views have held pretty steady over time, iirc, and Politifact also says: quote:The polling results suggest that Americans lack a nuanced view of what Roe permits and what would happen if it were overturned. This is the reason many of us were irate at the decision resulting from Planned Parenthood v. Casey, bc voters & legislators (including Democrats, including the Democratic governor who signed the restrictions into law) were willing to go along with the restrictions that began eroding Roe. I don't recall seeing, even in the past year, a poll that showed majority support for abortion "for any reason." Abortion has always been a litmus test to show Americans' puritanical & moralistic streaks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 02:40
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Counterpoint: the point of abortions ideally being rare is that getting an abortion sucks. Even if a woman makes the decision to have an abortion in the early stages, it's an expensive, inconvenient, and stressful process, and that's even before getting into the various moral/ethical dilemmas—which you may not possess, but many people do. Abortions should be rare because they shouldn't have to get to that point in the first place, meaning comprehensive sex ed and widespread availability of birth control methods. This is entirely subjective. For a majority of women it's a simple procedure with very little after care required. Yes there are women who experience complications, but far fewer than say, childbirth. And yes there are women who regret or have moral qualms about their abortion, and that's okay too. Nothing inherently "sucks" about an abortion, it's a safe and routine medical procedure. And to the second part, it's conservative concern trolling. The vast majority of people aren't going to make that decision for that reason, and for the few that do, whatever. If you want to feel icky about it then you do you, but it literally does not matter when it comes to whether a woman should be able to access abortion care or not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 02:58
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Counterpoint: the point of abortions ideally being rare is that getting an abortion sucks. Even if a woman makes the decision to have an abortion in the early stages, it's an expensive, inconvenient, and stressful process, and that's even before getting into the various moral/ethical dilemmas—which you may not possess, but many people do. Abortions should be rare because they shouldn't have to get to that point in the first place, meaning comprehensive sex ed and widespread availability of birth control methods. This isn't a reason why abortions should be rare, this is a reason why abortions should be less expensive, less inconvenient, and less stressful. Also a huge amount of the reason why they're expensive, inconvenient, and stressful is because of the deliberate actions of the anti-abortion crowd. Lots of other medical procedures are expensive, inconvenient, and stressful, but nobody makes a fuss over those being rare.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 03:09
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Lots of other medical procedures are expensive, inconvenient, and stressful, but nobody makes a fuss over those being rare. We absolutely do, but usually through focus on preventative medicine* rather than restricting the procedure or shaming people who need it. That's part of what always gives the game away for anti-abortion types, is that you can reduce abortion rates a lot through sex education and easy access to birth control but they don't like that much either. *There's also a lot of pressure to make difficult and stressful medical procedures rare by using less intrusive alternatives when possible. (Yes, even in places without private insurance companies, before anyone brings that up.) This doesn't really apply as much to abortion unless you count giving enough social/financial support to new mothers that no one feels pressured to abort just because they can't afford a baby. Though guess what the anti-abortionists think about that!
