Pro Life / Pro Choice Debate

PhDeac said:

So was Manchin going to bypass the filibuster to codify Roe?

Click to expand...

My understanding was nobody believed Manchin would do that even if he hinted it was possible, because he'd then say the exact opposite in public. I got the impression nobody trusted Manchin at all really, and that finding a path through him or the Republicans was judged to be a fools errand. Which is probably right. So watering down a bill just to get his one vote in hopes he would possibly cave to pressure for a one-off filibuster exception, putting him back at the center of attention, holding tons of power, etc. - they made sure not to do that. I don't find the logic to be all that complicated unless you have an incredibly high opinion of Manchin.

deactherunner said:

There's another one here, in a winnable district.

Click to expand...

Vega was then asked, "I've actually heard that it's harder for a woman to get pregnant if she's been raped. Have you heard that?"

Vega responded: "Well, maybe because there's so much going on in the body. I don't know. I haven't, you know, seen any studies. But if I'm processing what you're saying, it wouldn't surprise me. Because it's not something that's happening organically. You're forcing it. The individual, the male, is doing it as quickly — it's not like, you know — and so I can see why there is truth to that. It's unfortunate."

Click to expand...

:squint:

Abstinence only education, Biology how does it work?

BiffTannen will adopt your baby ! !

He got drowned on Twitter.

birdman said:

Click to expand...

Lol

PhDeac said:

There hasn't been nearly enough posted about how Republicans have moved from anti-abortion except in the case of rape, incest, or a mother's life to denying rape and harm to a mother's life even happen.

Click to expand...

Because Dems have stupidly focused the argument on the relatively small percentages of abortion because of rape and incest, and so have shifted the argument to the margins. Even on this thread a massive amount of posts are focused on the rape/incest scenario, whereas per this article only 1.5% of all abortions are from those reasons. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ew-abortions-so-why-all-attention/1211175001/ Even if in reality it is 5% or 10%, that is a pretty small number.

It is the same stupid strategy that dragged out the Covid vaccine. Don't tell me I need the Covid vaccine because of the 0.01% chance that I'll get Covid and die. Plenty of people will just take that risk because it is so small compared to other risks of life. Tell me why I need it because of the other more common symptoms that I would want to avoid. But Dems focus on the lowest common denominator, as usual. Focusing on rights for the pre-op gay male to female trans instead of just equal rights for everyone. Focusing on the number of people killed by cops instead of just the number of people unjustly killed by anyone. Dems always focus their argument on the margins and then don't comprehend why they keep losing. Most people don't identify with the margins, that is why they are the margins.

So here, do not focus on the rape/incest situations because most people don't identify with the the sister who willingly banged her brother (which appears voluntary as incest is always delineated separately than rape). You are never going to win that argument with respect to the right as a whole because the percentages are so small.

Focus on why there should be a right to have the 98% of abortions that occurred through voluntary sex. That is a much more difficult argument to make, which is why Dems always bring it back to the rape/incest angle. But you have to be able to win that argument if you want to convince people that the right is necessary.

"We're cool with killing a fetus that is an inconvenience to the mother." You need to be able to say that and justify it to win the battle. It is a tough stance to take, but running from it and trying to focus everything on R/I clearly is not working. Ignore the rape/incest angle, as it isn't going to carry the rights for the majority of the situations. The focus needs to be on the drain caused by voluntary but mistaken pregnancies and ignore the R/I components.

Democrats traditionally focused on choice. Only recently have Democrats begun focusing on abortions due to rape and incest. Along with the life of the mother, those were the few areas where both sides agreed abortion should be legal and available for decades. There has been a renewed focus on that because Republicans have shifted to being against abortion in all circumstances meaning they're for completely wiping out the infrastructure for abortion and full-service OB/GYN care.

The early arguments against abortion were only a cynical attempt to get Catholics on board. This generation of Republicans are true believers, so it makes sense they took the issue literally and to the extreme.

It hasn't been radical from a legal standpoint to suggest that abortion is healthcare, not for 50 years. Settled law, done. Moral majority assholes ruin fucking everything in this country.

The focus on rape and incest is to try and highlight just how extreme the Republican Party has become. Dems want abortion to be safe legal and rare. They want it to be a personal decision between a woman and her doctor and the father if he is in the picture. 90% of elected Dems would say so if you asked.

