The Women Are Marching Today!

[Nick0678]

28 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

If I remember right you live in Eastern Europe right? So I can't expect you to understand what's going on here in the U.S.  I'll try to explain briefly.

Yes i live in Greece.

So you are saying that we are almost in 2022 but pastors can control how local Governors or the Federal government will administer the country.  Are we still talking about U.S.A  because that actually sounds more like IRAN (no offense to any fellow Persians that might be here).

[Silent Mistwalker]

I blame the religious groups sent/expelled/persecuted by Europeans for the fanatics on this continent. 

[Mollymews]

13 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Needless to say I hope the ruling goes that way.

am pretty sure the deputisation question is what trouble the minds of the US Supreme Court when it chose not to stay the law recently

the trouble is for the more originalist and textualist Justices.  How to affirm a State's ability to deputise a citizen and at the same time abdicate their responsibility for the deputisation.  Is some gnarly constitutional implications for the originalist/textualist Justices in this.  And is going to take some fairly complicated legal opinions from these Justices to deal with the implications. Which is kind of what was alluded to in the decision not to stay. We (the Justices) need more time to work out what those opinions might be

i think tho that these Justices are quite happy for the law to be contested at the local level first. So that by the time the case reaches the Supreme Court then they only have to rule on the decisions of the lower Courts which is not quite the same as having to rule on the question of abortion itself, This particular law is not a great vehicle for the Justices who are looking for a way to overturn Roe

[Luna Bliss]

18 minutes ago, Nick0678 said:

So you are saying that we are almost in 2022 but pastors can control how local Governors or the Federal government will administer the country.  Are we still talking about U.S.A  because that actually sounds more like IRAN (no offense to any fellow Persians that might be here).

haha...well it does sound like Iran and the like. Tbh, I'm not sure it's much different...it's just more hidden.

I'm not sure the U.S. has ever really been a democracy though...but it does depend on how you define the word.

Politicians can be devious. It's not a direct connection between pastors who are controlling the government -- the pastors are simply preaching their interpretation of the Bible. 
Politicians always pander to whomever they decide will get them votes. Case in point, at one time the Democrats appealed to the nations racism, and that switched to where the Republicans have a large following from those who are threatened by our changes attempting to be more inclusive of Blacks. It is named The Southern Strategy.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

And so, certain governmental factions appeal to the desires of those who disapprove of abortion (usually those in various Evangelical or Catholic communities), and even stoke the fires for their personal benefit. Nothing like putting a hot-button issue front and center to polarize the public and force them to fight each other, take sides.

You can read more here in this article about Dominionism. We have 3 strands of Dominionism here. There are quite a few of these people in Congress currently.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dominionism

The takeaway is that they believe the U.S. should be a Christian nation and conform to their interpretation of the Bible, without separation of church and state.

Edited October 4, 2021 by Luna Bliss

[Mollymews]

1 minute ago, Luna Bliss said:

Why would they even propose such a thing do you think?

Too many Cowboys high in the saddle with impaired thinking maybe?

i think the representatives who created this law were being a little bit disingenuous.  I think was more an exercise in feeding raw meat to their base supporters than anything else

and when the meat turns to custard in the courts then they can say wasn't my fault. I tried to do what we both want to be right but yanno, dang liberal judges. So keep voting for me, keep sending me your money and I will always try to do what we want to be right

[Luna Bliss]

20 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

i think the representatives who created this law were being a little bit disingenuous.  I think was more an exercise in feeding raw meat to their base supporters than anything else

and when the meat turns to custard in the courts then they can say wasn't my fault. I tried to do what we both want to be right but yanno, dang liberal judges. So keep voting for me, keep sending me your money and I will always try to do what we want to be right

That sounds plausible.

But it might be more disconcerting to imagine a large percentage of their base actually thought a world approaching the sci-fi book 1984 is a good thing!

[Finite]

4 hours ago, Innula Zenovka said:

It's the fact that it's politically contentious at all, though, and that it's still contentious after 30 years, that's surprising.    In the UK, it's always been treated as an "issue of conscience" (meaning that the parliamentary parties don't whip their MPs to vote one or way or another, and there's a free vote on it) and attempts seriously to restrict women's reproductive rights have never gained traction here.   

Some individual politicians, often quite senior ones, have expressed their opposition to abortion, but every parliamentary vote on restricting the time limits always goes the same way, and that's not likely to change.   

