Maybe a million women get an abortion each year in the United States. The number is rough and we have not looked in ages but it's extremely high.
So the Angel of Moralistic Restrictions grants the dream of the GOP and Roe v Wade is done. All abortion is illegal immediately and from this point forward.
Very nice, very nice, dream comes true ... or so it seems.
It won't only be a million annoyed, frustrated, desperate women but it will also be their families because the burden of raising the unwanted baby will either be shared within the family or that baby probably won't make it. All of them are angry with the state because it denied the solution the women wanted for the problem. They will probably be angry with the mother as well but that won't deflect at all their anger toward the state.
The question isn't whether the state believes the reason is valid but rather whether it has the right. One million women and their families will more than likely strongly disagree.
Resentment will grow because chop shops will return and some percentage of the women who go to them will end up in emergency rooms and possibly won't survive due to butchery of the amateurs who try to perform such procedures.
Update from Kannafoot: (not verbatim) he advises on repeal of Roe v Wade, the legal cascade would be to states rights in which state determines its own policy. In the example quoted, abortion was illegal in Rhode Island but permitted in New York state. (End of update from K)
The update is not a major change to the prospect of chop shops although it does mitigate it to some extent. Roe v Wade was made law in 1973 and "Love With the Proper Stranger" with Steve McQueen and Natalie Wood was filmed in 1963. At the time of the movie, abortion was flatly illegal everywhere in America. In the ten years between the movie and Roe v Wade, a significant number of states had made abortion legal.
Note: in the movie, no abortion was performed. McQueen is the unwilling boyfriend and he sees the horror of the chop and won't let Wood go through it. The movie resolves to a happy ending and that's great Hollywood but it's hardly realistic. I'm sure that happens sometimes but we all know many more times when it did not.
That moves the abortion combat at the Federal level to a matter of Constitutional authority rather than moralistic legislation and that only dodges the problem but that's what comes of it in any case.
The disagreement on states rights is fundamental to the party platforms for traditional Republicans and Democrats. The DINOs and RINOs (i.e. in-name-only) don't seem to have much of an idea of such things but you see how confused the parties get when people forget the fundamentals.
(Ed: you sound like Gomer Pyle giving a philosophy class)
Perhaps so but traditional is required for many things, even if I reject it altogether in others, and America is exceptionally adept at throwing them out, often priding itself on this as a form of sociological evolution. Perhaps so but quite a bit gets forgotten nevertheless.
Here at the Rockhouse, we believe it's a cheap solution to throw it down to the states. However, to usurp that is conceivably due a valid charge of legislating morality in reverse (i.e. it forces states to throw out Biblical considerations in any matters of law). This is where we come to the dodge because we know without even thinking about it states will, in fact, legislate for Biblical considerations which Democrats consider in itself a violation of law. We think throwing this back to the states will only amplify the problem by fifty and there will never be an end to it.
Continuing on the chop shop theme.
The sisters around the country of those directly affected will take up with them because they don't believe the state has the right either and now they have in front of them the direct consequence of state interference.
The Age of Moralistic Restriction has gone far past all reasonable limits in legislation. The GOP sees solutions in binary but life never works that way. It's not so simple as to say something is right or wrong in the way they perceive such things. The GOP kills people all over the place and they know it's wrong but believe the circumstances make it right. That rubbery perception of morality isn't even close to convincing and the expectation of passivity from the people in reaction to it is not realistic.
So the Angel of Moralistic Restrictions grants the dream of the GOP and Roe v Wade is done. All abortion is illegal immediately and from this point forward.
Very nice, very nice, dream comes true ... or so it seems.
It won't only be a million annoyed, frustrated, desperate women but it will also be their families because the burden of raising the unwanted baby will either be shared within the family or that baby probably won't make it. All of them are angry with the state because it denied the solution the women wanted for the problem. They will probably be angry with the mother as well but that won't deflect at all their anger toward the state.
The question isn't whether the state believes the reason is valid but rather whether it has the right. One million women and their families will more than likely strongly disagree.
Resentment will grow because chop shops will return and some percentage of the women who go to them will end up in emergency rooms and possibly won't survive due to butchery of the amateurs who try to perform such procedures.
