USA Roe, the evangelicals and the war on choice

[Crow54]

Just for shits and giggles, how about considering the idea I saw that all men get vasectomies which can be reversed when they prove they are mentally, financially and emotionally capable of fathering a child - and, further, that they are prepared to put their money and time into the raising of that child until the age of 18 (or 21).

Problem solved before it takes hold, prevention better than the cure, that sort of thing, and I'm sure men wouldn't mind being told what to do with their bodies and their health (hell, even the small percentage whose vasectomies can't be reversed would see the bigger picture, I'm sure).

Good idea. I also like this:

 

[Seeds]

Good idea. I also like this:

arent fathers already responsible to support a child financially until they are 18 even though they do not have the choice to abort?

what am i missing. This is already the law isnt it?

 

[Cooldude]

These GOP politicians will know they ****ed up, when they ask their mistresses/prostitutes to get an abortion and they can't anymore

 

[Osho]

These GOP politicians will know they f’ed up, when they ask their mistresses/prostitutes to get an abortion and they can't anymore

Yep. Remember this southern gent?

"According to Young, Edwards devised a plan to have Young claim to be the father of Hunter's baby.

"He wanted me to issue a statement claiming paternity for Rielle's child," Young said.

The issue was, not only was it not true, but Young is married.

"When he asked me, I, I really about fell over. 'How could John Edwards ask you to do that?'" Young's wife, Cheri Young, told ABC News in a 2010 interview."

John Edwards and the Mistress: A Breakdown of One of America's Most Sensational Scandals

John Edwards was once a titan in the Democratic Party, until he was caught in one of the most sensational sex scandals in American history.

abcnews.go.com

 

[Crow54]

arent fathers already responsible to support a child financially until they are 18 even though they do not have the choice to abort?

what am i missing. This is already the law isnt it?

Any man could deny being the father. DNA would prove the case one way or another.

 

[Seeds]

Any man could deny being the father. DNA would prove the case one way or another.

Arent dna tests mandated in such cases though?

 

[Crow54]

Arent dna tests mandated in such cases though?

I don't know. Perhaps the letter writer knows more than I do. Can you quote the law on that for me?

 

[Maggie5]

Any man could deny being the father. DNA would prove the case one way or another.

In the case of rape. You would have to catch the 'rapist' first to get a match.

 

[western royboy]

A massive step backwards for society and a massive win for people who believe in sky fairies…

 

[Saint]

arent fathers already responsible to support a child financially until they are 18 even though they do not have the choice to abort?

what am i missing. This is already the law isnt it?

Presumably the incestuous/rapist father is in prison. So double-whammy. Poor women don't have DNA tests coming out of their ear-holes

 

[Saint]

These GOP politicians will know they f’ed up, when they ask their mistresses/prostitutes to get an abortion and they can't anymore

Rich people will still send their mistresses to liberal states for abortions.

This law is to keep poor people poor, to make them suffer for their sins. Literally.

Also worth pointing out that the Jewish religion does not prohibit abortion.

You can't look at this through the lens of well-off people. This is aimed at poor people in small towns.

Amy Coney Barrett says that it's so there's a steady supply of babies for adoption, because there's a shortage.

What she overlooks is that there's only a shortage of white babies, which selective white parents only want to adopt.

It's wholly disgusting. Three justices lied to the Senate for their confirmation, yet they're still saying the judiciary is politically impartial.

 

[Seeds]

Rich people will still send their mistresses to liberal states for abortions.

This law is to keep poor people poor, to make them suffer for their sins. Literally.

Also worth pointing out that the Jewish religion does not prohibit abortion.

You can't look at this through the lens of well-off people. This is aimed at poor people in small towns.

Amy Coney Barrett says that it's so there's a steady supply of babies for adoption, because there's a shortage.

What she overlooks is that there's only a shortage of white babies, which selective white parents only want to adopt.

It's wholly disgusting. Three justices lied to the Senate for their confirmation, yet they're still saying the judiciary is politically impartial.

Think this is a reach. Most of the pro lifers are poor people. Anti abortion views are mostly pushed by the base, not the elites.

 

[Saint]

Think this is a reach. Most of the pro lifers are poor people. Anti abortion views are mostly pushed by the base, not the elites.

Haha. Not by the elites? Who do you think is funding this? Where do you get this pro-lifers are poor people stuff? Did you just make it up?

Business leaders helped to bankroll the anti-abortion groups who could soon see Roe v. Wade overturned

Anti-abortion lobbying groups backed by corporate leaders have raised over $40 million since Donald Trump became president.

www.cnbc.com

Rich people still got abortions pre-Roe, they just paid a lot for good care. Poor people used unsafe methods and died because of it. That's what will happen this time around too. More lives will be lost than saved.

 

[Seeds]

Haha. Not by the elites? Who do you think is funding this? Where do you get this pro-lifers are poor people stuff? Did you just make it up?

Business leaders helped to bankroll the anti-abortion groups who could soon see Roe v. Wade overturned

Anti-abortion lobbying groups backed by corporate leaders have raised over $40 million since Donald Trump became president.

www.cnbc.com

Rich people still got abortions pre-Roe, they just paid a lot for good care. Poor people used unsafe methods and died because of it. That's what will happen this time around too. More lives will be lost than saved.

rich people fund everything.

the pro lifers arent coming from urban rich republicans. Theyre coming from the religious nutters in the poor rural regions. religious nutters are poor. Because the poor are uneducated. Thats often why they turn to religion.