That's what I meant -- the fact people are still arguing about abortion in the US seems strange to many outsiders, as does the fact it's become so political an issue.

For instance, if the UK and Malta (where abortion is illegal) fell under a single government and decisions made in Malta that were confirmed at the federal level could have a direct impact on people in the UK the issue would be a quite a bit more contentious than what you experience.

The reason I chose UK and Malta is because the distance between the two is nearly identical to the distance between the US region of New England where are majority of people are pro-life (and is roughly the same size as the UK) and Texas where the issue is quite a bit more contentious (and is 3 times the size of the UK).

76% of people in the UK are pro-choice. In  New England its between 63% (Rhode Island) and 74% (Massachusetts) pro-choice. On average New England is around 70% pro-choice. With that kind of majority views obviously there wouldn't be any contention. Texas however is 45% pro-choice and 55% pro-life (this is actually an improvement) so there is contention there and contention in other parts of the country since what's decided in Texas and ruled on at the federal level could impact people who have entirely different views.

UK doesn't have this issue. And likely doesn't even concern itself with what happens in Malta. Am I surprised or think it's strange the UK has nearly zero contention on abortion? No, since nearly all of it have the same view. Am I surprised or think its strange that abortion is illegal in Malta? No, 95% of the country doesn't think it should be legal. Am I surprised or think it's strange that there's contention in the US over abortion? No, overall it's nearly 50/50 pro-choice and pro-life. Do I think the issue would be more contentious if the UK and Malta somehow fell under a single government? Absolutely. 

Edited October 4, 2021 by Finite

[Arielle Popstar]

5 hours ago, Rowan Amore said:

I never meant to imply it doesn't have an effect on anyone else.  It has no effect on the general population so comparing it with the vaccine is irrelevant.

Just as any decision between partners, it should be discussed.  

Well the decision to abort also affects the potential of that fetus she is about to get rid of. For better or worse, that potential human being would have had an effect on the the general population. It affects herself as it is pretty common knowledge that there are often ramifications on the mental well being of the woman herself. Depression, thoughts of suicide, increased drugs and alcohol rates is not that uncommon. These things are rarely mentioned by the Rah Rah Abort! crowd. I know friends, and acquaintances who still have a sense of loss for just losing babies through a miscarriage, how much more so for those who have chosen to induce it not realizing or being informed of the mental health considerations that may well come up down the road. My own daughter during a wildchild phase of her teens wound up getting pregnant and unbeknownst to me had it aborted. She wasn't brought up with any particular judgements against it but a few years later after having carried a son to full term, started to suffer from sadness and regret for aborting her first pregnancy, crying for the potential of what that child might have been. The state may not recognize the personhood of a child until it is born, but I am of the opinion that as mothers, the recognition of personhood starts to grow from the moment it starts to develop in the womb.

As far as the correlation with vaccines is concerned, remember an abortion is the end result of 2 people not having taken a "pregnancy vaccine" There are plenty of safe and reliable contraceptives readily available that an educated and informed populace should never have to resort to an abortion. Yet, you and the OP regular complain about those who do not take a Covid vaccine even going to the point of wanting to deny the unvaccinated an ICU bed should it come to that. But a woman who didn't take proper precautions before an evening of fun and then decides the resulting pregnancy is a little inconvenient at this time, you would roll out the red carpet for and push any unvaccinated Covid patient out of their ICU beds to make room for someone needing an abortion. You getting why I am saying there is some inconsistencies in your thinking on this?

[Rowan Amore]

No matter how long and convoluted your reasoning/comparison is, It's still not the same as getting the vaccine.

[Mollymews]

5 hours ago, Rowan Amore said:

No matter how long and convoluted your reasoning/comparison is, It's still not the same as getting the vaccine.

and, abortion is not an infectious disease. Like nobody is going to have their lungs collapsed if they get breathed on by a person who has had an abortion. Same when pregnant, like can't get infected if a pregnant person breathes on you

this is the difference when it comes to personal choice.  A decision to have a baby or not have a baby doesn't imperil the health of others. It can certainly impact the person tho and the unborn, when a decision is made to terminate. And that person gets to live with that decision for the rest of their life. Not their mum, not their dad, not their siblings, not their priest, not their school counsellor, not the local elected representative, not the random stranger with a sign yelling on the side of the road

Edited October 5, 2021 by Mollymews
typs

[Nick0678]

8 hours ago, Finite said:

For instance, if the UK and Malta (where abortion is illegal) fell under a single government and decisions made in Malta ....