Update from Kannafoot: (not verbatim) he advises on repeal of Roe v Wade, the legal cascade would be to states rights in which state determines its own policy. In the example quoted, abortion was illegal in Rhode Island but permitted in New York state. (End of update from K)
The update is not a major change to the prospect of chop shops although it does mitigate it to some extent. Roe v Wade was made law in 1973 and "Love With the Proper Stranger" with Steve McQueen and Natalie Wood was filmed in 1963. At the time of the movie, abortion was flatly illegal everywhere in America. In the ten years between the movie and Roe v Wade, a significant number of states had made abortion legal.
Note: in the movie, no abortion was performed. McQueen is the unwilling boyfriend and he sees the horror of the chop and won't let Wood go through it. The movie resolves to a happy ending and that's great Hollywood but it's hardly realistic. I'm sure that happens sometimes but we all know many more times when it did not.
That moves the abortion combat at the Federal level to a matter of Constitutional authority rather than moralistic legislation and that only dodges the problem but that's what comes of it in any case.
The disagreement on states rights is fundamental to the party platforms for traditional Republicans and Democrats. The DINOs and RINOs (i.e. in-name-only) don't seem to have much of an idea of such things but you see how confused the parties get when people forget the fundamentals.
(Ed: you sound like Gomer Pyle giving a philosophy class)
Perhaps so but traditional is required for many things, even if I reject it altogether in others, and America is exceptionally adept at throwing them out, often priding itself on this as a form of sociological evolution. Perhaps so but quite a bit gets forgotten nevertheless.
Here at the Rockhouse, we believe it's a cheap solution to throw it down to the states. However, to usurp that is conceivably due a valid charge of legislating morality in reverse (i.e. it forces states to throw out Biblical considerations in any matters of law). This is where we come to the dodge because we know without even thinking about it states will, in fact, legislate for Biblical considerations which Democrats consider in itself a violation of law. We think throwing this back to the states will only amplify the problem by fifty and there will never be an end to it.
Continuing on the chop shop theme.
The sisters around the country of those directly affected will take up with them because they don't believe the state has the right either and now they have in front of them the direct consequence of state interference.
The Age of Moralistic Restriction has gone far past all reasonable limits in legislation. The GOP sees solutions in binary but life never works that way. It's not so simple as to say something is right or wrong in the way they perceive such things. The GOP kills people all over the place and they know it's wrong but believe the circumstances make it right. That rubbery perception of morality isn't even close to convincing and the expectation of passivity from the people in reaction to it is not realistic.
19 comments:
We will never agree on your logic on abortion. But the GOP does not kill a million people per year
Since R v W over 50 million abortions World wide since R v W
over a Billion abortions
You will claim that those arent lives just tumors needing to be cut out and thrown away. No worries that is your right. You are wrong but it is your belief.
Maybe planned parenthood should spend thier time teaching birth control. I know prevent the conception is such a novel idea. And would require the participants to show self control and some degree of accountability.
Or they can just keep on relying on abortions as they are so simple. Maybe you should talk to the women who have an incredibly hard time dealing with it for the rest of thier lives. Should not be hard to find them.
In 40 years there have been some 50 million abortion in a female population of about 200 million females of child rearing age in this country over the last 40 years
How scary is that number
Not very for the left
If she wants an abortion why do I have to pay for it. With goverment subsidies it is cheaper to get an abortion than a root canal.
Even cheaper to use birth control
Paying for it is hardly relevant when practically every other medical procedure is covered. When it goes a la carte for what you will support and what you won't, it's no longer a system but rather a dogfight and I offer the last fifty or sixty years as proof.
GOP kills a million people a year without even trying and they get tremendous applause from the American public for doing it. Well, they fall short on that too but they never accomplish much anyway.
Must be Doc to be putting words in my mouth as to what I will say. Hardly an adult technique. In fact, I didn't say anything of that nature and the discussion was strictly on the basis of process and logic and has nothing to do with self-serving morality (that which only serves to rationalize religion). The rationale for abortion is trivial and uninteresting whereas the process of making such a mess of it legally has some interest.
Planned Parenthood spends little of its time with abortion and a great deal with education and other services. Consider reading.
I've talked to women who have had abortions and no-one liked that fact, least of all they, but it enabled them to get on with their lives. As to ones who wished they had not done it, likely they would have done better if they hadn't been beaten to shit by so-called pro-life militarists with the idea of their shame.
Yah, lots of judgment. This has got to be Doc. Lots of melodrama with little content.
It amuses me endless that it's males making all the noise. It's on behalf of women, isn't it? (larfs)
Pleae document the million people per year the GOP kills. I cant find the bodies.
