ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags abortion issues , abortion laws

Reply
Old 13th May 2019, 09:25 AM   #81
AnonyMoose
Muse
 
AnonyMoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Land of the Frozen Chosen
Posts: 567
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I think you are looking for a different word than misogyny. Sexist is probably a more accurate term for Biden.

Biden may like to sniff women's hair, but at least he hasn't felt self-entitled enough to grab them by their kitty-kat.

Just by that measure alone, he's already much farther ahead of the game than the orange octopus.
__________________
"Some mornings it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps." ~ Emo Phillips
AnonyMoose is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 09:33 AM   #82
Shalamar
Dark Lord of the JREF
 
Shalamar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Else
Posts: 4,585
Originally Posted by AnonyMoose View Post
Biden may like to sniff women's hair, but at least he hasn't felt self-entitled enough to grab them by their kitty-kat.

Just by that measure alone, he's already much farther ahead of the game than the orange octopus.
No no. It's only bad when Dems/libs do it!

Perfectly acceptable when cons do it, as Zig has helpfully pointed out.
__________________

"The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head."
Shalamar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 09:35 AM   #83
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 19,929
And if you dare say "Hey maybe we should have standards beyond comparisons to what some member of the other tribe did" we're told we're "Saying both sides are equally bad."
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 09:35 AM   #84
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,653
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
What they are trying to eliminate is elective abortion, which I suppose is a "huge swath".
You suppose? Exactly which abortions are mandatory?

In their heart of hearts, I think a majority in this country does not want abortion criminalized. I'm not sure even most Republicans want it criminalized. This is nothing more than virtue signaling. Conservative legislatures have been doing this for decades, knowing their laws would be struck down. Kind of like Republicans calling for the repeal of the Affordable Care Act. It was a safe position of protest.

At this point there is a hella precedent for saying the right to an abortion is well-established law and policy. I'm not sure about precedents in regards to declaring a 6-week-old fetus a human being and giving it full rights under the law. Can you declare a zygote as a dependent on your tax returns? Buy it life insurance? Is it eligible for Medicaid? Will it be counted in the Census? Will there be custody fights? Etc.

I hope this will increase awareness of the Plan B option which is (for now) safe, legal and available over the counter. I hope there are volunteers willing to give women rides to other states, without fearing they will be charged as accessories to murder. It also will make no sense to make exceptions for rape and incest, obviously. And it will make no sense not to prosecute women getting abortions. The person who hires a hit man is still guilty even if they did not perform the actual murder. And why stop at the fetal heartbeat? That's as arbitrary a point as any. We might as well extend it to zygotes, which will raise issues for the IVF industry.

I asked my mom if abortion should be illegal and she said it's a sin. She is Republican, all for birth control and raised 2 adopted newborn boys. So she's pretty consistent. Yet she dodged the question. I used to think she was the Republican base, but she's 94, from another era entirely, and doesn't like Trump. In her heart of hearts, I do not think she wants abortion to be illegal. Bottom line, forcing a girl or woman to give birth against her will is probably not something she really wants.

Evolved common law has historically permitted abortion before "quickening" and even the Bible says that someone who assaults a pregnant woman, causing her to miscarry, is on the hook for financial damages only.

Usually I think Travis tortures himself with hyperbole, but I'm not sure in this case he's actually wrong. The Georgia Legislature's reasoning on this issue is deeply flawed. Should it become the law of the land, it will have boatloads of unintended consequences.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 09:38 AM   #85
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 43,969
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I think you are looking for a different word than misogyny. Sexist is probably a more accurate term for Biden.
I'm describing the people who support Biden. Using the standards that Democrats like to apply to others.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 09:40 AM   #86
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
What they are trying to eliminate is elective abortion, which I suppose is a "huge swath".
And of course in ectopic pregnancies and other life threatening conditions that the fetus will never be viable and only risk the woman's life. But these thing will only effect poor women, not women to can travel(well except those who die from the refused abortions) so by definition not anyone who matters.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 09:43 AM   #87
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
At this point there is a hella precedent for saying the right to an abortion is well-established law and policy. I'm not sure about precedents in regards to declaring a 6-week-old fetus a human being and giving it full rights under the law. Can you declare a zygote as a dependent on your tax returns? Buy it life insurance? Is it eligible for Medicaid? Will it be counted in the Census? Will there be custody fights? Etc.
Hell there is the fun of schrodinger's pregnancy because the 6 week old dates to the last period so you are technically pregnant before you even have sex if that sex produces a fetus.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 09:43 AM   #88
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 19,929
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
In their heart of hearts, I think a majority in this country does not want abortion criminalized. I'm not sure even most Republicans want it criminalized. This is nothing more than virtue signaling.
There's a handful of discussions, debates stuck in the popular consciousness that I think have been a symbolic fight for some vague, impossible to put into words broad almost philosophical divide that we've come full circle.