Coughs.. The U.K is not part of the E.U. What happens in the U.K stays in the U.K

(just a reminder for those who forgot it.)

[Finite]

1 hour ago, Nick0678 said:

Coughs.. The U.K is not part of the E.U. What happens in the U.K stays in the U.K

(just a reminder for those who forgot it.)

*coughs*(?) I never said they were but thanks for pointing that out if some people didn’t already know that or even cared… I honestly couldn’t imagine needing a passport to travel outside of New England which is about the same size as the UK. So grats? I guess?

Edited October 5, 2021 by Finite

[Nick0678]

4 hours ago, Finite said:

*coughs*(?) I never said they were but thanks for pointing that out if some people didn’t already know that or even cared… I honestly couldn’t imagine needing a passport to travel outside of New England which is about the same size as the UK. So grats? I guess?

Coughs.. don't you need a passport to travel from New England to Japan, China, Brazil, Argentina?

You do realize that when you talk about Malta and the UK you are talking about 2 different countries/nations that have nothing in common, unlike New England and Texas which is the same (U.S.A).

Edited October 5, 2021 by Nick0678

[Luna Bliss]

12 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Well the decision to abort also affects the potential of that fetus she is about to get rid of. For better or worse, that potential human being would have had an effect on the the general population. It affects herself as it is pretty common knowledge that there are often ramifications on the mental well being of the woman herself. Depression, thoughts of suicide, increased drugs and alcohol rates is not that uncommon. These things are rarely mentioned by the Rah Rah Abort! crowd. I know friends, and acquaintances who still have a sense of loss for just losing babies through a miscarriage, how much more so for those who have chosen to induce it not realizing or being informed of the mental health considerations that may well come up down the road. My own daughter during a wildchild phase of her teens wound up getting pregnant and unbeknownst to me had it aborted. She wasn't brought up with any particular judgements against it but a few years later after having carried a son to full term, started to suffer from sadness and regret for aborting her first pregnancy, crying for the potential of what that child might have been. The state may not recognize the personhood of a child until it is born, but I am of the opinion that as mothers, the recognition of personhood starts to grow from the moment it starts to develop in the womb.

I agree that the decision to obtain an abortion should never be taken lightly. Most people value life and when they reflect deeply they view life as miraculous, amazing, and precious.  Most women have a profound desire to nurture the development of young lives, especially when that life originates so personally within their own body.
So as you say, if a woman believes she is ending a life there is the possibility that feelings of immense grief can be the result for some women.

However, your attempt to pull on heartstrings to make your point has fallen flat, as you have constructed an imaginary instrument. According to a recent study 95% of women, at 5 years after their abortion, feel their decision was the right one.
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/01/416421/five-years-after-abortion-nearly-all-women-say-it-was-right-decision-study
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953619306999?via%3Dihub

I suspect that nearly 100% would not regret their decision if it were not for the brainwashing of religion proclaiming some mystical event occurred at the meeting of the biological contribution by both sexes, causing the 'soul' to enter the body at that point and so making that event the beginning of a person.

I don't doubt you have run into women who regretted their abortion in your religious community -- I have encountered them myself, albeit in a different religion. But these cases are not representative of most women by far.
Your statement that "depression, thoughts of suicide, increased drugs and alcohol rates is not that uncommon" due to aborting is simply not true. It doesn't serve your position in this debate to present patently false statements in an attempt to buttress your position.

I am concerned about the women who feel they did something horribly wrong due to unnecessary prescripts from society, and carry such guilt over what was most likely the best decision they could make.

[Luna Bliss]

12 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

you would roll out the red carpet for and push any unvaccinated Covid patient out of their ICU beds to make room for someone needing an abortion. You getting why I am saying there is some inconsistencies in your thinking on this?

Abortions occur overwhelmingly in clinics, not hospitals.  And certainly no ICU (Intensive Care Unit)  bed is needed for an abortion procedure.

