The Conservative War On Women

JC wrote:

WHAT THE HELL JUST HAPPENED??

Nothing *just* happened. There's been a dedicated conservative strategy over the past ten years or so that have resulted in dozens of anti-abortion laws being passed. Of course, they're not positioned as being anti-abortion laws. They're positioned as being necessary for the health and safety of the women, which, of course is complete bullsh*t.

The laws are three fold:

1) Shame and guilt. These laws are designed to inflict the maximum amount of psychic harm on women by forcing them to wait to have a completely legal medical procedure performed; by requiring them to undergo needless and overly intrusive tests, such as trans-vaginal sonograms; and, shame them into not having an abortion by forcing them to listen to the fetal heartbeat, view a sonogram of the fetus, or have a doctor tell the women medical untrue "facts" like fetuses can feel pain or that there's a linkage between abortion and breast cancer.

2) Cut off the money. These laws specifically ban state funds from going to any organization, such as Planned Parenthood, that provides abortions or, if they can't legally do that, move those organizations to the back of the line and instead provide those funds to pregnancy crisis centers which are essentially just fronts for anti-abortion groups.

3) Regulate abortion providers into non-existence. These laws are designed to make it as expensive as possible for an abortion provider to operate by requiring them to comply with a raft of regulations, such as requiring hallways to be widened, elevators installed, installing new sinks and plumbing, etc.

Here in Ohio, my state just passed a law that requires any abortion provider to be located within a set distance from a hospital and have an agreement with said hospital so they can transfer any patient should something go wrong. The kicker is that any public hospital can't participate in those agreements. That leaves private hospitals, the vast majority of which are religiously affiliated. So they didn't technically outlaw abortion, they've just made it extremely difficult and expensive for an abortion provider to operate legally.

OG_slinger wrote:

2) Cut off the money. These laws specifically ban state funds from going to any organization, such as Planned Parenthood, that provides abortions or, if they can't legally do that, move those organizations to the back of the line and instead provide those funds to pregnancy crisis centers which are essentially just fronts for anti-abortion groups.

3) Regulate abortion providers into non-existence. These laws are designed to make it as expensive as possible for an abortion provider to operate by requiring them to comply with a raft of regulations, such as requiring hallways to be widened, elevators installed, installing new sinks and plumbing, etc.

Here in Ohio, my state just passed a law that requires any abortion provider to be located within a set distance from a hospital and have an agreement with said hospital so they can transfer any patient should something go wrong. The kicker is that any public hospital can't participate in those agreements. That leaves private hospitals, the vast majority of which are religiously affiliated. So they didn't technically outlaw abortion, they've just made it extremely difficult and expensive for an abortion provider to operate legally.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/07...

Also, the Ohio bill seems to be using the state budget as its crowbar, as you note in #2. They're effectively bypassing the actual lawmaking process in order to get what they want, changing definitions of things associated with the budget to help fund or de-fund certain programs. It's no longer an issue of trying to minimize government and save babies, it's about corrupting the political process to bypass the state's own constitution, rejecting science, and using political manipulation to fund what they want. The cognitive dissonance of a hard-line Republican Party supporter at this point is getting more and more difficult for me to understand.

JC wrote:

WHAT THE HELL JUST HAPPENED??

I live in Charlotte and this is a load of BS.

McCrory happened.

Quintin_Stone wrote:
JC wrote:

WHAT THE HELL JUST HAPPENED??

I live in Charlotte and this is a load of BS.

McCrory happened.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. He's on record as saying he wouldn't make abortion more restrictive and we all know that politicians are true to their words right? Right? Guys? Why is everyone laughing at me?

Republicans need to mind their own damn business.

Apologies if this isn't the best thread for this, but it seemed the most appropriate, since we're currently discussing the subject matter.
My Mother's Abortion @ New York Times
Not only is the article very well-written, but I find the comments to be rather fascinating. Some of them are unequivocally pro-life but the vast majority are women coming forward to relate their own experiences. One sentence that resonated particularly was "Even to this day it is a taboo subject for most families." Because it is. I know there have been abortions in my family, but know nothing more, no matter how close I am to that family member (my mother in particular). And it was utterly legal at the time too.

To echo what's already been said, how is it that politician think that they can dictate what happens to a women's body? Aren't these the same guys who prattle on about personal freedom?

In regards to personal freedoms and abortions, I felt this was a relevant opinion on the current subject: IMAGE(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v243/Liolai/tumblr_mokjaybJed1spy73go1_1280_zpsddedbf1c.png)

That mindset justifies this farce as a reality.