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 03:37
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:We absolutely do, but usually through focus on preventative medicine* rather than restricting the procedure or shaming people who need it. That's part of what always gives the game away for anti-abortion types, is that you can reduce abortion rates a lot through sex education and easy access to birth control but they don't like that much either. This is the key right here, women should have access to whichever birth control method they choose at any time, up to and including abortion, but again, there is absolutely no statistically significant portion of women choosing to use abortion as their birth control method, and those that do probably do so because they are trapped in controlling households and cannot rely on having access to regular birth control. Like this is all accessible from a utilitarian perspective, the only point I'm trying to make is that it's bad to start off with the tacit admission that your anti-choice opponent is right about abortion being bad. That's extremely weak footing and potentially a tacit endorsement for some restrictions on abortion. Professor Beetus fucked around with this message at 04:16 on Apr 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 04:14
|
|
|
Killer robot posted:We absolutely do, but usually through focus on preventative medicine* rather than restricting the procedure or shaming people who need it. That's part of what always gives the game away for anti-abortion types, is that you can reduce abortion rates a lot through sex education and easy access to birth control but they don't like that much either. Yeah but that's not really the same sort of fuss over abortions being rare. Nobody wants to make heart bypasses illegal, is what I meant. And if they did, it would be a terrible idea to try to meet them halfway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 04:33
|
|
|
So was Mitch McConnell ambulatory and able to speak today?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 05:00
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:Why? These views have held pretty steady over time, iirc, and Politifact also says: I don't know how much it affects the numbers, but there's a decent chunk of people who answer hypotheticals differently than actual choices. Fully overturning Roe changes the headspace of those polled from(however valid the belief actually was) abortion being taken for granted as a right, to abortion is totally up in the air and nobody is guaranteed one at all. Edit: It's the difference between "What would you do if you were in a space shuttle?" and "You're in a space shuttle, now what?" Gyges fucked around with this message at 05:21 on Apr 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 05:13
|
|
|
Gyges posted:I don't know how much it affects the numbers, but there's a decent chunk of people who answer hypotheticals differently than actual choices. Fully overturning Roe changes the headspace of those polled from(however valid the belief actually was) abortion being taken for granted as a right, to abortion is totally up in the air and nobody is guaranteed one at all. As the piece & the polling points out, people generally support a right to abortion, but when drilled on the particulars, they have their ideas of what's morally acceptable. Americans support, by pluralities, the right to first-term abortions for "reasons" but not for any reason. Even as SCOTUS was getting ready to overturn Roe most Americans still viewed it situationally & conditionally:   If you can find later surveys that drill down into the same questions (ideally, yougov or gallup surveys so it's apples-to-apples) I'd love to see if the ruling did change people's minds on the conditions they attach to legal abortion, but I've been following this stuff for almost a half-century & I've always been struck by the weird stuff like pluralities thinking pregnant women should give unwanted babies up for adoption. Understandably, the groups & politicians who support bodily autonomy speak of public support as being clear & decisive, and in a general way it is. But people get squicked out by the particulars, and that's likely a result of the acceptable sociopolitical discourse having been the space between "murdering innocent babies" and "safe, legal & rare" for so long.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 05:40
|
|
|
I'm not sure pre Dobbs polls that did not poll the actual policy outcome ("should 11 year old rape victims be forced to give birth?") are worth much, especially when we have actual voting results. In Montana (Trump+16, evenly split on abortion in pre Dobbs polls) a ballot initiative to mandate treatment for infants that survive an attempted abortion failed by 5 points. In Kansas (Trump+15, anti-abortion in pre Dobbs polls) an initiative to say the constitution does not guarantee a right to abortion failed by 18 points. In Kentucky (Trump+26, anti-abortion in pre Dobbs polls) a similar initiative failed by 5. An obvious issue is that people may answer "is it wrong to abort baby Einstein" and "should an 11 year old rape victim be forced to give birth" differently, and only the latter question is policy relevant. James Garfield fucked around with this message at 06:28 on Apr 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 06:20
|
|
|
Turns out normal people don't like old gross men forcing birth on 12 year olds, who would have thought.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 06:28
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:And dude this is missing the point in a frankly horrifying way — yes, sex-selective abortions are a horrible wrong, not because they're abortions, but because it's a horrifically misogynic practice. Yes. But also irrelevant. Sex-selective abortions won’t be dealt with via the legality of abortion. The fundamental problem there (not valuing women as human beings) tends to be worse when abortion is illegal, not better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 06:46
