Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade; states can ban abortion

[Agema]

I'm honestly starting to wonder if it would be better if the US became less centralized at this point. Give each state more independence, let stuff get done, etc.

There was an article in The Atlantic (I think) that basically made the case. That the country's so hopelessly polarized, that it might be better to treat it as something like a confederation of independent states/countries. All of them can broadly agree on key issues (e.g. shared defence), then let the rest of them carry out their affairs.

Yes. I already think the USA is heading for schism. In my mind, Trump was effectively a declaration of war by the Republicans: they had no respect for their opponents, no interest in governing for anyone outside their own party, nor any interest in fairly winning power. It's not irrevocable, but someone has to find a way to change course.

 

[Cheetodust]

>forward

As Ohio restricts abortions, 10-year-old girl travels to Indiana for procedure

After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, it's left some in Ohio to travel outside the state for an abortion. Among them is a 10-year-old girl.

www.cincinnati.com

The future is now old man.

Fuck. Just fuck. That's all I have to say. The Christian right can fuck off when they say they care about children.

 

[McElroy]

No matter how you end that sentence odds are good that you'll end up being wrong, in particular when talking about sociology.

It sounds silly now, but demographics can possibly turn to favor anti-abortion.

 

[Bedinsis]

It sounds silly now, but demographics can possibly turn to favor anti-abortion.

I agree. Hence why I advocate caution when making predictions.

 

[tstorm823]

It sounds silly now, but demographics can possibly turn to favor anti-abortion.

It doesn't sound silly. Not killing people is an exceptionally popular idea. People rationalize a lack of personhood to avoid coming to terms with the tragedy of the unborn dying, the same way people used to not name a baby until well after birth because the chance of infant death was so high they wanted to disassociate. Now that same logic gets applied to a certain point in gestation, which is only ever going to move closer to conception as medical science advances. And at some point, likely beyond our lifetimes, methods for transferring a fetus intact to an artificial womb are going to be developed, at which point the idea of killing a fetus in the womb and sucking it out is going to be looked back on with the same stupefied horror we now look back at ancient Greeks leaving infants on the road to die of exposure.

 

[Bedinsis]

at some point, likely beyond our lifetimes, methods for transferring a fetus intact to an artificial womb are going to be developed

Wouldn't surprise me.

at which point the idea of killing a fetus in the womb and sucking it out is going to be looked back on with the same stupefied horror we now look back at ancient Greeks leaving infants on the road to die of exposure.

That... does not follow. It's not the inconvenience of having to go through a pregnancy that makes people have abortions. It's the inconvenience of having to raise a child.

That or a myriad of other reasons.

 

[tstorm823]

That... does now follow. It's not the inconvenience of having to go through a pregnancy that makes people have abortions. It's the inconvenience of having to raise a child.

That or a myriad of other reasons.

There is a waiting line to adopt infants in the US. Nobody has to raise a child they don't want to.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Well I mean, I'm sure POWER is always going to be the end goal for most of the republicans, but really, how does an abortion ban work to achieving that goal? It's going to hit red states the hardest. Again, this is literally going to benefit nobody, apart from zealots that wanna feel good about themselves (and dipshits that feel they now owned the libs I guess).

With them banning gay people and literature there's atleast the "logic" of wanting to suppress a mentality and identity they don't agree with, so that their own can remain dominant. It's fucked up and evil, but it's something that benefits their side and weakens (others) the other. But abortion bans, in the short term, weakens their own states.

Depends if you mean the leaders or rank and file. For the leaders, (assuming they aren't believers themselves), it's some excuse to rally their side against their opponents. By comparison, evolution didn't start off as that controversial in the US, lots of Christians were ok with that being taught in school when it became widely known that evolution was a thing in the 1860s. The backlash really got going in the1920s, but started off localised and spread from there, because it's something the church and demagogues could use to whip up a mob and set it on someone they've decided was their enemy.

Give the people someone to hate, someone at once weaker than themselves they can attack without fear, and simultaneously seemingly powerful enough to need to be attacked, and you can get them behind all sorts of things and facing away from real issues.

In a strange way, the people using such hatred for their own ends are almost more respectable (IMHO) than the true believers. Lying for political reasons is understandable, but choosing to believe an obvious lie because doesn't suit you, not so much. Not to say I can guarantee I'm not doing the same, though.

 

[Bedinsis]

There is a waiting line to adopt infants in the US. Nobody has to raise a child they don't want to.

And you think it will still be there by the time artificial wombs is a reality?