Texas House just passed their abortion bill. On to the Senate... don't suppose Davis can filibuster again?

Chairman_Mao wrote:

Texas House just passed their abortion bill. On to the Senate... don't suppose Davis can filibuster again?

Given the GOP essentially cut down deliberation, testimony, and debate time down to nearly-nothing to push this through quickly, no.

This whole thing is a bit of a farce at this point. While they have followed procedure in most cases when it comes to public input and internal debate, the whole thing has the earmarks of a trial just for show.

And people wonder why I talk about the failed experiment of American Federalism.

The brilliance of our government is that counter culture can thrive. Except we are finding out that counter culture can thrive to the point of obstruction or undoing of the laws that allow them to thrive.

I love this woman's views already.

I don't understand why conservatives are so against the ACLU. I just don't get it.

bombsfall wrote:

I was definitely raised to see the ACLU as a bunch of liberal PC enforcers getting in the way of actual, swift justice and telling people how they need to live.

And then I actually read up about them and looooolz.

Everytime I heard something about how Republicans hate the ACLU for being a bunch of liberal activists, my head starts playing the scene from the American President.

bombsfall wrote:

I was definitely raised to see the ACLU as a bunch of liberal PC enforcers getting in the way of actual, swift justice and telling people how they need to live.

And then I actually read up about them and looooolz.

This was my experience as well. Anyone who is worried about big government and government tyranny and also hates the ACLU, just, damn man.

Yonder wrote:
bombsfall wrote:

I was definitely raised to see the ACLU as a bunch of liberal PC enforcers getting in the way of actual, swift justice and telling people how they need to live.

And then I actually read up about them and looooolz.

This was my experience as well. Anyone who is worried about big government and government tyranny and also hates the ACLU, just, damn man.

Ah, but the ACLU also tends to represent minorities and atheists, which is a big no-no for most of the small government and white supremacist types. On that venn diagram, there is a lot of overlap of conservative and white and pining for the 3/5 compromise-and small government.

It is a good litmus test, like abortion to see if the people writing checks about freedom really give a good god damn.

"We believe in limited government and personal interference...but let's shove things in the vagina for no reason and make sure that Mexicans, the Chinese, and Blacks know their place."

Then again, in a perverse way this is precisely the type of freedom that the nation was found on.

I think an even better test is to see if people use Socialism, Communism, Fascism, and Nazism interchangeably.

Then again, in a perverse way this is precisely the type of freedom that the nation was found on.

It was the compromise reached to get the colonies to stand together... not necessarily the ideals that our nation were hoping to be founded on.

And yet many Republicans are either suprised or refuse to believe that the ACLU defended Ollie North.

A friend of mine who has a long history of dealing with the religious right posted this on her Facebook feed:

http://thelastabortionclinic.wordpre...

The blog is by volunteers of the abortion clinic in Jackson, MS, the only one in that state.

Definitely worth the read. She's told me a number of times about how willing opponents of abortion are to lie for their cause.

concentric wrote:

A friend of mine who has a long history of dealing with the religious right posted this on her Facebook feed:

http://thelastabortionclinic.wordpre...

The blog is by volunteers of the abortion clinic in Jackson, MS, the only one in that state.

Definitely worth the read. She's told me a number of times about how willing opponents of abortion are to lie for their cause.

Ugh. Those protesters really are hateful cowards, aren't they? They sure as hell don't follow the teachings of Christ that I was raised with.

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/T4pQAv4.jpg)

Maq wrote:

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/T4pQAv4.jpg)

With the exception of the killing children bit, I don't a problem with the rest of that.

Nevin73 wrote:

With the exception of the killing children bit, I don't a problem with the rest of that.

Eh, depends on where I am flying to or if I sleep in and need to shop for groceries after the church crowd gets out.

I have a problem with the practicing Witchcraft part. They should clearly be practicing Starcraft instead.

Maq wrote:

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/T4pQAv4.jpg)

So... do I put you down as "for" or "against"?

LarryC wrote:

I have a problem with the practicing Witchcraft part. They should clearly be practicing Starcraft instead.

I've known a few Wiccans in my time. Let's just say that Wicca seems to encourage spreading the love.

Yonder wrote:

So... do I put you down as "for" or "against"?

Dang it, you got to my joke before me.

Lesbian Witches Destroy Capitalism

A Sy-Fy Original Movie

Demyx wrote:

Lesbian Witches Destroy Capitalism

A Sy-Fy Original Movie

I'd watch it.