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Driving a car into a playground would also be wrong, but it has no legal bearing on the matter of car ownership. Why are you acting like it's a hypothetical when China and India have massively skewed gender ratios because this has been standard operating procedure there for decades?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 09:13
|
|
|
I mean. If a woman says 'I don't want a daughter, the family name must be carried forward! Abort this girl fetus!' I might not exactly cheer this decision. But the question is, am I gonna go: 'Nope, I am forcing you to carry this child to term' No. I won't. Because forcing women to carry baby to terms is worse sexism and just 'worse' in general than a woman deciding to abort any female fetuses.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 13:25
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Why are you acting like it's a hypothetical when China and India have massively skewed gender ratios because this has been standard operating procedure there for decades? Why does this matter at all to the issue of the legality of abortion in America?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 14:28
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Why does this matter at all to the issue of the legality of abortion in America? I brought it up in response to a statement that abortion can never be framed as wrong or unethical. Based on some of these responses, I hope there’s never a genetic/developmental test that predicts a fetus’ orientation or gender dysphoria.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 14:36
|
|
|
Equally irrelevant are single issue polls because even if a large portion of chuds think it's bad to force 12 year old rape victims to give birth, they will still crawl over broken glass to vote for leaders who will enact laws that require just that. The huge discrepancy between chud party affiliation and ballot issue results is just further proof that fascists don't actually care about abortion as a real life issue, it's just one of the many invented grievances they pretend to care about to mask their actual goal of inflicting pain and suffering on innocent people they hate.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 14:39
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Like was posted earlier, the backup is probably the 14th amendment approach. Order the treasury to violate the debt ceiling and dare someone to take them to court over it. Then dare the court to rule that the global financial order must implode Automata 10 Pack fucked around with this message at 15:09 on Apr 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 15:06
|
|
|
I AM GRANDO posted:So was Mitch McConnell ambulatory and able to speak today? He's been up and speaking (bad things) for the last week. He made his first appearance on Sunday and appears fine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 15:09
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:I'm not sure pre Dobbs polls that did not poll the actual policy outcome ("should 11 year old rape victims be forced to give birth?") are worth much, especially when we have actual voting results. In Montana (Trump+16, evenly split on abortion in pre Dobbs polls) a ballot initiative to mandate treatment for infants that survive an attempted abortion failed by 5 points. In Kansas (Trump+15, anti-abortion in pre Dobbs polls) an initiative to say the constitution does not guarantee a right to abortion failed by 18 points. In Kentucky (Trump+26, anti-abortion in pre Dobbs polls) a similar initiative failed by 5. Election results show only how the (general) issue polls in a particular region. As the polling has pointed out, people want to think of the issue in generalized terms & not specifics, because when it comes to specifics people (even progressives) become conditional about its "morality." So it makes sense for Democrats running on the issue to stick to talking about 11-yr-old rape victims or in very generalized terms. I brought up the issue bc, as I've said, I've tracked the polling for almost 50 years and pollsters have noted the disconnect, and because imo it's an interesting consequence of having most of the public discourse narrowed to frame abortion as a fraught moral choice rather than as a simple medical procedure. This framing, imo, puts an undue psychological stress on a woman wanting to terminate a pregnancy, which is usually about as traumatic as having a tooth pulled, although it's usually less painful.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 15:09
|
|
|
Automata 10 Pack posted:If we're making bets, I think he's probably going to make cuts to Medicare and Social Security because "The Republicans are too darn crazy" and everybody's going to be convinced they'll really shoot the hostage this time. You would lose a lot of money on that bet. The Republicans aren't even asking for that because after Biden accused them of wanting to do so, they swore they definitely didn't and vowed that their debt ceiling bill wouldn't touch defense, Medicare, or SS. The Republican debt ceiling bill doesn't touch SS or Medicare. The Republican budget proposal does propose sizable cuts to Medicaid and "changes" to Medicare that are effective cuts. Some Republicans have also proposed various Social Security "reforms" that are effective cuts, but there isn't an official "Republican Bill" for Social Security changes right now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 15:14