[Silent Mistwalker]

7 hours ago, Mollymews said:

and, abortion is not an infectious disease. Like nobody is going to have their lungs collapsed if they get breathed on by a person who has had an abortion. Same when pregnant, like can't get infected if a pregnant person breathes on you

this is the difference when it comes to personal choice.  A decision to have a baby or not have a baby doesn't imperil the health of others. It can certainly impact the person tho and the unborn, when a decision is made to terminate. And that person gets to live with that decision for the rest of their life. Not their mum, not their dad, not their siblings, not their priest, not their school counsellor, not the local elected representative, not the random stranger with a sign yelling on the side of the road

And not the one who was forced to carry to term a child that was the result of r-a-p-e.

Much like how LL has determined that word is taboo and has been filtered. Their idea of a brave new world is one of control as well.

Edited October 5, 2021 by Silent Mistwalker

[Silent Mistwalker]

Quote

and, abortion is not an infectious disease. Like nobody is going to have their lungs collapsed if they get breathed on by a person who has had an abortion. Same when pregnant, like can't get infected if a pregnant person breathes on you

this is the difference when it comes to personal choice.  A decision to have a baby or not have a baby doesn't imperil the health of others. It can certainly impact the person tho and the unborn, when a decision is made to terminate. And that person gets to live with that decision for the rest of their life. Not their mum, not their dad, not their siblings, not their priest, not their school counsellor, not the local elected representative, not the random stranger with a sign yelling on the side of the road

 

And not the one who was forced to carry to term a child that was the result of r-a-p-e.

Much like how LL has determined that word is taboo and has been filtered. Their idea of a brave new world is one of control as well.

The first post I made is now in hidden limbo because of the one word I had to add dashes to. At my age, being treated like a child is only going to piss me off. I talk when I'm pissed and people hear it.

Edited October 5, 2021 by Silent Mistwalker

[roseelvira]

50 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

. According to a recent study 95% of women, at 5 years after their abortion, feel their decision was the right one.
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/01/416421/five-years-after-abortion-nearly-all-women-say-it-was-right-decision-study
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953619306999?via%3Dihub

As i read it  it was talking about the women in that particular study NOT ALL WOMEN who had abortions across the United States.  the article stated that so it was just for that study not across the United States  

Using five years of longitudinal data, collected one-week post-abortion and semi-annually for five years from women who sought abortions at 30 US facilities

the other article stated

The analysis included 667 participants who had abortions at the start of the study. The women were surveyed a week after they sought care and every six months thereafter, for a total of 11 times. 

 

So in fairness put in all the information.  It is not 95 percent of ALL Women across the United States. It is a study from 30 facilities and there are many facilities hospitals that do abortions across the USA that were not included in that study,  and if i read it correctly the other article stated 667 participants so that is not every woman across the United States who had an abortion and using the dates for the abortion they used in their study .

 

 

1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

However, your attempt to pull on heartstrings to make your point has fallen flat, as you have constructed an imaginary instrument.

ok confused on why this was said?   There are women who still regret the decision of having an abortion. What is this imaginary instrument? 

 

on a personal note, 

 

A few women i worked with had chosen to abort and to this day they regret their decision.  Even though they now have other children, husband   they wonder what that child would have been a boy or girl. Would that child have grown to be the next Chopin or a   research DR, to cure childhood cancer? As she said every Mother's Day she goes into the bathroom and pukes and weeps as she has such deep regrets.  

Abortion does have emotional consequences for the person. 

 

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I'm sorry, but I don't quite see why the fact a particular woman might later come to regret her decision to have an abortion is any sort of argument for restricting that right.

After all, plenty of people certainly also come to regret having children for whatever reason,  and certainly plenty of people later come to regret all sorts of decisions, whether it's getting married, joining the army, voting for a particular political candidate or buying a particular house or other major purchase.

The fact someone may later come to regret a particular decision is no reason for their government to try to stop her taking it.    

 

 

 

Edited October 5, 2021 by Innula Zenovka

[Arielle Popstar]

8 minutes ago, roseelvira said:

the other article stated

The analysis included 667 participants who had abortions at the start of the study. The women were surveyed a week after they sought care and every six months thereafter, for a total of 11 times. 

So in fairness put in all the information.  It is not 95 percent of ALL Women across the United States. It is a study from 30 facilities and there are many facilities hospitals that do abortions across the USA that were not included in that study,  and if i read it correctly the other article stated 667 participants so that is not every woman across the United States who had an abortion and using the dates for the abortion they used in their study .