Also it is planned parenthood who allows ala carte. It is specifically the abortion clinics that get specialized funding for abortions. My daughter cant go to the dentist and get federal subsidies to get a root canal.
Also if they were still under 17 they cant get a root canal without my permission but they can go get an abortion with no parental consent.
The law is flawed in so many ways. If a women wants to kill her child that is her choice. Eliminate the special circumstances and stop asking me to pay for it.
No this is Lotho
Please use some numbers for planned parenthood Such as they perform about 300 abortion per adoption. Or 25- 35 percent of thier revenue or budget is devoted to abortion. These numbers are very hard to verify as each patient would be required to have STD tests pregnancy tests etc none of which go to the abortion line on reporting so that percentage might well be higher without the muddy accounting done
And you skip over the accountability of the women and men involved who could prevent this will a little planning.
If this country spent less time arguing RvW and more time teaching kids there would not be 1M abortions a year. But since most children are raised in single parent homes there is little time for that.
I will never understand your argument that killing a million babies a year is ok since the gop kills also
I dont comment on behalf of women. My daughters both support the right but thankfully I have the Fairy Princess anyway
I feel I am a very open father but due to reactions she saw by other parents to thier daughters pregnancies was very scared to tell me about it.
As I told her I was only dissapointed that she felt I would have the same reaction as they did.
you will never convince me killing a child is right. and even less so because it will make the mother life easier because it is the right time
I bet the Raven is glad that Mts Lotho said I can start my career later
Correct I dont comment with your eloquence just emotion.
Killing babies is just wrong
It's not my purpose to say whether it's right or wrong but rather whether the state has the right to say anything on the matter. It's a fundamentally different thing. Obviously I don't like abortion as a horrible solution to a problem which is easily-prevented. Nevertheless, after that mistake is made, few solutions exist. That situation comes up incredibly often and I simply don't believe the state has any right to tell the woman what she should do.
Whether there's a soul in the fetus isn't really that significant when God spontaneously aborts pregnancies frequently with miscarriages, etc. You may know someone who has suffered one or more of those prior to successfully delivering a baby. I do.
It's ok for God to knock them off but not for women ... hmm ... sounds kind of shifty to me.
Emotion isn't allowed for this as I would like to strangle the son of a bitch who walked away, just stomp his face for making all men look bad and most of all for creating a life which will probably have one massive bitch of a time because of the circumstances.
I can't do such a thing but my emotion would love to do it.
My emotion does not absolve the woman but I am more sympathetic because they are different. Women will do it but not so often to gull a man to get knocked-up because she wants a baby but men will frequently gull a woman because men don't care if she gets knocked-up. That makes her more vulnerable so I don't want to stomp her face, now I want to help her. If there's any punishment, she's carrying it and it's on her to make it something beyond a punishment. There's no lesson I can give her beyond that. Now this baby lives, give it the best you possibly can and no more atonement than that will ever be necessary.
For the man, kick his chicken ass.
Emotion is not allowed or everyone goes to jail.
As to a million deaths, all over the Middle East, refugees getting capped in Europe, starving, drowning, etc. I know you don't support the killing but it happens nevertheless and hardly anyone takes responsibility for it. ISIS made me do it. Kee-rist. It's so kindergarten.
Look at all the deaders in Ukraine and you know much the U.S. was instigating all that. If not for Putin's infinite restraint, there would have been a war over that stunt for sure. Consider what would have happened if it had been Krushchev. We would still be glowing coals as a result of it.
So, yah, I put that up as wanton killing and all with the rationale 'they don't think like we do.'
Ok we will look at only two aspects of the law. Women can have the right. Only they live with it.
Now defend my point you continually dismiss or ignore.
Why does the state have the right to usurp my parent duties by allowing a 13 year old girl to get birth control or an abortion without my knowledge or consent.
That is so far out of bounds
She can get a license without me
Or even get an aspirin at school without my consent. But shr is allowed to go through what is undoubtedly the toughest decision of her young life with onlybthe advice of strangers
Fair enough on your question but my answer won't do too much for you since I don't believe the state has that right either. Your justification for it is valid as well. No argument on that.
Just that a kid is old enough to get herself knocked-up doesn't mean she's mature enough to make a decision about how to deal with it. The state does, in fact, usurp the parent's authority and I don't support it.
That the kid may be too afraid to talk to the parent is a valid consideration as you know. Their fear most likely exceeds reason as you also know ... but sometimes it doesn't. Maybe the dad is a beater. Maybe the mother is.