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:I brought it up in response to a statement that abortion can never be framed as wrong or unethical. Im not talking to you, im talking to the person who brought up India and China in a discussion about US politics. Your concern over people hypothetically aborting gay and trans fetuses is noted, and irrelevant. A person's reason to abort a pregnancy is 100% private - they dont have to tell a single soul. And like i said, if it ever did matter, they can just lie. If there were somehow a government policy to force the abortion of a certain category of fetuses, that would be bad because it violates people's rights to reproductive sovereignty, not because abortion itself is wrong. Forcing people to get abortions is just as abhorrent as forbidding them from getting abortions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 15:14
|
|
|
I would add that another reason I'd be interested in the same questions about abortion being asked now is because that sentiment often ends up shaping the laws in states with restrictions on abortions. Part of the legislation Bob Casey Sr. signed was spousal notification, which was later overturned by scotus, while many of the other state-based restrictions were upheld. Having watched the erosion of Roe since PP v. Casey was decided over 30 years ago, I know that many of the restrictions came about as a result of seemingly (for that time & place) "reasonable" proposals like waiting periods or judicial notification for minors. Willa Rogers fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Apr 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 15:17
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:Equally irrelevant are single issue polls because even if a large portion of chuds think it's bad to force 12 year old rape victims to give birth, they will still crawl over broken glass to vote for leaders who will enact laws that require just that. The huge discrepancy between chud party affiliation and ballot issue results is just further proof that fascists don't actually care about abortion as a real life issue, it's just one of the many invented grievances they pretend to care about to mask their actual goal of inflicting pain and suffering on innocent people they hate. It's unclear how much of it was specifically because of abortion, but in last year's election Republicans had a large turnout advantage and performed disappointingly because of Trump voters voting for Democrats. Republican voters have a lot of bad opinions and most of them still voted for Republicans last year, but they aren't groypers who spend 18 hours a day on Twitter like Ron Desantis' staffers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 15:26
|
|
|
Mike Lindell has to pay $5 million because someone proved him wrong. https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1649054814821834757 quote:
That’s at least a bit of decent news this week.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 15:30
|
|
|
Automata 10 Pack posted:If we're making bets, I think he's probably going to make cuts to Medicare and Social Security because "The Republicans are too darn crazy" and everybody's going to be convinced they'll really shoot the hostage this time. Biden made his unwillingness to cut Social Security or Medicare a centerpiece of his SOTU and a key point of contrast with Republicans. Making such a deal would effectively end his presidency and serious primary challenges would sprout up overnight. He would need at least 10 Dem Senators to go along with it. Republicans have taken more blame for every stupid game of chicken they’ve played since the Obama era. We’re, what, six weeks from the deadline and Biden hasn’t shown any signs of moving from his “no negotiating” stance and nobody in the party is suggesting he abandon it. There are other avenues the administration can pursue if legislation doesn’t go through. That’s just scratching the surface of the reasons that he won’t cut Soc… I mean yeah you’re right it’s a real possibility; once again, 5-1, PM me! Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Apr 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 15:32
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:I brought it up in response to a statement that abortion can never be framed as wrong or unethical. You can do completely mundane things for unethical reasoning. You can make objectively GOOD things for unethical reasoning. Why is this relevant?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 15:52
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Biden made his unwillingness to cut Social Security or Medicare a centerpiece of his SOTU and a key point of contrast with Republicans. Making such a deal would effectively end his presidency and serious primary challenges would sprout up overnight. He would need at least 10 Dem Senators to go along with it. Republicans have taken more blame for every stupid game of chicken they’ve played since the Obama era. We’re, what, six weeks from the deadline and Biden hasn’t shown any signs of moving from his “no negotiating” stance and nobody in the party is suggesting he abandon it. There are other avenues the administration can pursue if legislation doesn’t go through. Kind of an lol contrast given Obama's Grand Bargain attempt that was foiled specifically because of blanket Republican determination to deny him any accomplishments.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 16:05
|
|
|