 

[Saint]

rich people fund everything.

the pro lifers arent coming from urban rich republicans. Theyre coming from the religious nutters in the poor rural regions. religious nutters are poor. Be ause the poor are uneducated.

You're the one who said most pro-lifers are poor people. Most people in America are poor people. "Anti abortion views are pushed by the base". What does "Base" even mean?

75% of Americans want abortion kept legal.

Poll: Majority Want To Keep Abortion Legal, But They Also Want Restrictions

An NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist survey found that three-quarters of Americans want the Supreme Court to uphold Roe v. Wade. But there is also complexity — and contradiction — in respondents' views.

www.npr.org

What do you mean by "Base". Your using Fox News language brought to you by the "elites" yourself.

Just using the word "elites" is nonsense. Are Hannity McConnell and Koch not "elites"?

 

[Ben The Donkey]

Rich people will still send their mistresses to liberal states for abortions.

This law is to keep poor people poor, to make them suffer for their sins. Literally.

Also worth pointing out that the Jewish religion does not prohibit abortion.

You can't look at this through the lens of well-off people. This is aimed at poor people in small towns.

Amy Coney Barrett says that it's so there's a steady supply of babies for adoption, because there's a shortage.

What she overlooks is that there's only a shortage of white babies, which selective white parents only want to adopt.

It's wholly disgusting. Three justices lied to the Senate for their confirmation, yet they're still saying the judiciary is politically impartial.

I think you'll find that the vast majority of abortions and children given up for adoption in the USA would be centred in large cities - yes, largely among the poor and under educated. You'll also find that among those, the majority would not be white. The social issues centred around young women in large but poor American cities is in the public domain of information. Absentee fathers, economic woes, cultural pressure. And, yes, religion as a constraint.

I don't know where you're getting the information that there is a shortage of "white" babies put up for adoption in the USA, but if its true then perhaps you should consider why it is the case. There could be several reasons for it, and all of them could be considered factors in the situation (again, taking your statement at face value) rather than just one. Perhaps this Amy Barrett is merely trying to avoid quantifying a social issue as one of race, rather than "overlooking" anything. It would be opening a can of worms, wouldn't it, should certain information become widely acknowledged.
Somewhat ironic to think that if you had more information to hand, you'd realise that the result of the USA making abortion illegal (one result, at any rate,) would be that any supposed divide in the numbers of white and non-white babies available for adoption might grow even wider.

It is, moreover, entirely natural for a racial or cultural preference to be made when considering adoption. And, again, its not confined to white people at all. I doubt you'd find any Chinese couples wanting to adopt white babies, or Africans. Those wanting to adopt a child are naturally inclined to avoid questions by passing it off as their own child, at least at first.
Is it only white folks you're wanting to take to task for that preference, or is your distaste for making a preference known more... universal?

 

[Ben The Donkey]

Ideology knows no compromise. Religion replacement vs. Religion. Both have superiority complex.

Quite right.
I suppose you could argue that the religion-replacement folks are less dogmatic and far more fluid, idealistically speaking.

Interesting to note, too, that the modern world, in its determination to separate itself from religion in general, is far more inclined to hold the intangible dear than it has ever been. To whit, the replacement of religious dogma with ideals which have little or no more of a pragmatic foundation than those it seeks to replace.

 

[western royboy]

Quite right.
I suppose you could argue that the religion-replacement folks are less dogmatic and far more fluid, idealistically speaking.

Interesting to note, too, that the modern world, in its determination to separate itself from religion in general, is far more inclined to hold the intangible dear than it has ever been. To whit, the replacement of religious dogma with ideals which have little or no more of a pragmatic foundation than those it seeks to replace.

Can you interpret this statement for me…I’m only a simple man

 

[Father Jack]

Can you interpret this statement for me…I’m only a simple man

Sounds to me a lot like the statement that it takes as much faith to be an atheist as it does to believe in a god.

 

[Chief]

Say they do drop the right to abortion.

What will they use to get the religious nuts to vote? They've got what they want. What's next?

 

[Osho]

Amy Coney Barrett says that it's so there's a steady supply of babies for adoption, because there's a shortage.

Line about need for domestic supply of infants misattributed

Following the Supreme Court draft opinion leak on Roe v. Wade, some social media users zeroed in on the document’s inclu

www.politifact.com

 

[Crankyhawk]

Mandating Untested Vaccinations is also dehumanising and has equally undermined the argument for the sanctity of bodily autonomy.

if only these antivax libertarian types then didn't turn up to hospital in extremis demanding care...

 

[Crankyhawk]

arent fathers already responsible to support a child financially until they are 18 even though they do not have the choice to abort?

what am i missing. This is already the law isnt it?

that law is often not enforced, or the father is such a non earning deadbeat that there is no income to recover, or father not tracked down

 

[Seeds]

that law is often not enforced, or the father is such a non earning deadbeat that there is no income to recover, or father not tracked down

So the laws already fair. It just needs to be better enforced.

ps. No one has to earn anything. he wouldnt of been earning anything when they were together either. women who dont work are never called non earning deadbeats.

 

[Crankyhawk]

So the laws already fair. It just needs to be better enforced.

ps. No one has to earn anything. he wouldnt of been earning anything when they were together either. women who dont work are never called non earning deadbeats.

In the context of child support I doubt that there are many cases where father has full custody and is expecting but not getting child support; but sure in that situation I’d be comfortable calling the non earning mother a “non earning deadbeat”