My concerns aren't outlandish as those situations are disgracefully common. I don't have a snappy answer for what that kid should do. How should the state validate this kid truly has a concern for health or life and effectively she asks for asylum. That's such a stinking sinkhole of madness. I don't know if a good answer even exists because it will be likely too late to be effective due to slow speed of the state.
At some point in the pregnancy, an abortion becomes repugnant to me. In the early stages, frankly, it doesn't particularly concern me but that changes as the fetus develops. Nevertheless, I do not have the medical grounding to say. Sure the fetus may survive outside the womb after a certain point but often with severe impairments and the more so depending on how premature it was. That's not always true but it seems more common than not because the fetus is deprived of a great deal of developmental and nutritive maternal boost to start. I still do not have the medical expertise to make that judgment, however.
If there is parental abuse Human Services needs to be involved and then they can assist the process. In cases like that the state would likely take custody and then make those decisions.
Or an outside panel of therapists maybe
My last point would be the funding which is hugely biased by the state toward abortion.
The cost of an abortion with no insurance is about $350 - $450 through planned parenthood. The rest is government subsidies.
If an insursed women doesnt want to use her insurance so there is no record of the abortion on her insurance she is allowed. And it is cheaper than her insurance since co pays and deductibles are not used.
So abortions are treated completely apart from all other medical procedures.
The laws make it too easy to use abortions as birth control through cost and access.
So the law goes far beyond the right of a women to access to an abortion and funding it. But it also gives very little access to therapy pre or post abortion.
So many holes in the law. I am not asking to repeal RvW. But there are so many viable programs to implement that could prevent the need. Worldwide 25 million a year. As the 6million dollar man said we have the technology.
No disagreement a zillion ways exist to prevent abortions but still they happen ... so make more legitimate ways and education has seemed to reduce teen pregnancies but unknown how much. I do believe it's been significant, tho.
One thing I'm sure is kids will screw, good ones or bad ones, and the only way to stop them is with cattle prods. The abstinence programs invariably have collapsed because it only goes for so long. It would be exceptional to remove the good / bad from it and deal with the fact it happens.
As a parent this is my worst nightmare. My baby girl comes up to me and says, you know what, dad. I think it's time I started to screw.
Girl, you stab me in the heart! (larfs)
I guess people need to learn to hack it so those baby girls can come to you and expect some real answers to I want to screw. What should I know.
Girl, you stab me deep in my heart!!! (larfs) Probably the wrong answer!
As to paying for abortions, I'll just run straight away as it's clear already I think the medical insurance system here is a travesty of Soviet emulations in bureaucracy insofar as most of it is designed to prevent things. I'm not surprised it's a mishmash as I would be surprised if it were not.
Baby girls turn into women. And do screw early. I had many one sided conversations starting probably too early and offering them a way to start birth control without my knowing.
It is not a mish mash on paying for abortions. It is state subsidizes like no other procedure. This has nothing to do with insurance. If she were to go to a private insurance it would costs her her co pay and any deductible. If it is the first procedure of the year and was my insurance it would costs about $1500. Or she can go to planned parenthood and pay $350 and the rest is paid by subsidies taxes.
So this is a legal side not a morality side
Sure it's a mishmash as the flip side is some malady which insurance companies don't cover because it's too rare, too expensive, or whatever reason. Too bad, you're croaked.
The state doesn't subsidize that so fair enough the system is loaded but this justification for rejection is based on a system I don't accept anyway. Given a one-payer system, there's nothing to protest ... or protest all of it, as you wish.
Perhaps your way you mention above is the smoothest way to ease into a general acceptance of reality. It's going to happen so let's make sure the parachute works. I strongly suspect that's not common in many parents as it requires a whole lot of maturity and many times it just ain't there. Maybe it sucks but it's real and you need to own it.
I do think in general there needs to be a whole lot of growing regarding sex and goodness / badness. It's got tied to Biblical purity and that just twists it around the Moon. No wonder kids get bent all out of shape. As always, I'm not disputing the Bible but this aspect of it really gets flogged and it's got to mutate kids when it's something they will do anyway.
We don't need boobs on every billboard but a little bit of lighten up would go a long way, I'm thinking. I don't mean you as your attitude seems to be there already but a whole lot of people are rigid and that can't be good.
I'm SO damn glad I did not have to face this! (larfs)
Post a Comment