Despite Trump's best efforts, DeSantis seems intent on losing the 2024 primary in spectacular fashion. The Washington Post has an article that details a pretty wild political strategy that DeSantis has been cooking up for the last two years. The initial setup seems perfectly reasonable, but the actual plan once he started running seems completely idiotic. There's still plenty of time for things to change, but I think Trump has gone from about a 70% favorite to win to 90% entirely from the DeSantis campaign's bizarre strategy ideas that essentially relied on everything just working out magically for them. His plan was: - Raise an enormous amount of money early (succeeded) - Win re-election in Florida by a large margin (succeeded) - Use this money and Republican majority in Florida to pass high-profile culture war laws to appeal to the Republican base (succeeded) - Use that money and base appeal to clear the field, so nobody runs except Trump and himself (failing wildly) - Build a public image that he is tougher, more aggressive, and more effective than Trump (failing wildly) - Hope Trump decided not to run or that everyone would abandon him after his legal troubles (failing wildly) - Try to moderate some of his public positions to get swing voters and certain donors on his side without coming off as a wishy-washy or alienating the Republican base (failing wildly) - Start getting major endorsements from Florida politicians and other leaders in big states (failing wildly - Trump has more endorsements of Florida congressman than DeSantis) - He doesn't like talking to people, so he hoped that his money and polls would just lead people to endorse him without having to try and organize or talk to them (failing wildly) - Ignore Trump to not anger the Trump-supporting base and hope he fades away or fails on his own (failing wildly just like it did in 2016) - Put out a book and send it around to get people in important states on board without having to meet them (failing wildly) - Purposefully lose/not focus on the first 4 states + super Tuesday states in a primary to instead win big delegate later states like California and New York (N/A, but incredibly dumb) quote:After high-flying start, DeSantis hits stumbling blocks on road to 2024 https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/04/19/ron-desantis-trump-2024-election-polls/ https://twitter.com/BenjySarlin/status/1649041042815975425 Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 16:10 on Apr 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 16:06
|
|
|
Buzzfeed News (which actually did produce some significant original investigative journalist pieces - including winning a Pulitzer) is shutting down because Buzzfeed is losing money and the investigative journalism division is by far the least profitable part of the company. https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/1649066484277051394 Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Apr 20, 2023 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 16:16
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Buzzfeed News (which actually did produce some significant original investigative journalist pieces - including winning a Pulitzer) because Buzzfeed is losing money and the investigative journalism division is by far the least profitable part of the company. I’m guessing the listicles are staying though?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 16:17
|
|
|
TheDisreputableDog posted:I brought it up in response to a statement that abortion can never be framed as wrong or unethical. Explain to me how you would go about policing this. What restrictions would you have in place to protect thought crime? Why do you think it's important to bring up unlikely or unknowable situations in this discussion?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 16:18
|
|
|
Silly Burrito posted:I’m guessing the listicles are staying though? Yes. Buzzfeed is cutting 15% of its staff, but only the news division is being eliminated entirely.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 16:18
|
|
|
You have to appreciate DeSantis doing insane poo poo in Florida to prove that he can be a big balls authoritarian and then losing the nomination anyways. There's no endgame, they're just going to keep going because they have no exit plan.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 16:20
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Buzzfeed News (which actually did produce some significant original investigative journalist pieces - including winning a Pulitzer) because Buzzfeed is losing money and the investigative journalism division is by far the least profitable part of the company. Oh wow  . They've done some really good work over the years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 16:30
|
|
|
Looks like there’s a major point of failure you can tie to a lot of what’s poo poo about our government across multiple branches: https://twitter.com/annielinskey/status/1649025808097214468?s=46&t=6Q05E9cp_ar9ql-5Jy81HQ What’s to be done? We have a billionaire who can corrupt our processes with impunity, a literal Hitler fanboy who nobody can touch and who can command the right’s opinion leaders to make repeated, humiliating obeisances to him in public after each new revelation of the degeneracy of accountability and mass politics. One man, one vote my rear end, in short. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 16:38
|
|
|
Just lol at thinking the GOP primary wasn't going to be a clownshow in 2024. Meatball Ron is being given the Wrong Advices. There's a clear perverse incentive for campaign staff to encourage candidate's delusions and get a steady paycheck for as long as possible, but "just chill out and don't contest the early primaries" is the electoral version of "Get in loser, we're going losing!"
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:19 |
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:Just lol at thinking the GOP primary wasn't going to be a clownshow in 2024. Meatball Ron is being given the Wrong Advices. There's a clear perverse incentive for campaign staff to encourage candidate's delusions and get a steady paycheck for as long as possible, but "just chill out and don't contest the early primaries" is the electoral version of "Get in loser, we're going losing!" Pudding Fingers Desantis
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2023 16:45
|
|