 

[McElroy]

It doesn't sound silly. Not killing people is an exceptionally popular idea. People rationalize a lack of personhood to avoid coming to terms with the tragedy of the unborn dying, the same way people used to not name a baby until well after birth because the chance of infant death was so high they wanted to disassociate. Now that same logic gets applied to a certain point in gestation, which is only ever going to move closer to conception as medical science advances. And at some point, likely beyond our lifetimes, methods for transferring a fetus intact to an artificial womb are going to be developed, at which point the idea of killing a fetus in the womb and sucking it out is going to be looked back on with the same stupefied horror we now look back at ancient Greeks leaving infants on the road to die of exposure.

"Inevitability" though artificial wombs (and gene editing) could maybe do this for the wealthiest of us. I'd bet on popular support if truly foolproof and cheap contraception becomes available. Abortion would be rarely necessary in those conditions even in my opinion. But the far more probable alternative is a demographic shift through more conservative and religious people moving in while secular and liberal people only have one child on average.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Not killing people is an exceptionally popular idea.

Then what are all the guns for? Then what are all the capital punishment laws for? Please, please stop telling such obvious lies; you're only insulting our intelligence.

There is a waiting line to adopt infants in the US. Nobody has to raise a child they don't want to.

I've already told you that there are already tens of thousands of children waiting for adoption. Your "waiting line" is looking for perfect white children; minorities are routinely ignored.

As Ohio restricts abortions, 10-year-old girl travels to Indiana for procedure

After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, it's left some in Ohio to travel outside the state for an abortion. Among them is a 10-year-old girl.

www.cincinnati.com

The future is now old man.

Well, that's what she gets for having a vagina! Little harlot, tempting that pure, innocent man!

 

[Casual Shinji]

Well, that's what she gets for having a vagina! Little harlot, tempting that pure, innocent man!

Sanctity of life dude - fuck all these kids if they can't understand their lives are worthless in the face of the sanctity of life.

And that was sarcasm obviously, because I'm not even in the mood for someone to take this at face value. The SCOTUS makes it hard to really joke about any of this anymore.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Fuck, they don't care. GOP'll happily force her to carry her rapists child until she's on the brink of death, when the odds are the worst that she'll survive it before rolling the dice.

The dead 10 year old gets to go to heaven after all.

 

[XsjadoBlaydette]

Fuck, they don't care. GOP'll happily force her to carry her rapists child until she's on the brink of death, when the odds are the worst that she'll survive it before rolling the dice.

The dead 10 year old gets to go to heaven after all.

Coincidentally not so easy to testify against your male perpetrator when dead too.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Coincidentally not so easy to testify against your male perpetrator when dead too.

Excuse you, that's the single father of a motherless child you're slandering.

Christ, I need a shower

 

[XsjadoBlaydette]

Excuse you, that's the single father of a motherless child you're slandering.

Christ, I need a shower

Yeah, I don't really know what else to say anymore with this shit. Nothing helpful left. Nothing to debate left. This is the the hell they want and there's seemingly nothing anyone can do to stop it.

 

[tstorm823]

Then what are all the guns for? Then what are all the capital punishment laws for? Please, please stop telling such obvious lies; you're only insulting our intelligence.

I'm not a particular fan of guns, though I appreciate the intent of the second amendment, and I'm fully against capital punishment.

I've already told you that there are already tens of thousands of children waiting for adoption. Your "waiting line" is looking for perfect white children; minorities are routinely ignored.

That's not true. The waiting line is looking for infants to adopt, and people wanting to skip that line often go to China or Africa or South America to find an infant up for adoption. Your attempt to deflect this to racism is so obviously misguided, I don't know what you were thinking when you typed this.

The children "waiting to be adopted" are older children in foster care, most of whom aren't awaiting adoption, as they were removed from their parents with conditions for the parents to regain custody down the line, and therefore cannot be adopted. Like 75% of those in foster care are not eligible for adoption. Of those who are, many spend longer times in foster care not because nobody is willing to adopt, but because they come from troubled backgrounds and those arranging adoptions are looking carefully for the right fit rather than the first people to offer. Even then, the majority of those who go through the foster system spend less than a year in it before being adopted. And none of this has anything to do with the wait line to adopt infants. You just don't know what you're talking about.

And you think it will still be there by the time artificial wombs is a reality?

Yes. Infertility is reasonably common, and people want to raise children.

 

[Seanchaidh]

I mean, there will inevitably come a time when abortion is as illegal as infanticide the world over.

Neither inevitable nor particularly desirable.

 

[Trunkage]

Neither inevitable nor particularly desirable.

It would only be desirable at a time when it is impossible for a woman to get pregnant accidentally or forcibly

I.e. the woman controls exactly when she gets pregnant so any fetus deaths would be intentional

Until such time, tstorm is living in dream land. This suggestion might be as well: To get to tstorm's Utopia, vasectomy should be mandatory from birth until such time that sperm is needed for insemination

Seems only fair

 

[Kwak]

Fun ride