A couple of other points on this study Luna is trying to rely on to push her narrative is that the study was funded by pro abortion groups, was done by telephone interviews which makes it all rather impersonal and less likely for someone to share about something deeply personal and lastly:

The findings could have been biased by the fact that only 38 per cent of those asked to take part in the survey accepted, and women who felt more negatively about their decision might have been less likely to participate. NewScientist.com

[roseelvira]

1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

I suspect that nearly 100% would not regret their decision if it were not for the brainwashing of religion proclaiming some mystical event occurred at the meeting of the biological contribution by both sexes, causing the 'soul' to enter the body at that point and so making that event the beginning of a person.

I see that is your opinion. People chose what to believe.  I myself left the church for a long time to search for answers to questions i had about life.  I chose to go back to my chosen beliefs.

SO we are at another question overlapping, question of the event of the beginning of a person as you stated another question and people have different views on it .

 

 

1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

I am concerned about the women who feel they did something horribly wrong due to unnecessary prescripts from society, and carry such guilt over what was most likely the best decision they could make.

In most churches be it catholic /orthodox/ Christian   etc they have counseling   for women /couples who have made that choice and there is love and understanding compassion.  

Hollywood has used the "you will burn in the fires of ,,,,,," for the drama,

  

 

 

 

 

 

[Rowan Amore]

None of which makes it comparable in any way to getting the vaccine which is my point.  I've yet to see a valid argument that one woman getting an abortion can effect the health of any random person she may come in contact with.  

[Arielle Popstar]

23 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

I'm sorry, but I don't quite see why the fact a particular woman might later come to regret her decision to have an abortion is any sort of argument for restricting that right.

After all, plenty of people certainly also come to regret having children for whatever reason,  and certainly plenty of people later come to regret all sorts of decisions, whether it's getting married, joining the army, voting for a particular political candidate or buying a particular house or other major purchase.

The fact someone may later come to regret a particular decision is reason for their government to try to stop them making it.    

It is what that regret may lead to for those who find no way to deal with the pain. Suicide, alcoholism, drug addiction etc. Are there not laws in the UK that require truth in advertising for products and services?

15 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

None of which makes it comparable in any way to getting the vaccine which is my point.  I've yet to see a valid argument that one woman getting an abortion can effect the health of any random person she may come in contact with.  

I've not seen any proof that an infected and vaccinated individual would not affect the health of a random person either, which then begs the question as to why you push for mandated vaccines even for those who have a high incidence of being susceptible to a life threatening or altering side effect. All I am seeing from you is "autonomy for me and not for thee". 

[roseelvira]

The abortion topic has many layers to it and many things to consider.

The one issue is regardless if you agree with abortion or not why should your tax money pay for it.

NOTE most agree that in the case of   the word not allowed to use on the forum, yes tax money for that situation if that caused the pregnancy.

I have a friend who is atheist and his thought is "Why should my tax money pay for her birth control or abortion?

It was her choice to have relations with that man.

No one paid for my ribbed trojans, !!! "

Another thing he stated was "What is necessary for one to keep one's body alive?

One needs, air, food, water!

NO ONE has ever died from NOT having sex. 

Posted w his permission.

Just another layer of thought to this complex situation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Innula Zenovka]

47 minutes ago, roseelvira said:

SO we are at another question overlapping, question of the event of the beginning of a person as you stated another question and people have different views on it .

Yes, and I think that's the problem.    I mean, I regard the foetal heartbeat test as not terribly useful, since if a heart transplant donor isn't dead before their still-beating  and perfectly healthy heart is removed for transplant, they certainly are afterwards, which must mean a murder has been committed at some point.

For myself, I'd rather use similar criteria to determine when life begins to those we use to determine when it ends (and patients are certified as being dead and their vital organs therefore available for transplant, if that was what they wanted), and ask when the organised electrical activity in the foetus' developing brain becomes recognisably that of a living human being, as it begins to regulate its own automatic bodily processes and chemistry (that's some time in the seventh month, I believe).

I'm not saying that's the best test, but at least I can justify my reasoning with reference to something other than theology and the question of at what point the body becomes ensouled.

That's why I'm so uncomfortable arguing about abortion -- so often, it comes down to an argument about religion, and I don't think that courts, legislatures or this forum are particularly good places to conduct such debates.

 

 

Edited October 5, 2021 by Innula Zenovka