You want to talk about focusing on the extremely rare case to make your point about abortion, let’s talk about the gop’s focus on the third trimester.

Dumb dumb is so bad when it comes to percentages. While the majority get abortions for other reasons just the fact that these numbers exist is crazy. I mean low numbers that’s like 10,000 abortions a year because of rape and incest, or 1 in 18,000 females.

Louis Gossett Jr said:

Dumb dumb is so bad when it comes to percentages. While the majority get abortions for other reasons just the fact that these numbers exist is crazy. I mean low numbers that’s like 10,000 abortions a year because of rape and incest, or 1 in 18,000 females.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure of your point. Those are extremely low numbers for a country of our size. Most people don't know 18,000 women so aren't going to know the 1. Focus on the reason that the other 600,000+ abortions occurred.

But you were on the wrong side of the Covid risk analysis as well, so I guess it tracks that you lose on both.

Anti-abortion organizations have gotten more savvy about tracking their visitors and collecting information that isn’t protected by medical privacy laws. Tara Murtha, communications director at Women’s Law Project, said that if women in states where abortions are restricted visit a center and then fail to have a baby, there’s a record that could be passed into the hands of “overzealous prosecutors,” examples of which have almost tripled in the last 12 years.

Click to expand...

Anti-Abortion Centers Find Pregnant Teens Online, Then Save Their Data

Because it won't let me edit:

Think about it this way. 1,000,000+ people died from Covid and nobody gives a shit because, relative to the country as a whole, that is a small number. Do you think people give a shit about 10,000 R/I pregnancies? You need to focus on the bigger numbers to get people to care, because this has no bearing on the vast majority of people.

2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:

Because it won't let me edit:

Think about it this way. 1,000,000+ people died from Covid and nobody gives a shit because, relative to the country as a whole, that is a small number. Do you think people give a shit about 10,000 R/I pregnancies? You need to focus on the bigger numbers to get people to care, because this has no bearing on the vast majority of people.

Click to expand...

It does if you care about other people. Think of it this way, you almost certainly know a woman who has been raped and got lucky she didn't get pregnant too.

2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:

I'm not sure of your point.

Click to expand...

Obviously not. The rhetoric around rape and incest as extreme exceptions for abortion are intended as a shocking category meant to find common ground with *rational* anti-abortionists. There are plenty of liberals defending general access to abortion as medical care, you just don’t encounter any of those people because you are in a bubble.

myDeaconmyhand said:

Obviously not. The rhetoric around rape and incest as extreme exceptions for abortion are intended as a shocking category meant to find common ground with *rational* anti-abortionists. There are plenty of liberals defending general access to abortion as medical care, you just don’t encounter any of those people because you are in a bubble.

Click to expand...

Yep. As with conservatives in general, it's harder and harder to find anti-abortionists who hold rational views.

The most common reason that women need abortion access is: None of your fucking business. *Crazy* that the people who believe in greater autonomy for gun ownership than womens uteruses can’t be reached with reasonable political persuasion.

myDeaconmyhand said:

Obviously not. The rhetoric around rape and incest as extreme exceptions for abortion are intended as a shocking category meant to find common ground with *rational* anti-abortionists. There are plenty of liberals defending general access to abortion as medical care, you just don’t encounter any of those people because you are in a bubble.

Click to expand...

I encounter them, I just don't think their position is winnable. Couching it as "medical care" is a bullshit excuse. Medical care is let me go have my broken arm set or some cholesterol medication. Help me kill this fetus is no more medical care than me stabbing you with a knife. If a pregnant woman is attacked and the fetus is killed, it is a crime against the fetus that I think everyone agrees with. If the pregnant woman kills the fetus of her own volition, it is medical care? That does not fly.

I am pro-choice, I'm not disagreeing with you on the woman's right or the outcome. But you need to call it for what it is, as too many people see through the bullshit. The woman's convenience is valued over the life of the fetus. That's it, and that is okay. But the only way to win the argument is to admit that, not try to disguise it as something else like "medical care". Until you admit that and find a way to get anti-abortion people to agree with it for whatever reason, the argument and current situation is not going anywhere.