I'll put all my cards on the table. I'm 100% pro-abortion rights to pretty much the most liberal degree that's reasonably on the table (As in I'm for open, no fault access to abortions pretty throughout the entire pregnancy) while at the same time not fully grasping why this is the debate it is.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 09:50 AM   #89
AnonyMoose
Muse
 
AnonyMoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Land of the Frozen Chosen
Posts: 567
I guess it's going to take another century or two before everyone finally decides to keep their noses out of other peoples' uteruses....
__________________
"Some mornings it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps." ~ Emo Phillips
AnonyMoose is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 09:53 AM   #90
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 8,806
Excellent post, Minoosh.

Why is it that those who complain the most about 'personal freedoms' being impinged upon by the government tend to be those who have wanted to control a person's personal life the most? Laws against a woman's right to control her own body, sodomy, homosexuality, interracial marriages, same-sex marriage were all supported largely by conservatives who rail against big government taking our 'rights' away.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 10:01 AM   #91
AnonyMoose
Muse
 
AnonyMoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Land of the Frozen Chosen
Posts: 567
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Excellent post, Minoosh.

Why is it that those who complain the most about 'personal freedoms' being impinged upon by the government tend to be those who have wanted to control a person's personal life the most? Laws against a woman's right to control her own body, sodomy, homosexuality, interracial marriages, same-sex marriage were all supported largely by conservatives who rail against big government taking our 'rights' away.

You're assuming conservatives think of women, gays, and those icky non-white folk as being actual humans beings deserving of personal freedoms.

Their actions say otherwise.





Praise be to our white, blond-haired, blue-eyed Jeezus!

Amen.
__________________
"Some mornings it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps." ~ Emo Phillips
AnonyMoose is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 10:17 AM   #92
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,653
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I'll put all my cards on the table. I'm 100% pro-abortion rights to pretty much the most liberal degree that's reasonably on the table (As in I'm for open, no fault access to abortions pretty throughout the entire pregnancy) while at the same time not fully grasping why this is the debate it is.
I don't think I would have gotten an abortion back when I could get pregnant. That made me hypervigilant about birth control. But I had advantages a lot of girls/women didn't have.

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Excellent post, Minoosh.

Why is it that those who complain the most about 'personal freedoms' being impinged upon by the government tend to be those who have wanted to control a person's personal life the most? Laws against a woman's right to control her own body, sodomy, homosexuality, interracial marriages, same-sex marriage were all supported largely by conservatives who rail against big government taking our 'rights' away.
If there are people who think life begins at conception and are willing to accept all of the ramifications of that, I might give them points for consistency. If Jesus Christ had said anything about abortion or homosexuality, at least the objection would be possibly "Christian." But I don't understand accepting part of the OT while jettisoning some of it entirely. Exodus does not treat human-caused miscarriages as murder, and the bit about cursing the fruit of a woman's womb is not exactly a pro-life position.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 10:18 AM   #93
deadrose
Illuminator
 
deadrose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the wet side of the mountains
Posts: 3,180
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
And of course in ectopic pregnancies and other life threatening conditions that the fetus will never be viable and only risk the woman's life. But these thing will only effect poor women, not women to can travel(well except those who die from the refused abortions) so by definition not anyone who matters.
Of course, they've declared that traveling out of state to get an abortion will be illegal and result in prison time too. So if you leave the state for an abortion, or miscarry, you'd better not go home.

I'm so glad I live in a state that legalized abortion before Roe vs. Wade, and so isn't dependent on that ruling. I hope we don't end up having to run an underground railroad for pregnant women.
deadrose is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 11:05 AM   #94
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,464
This might not be popular, but here goes.

The law of unintended consequences.

If California and New York can ignore the law on *whatever* settled issue, *whatever* state that decides they disagree with settled law can ignore the law likewise.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 11:15 AM   #95
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 19,929
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
This might not be popular, but here goes.

The law of unintended consequences.

If California and New York can ignore the law on *whatever* settled issue, *whatever* state that decides they disagree with settled law can ignore the law likewise.
There's always going to be a balance on this and it's never gonna make everyone happy.

Yes, ignoring/circumventing/choosing to enforce/whatever a law is always crossing a line to some degree.

But on the other hand everything ever done ever could be taken to some unreasonable level by somebody somewhere. We are are not slaves to every possible outcome of every we take.

And besides in politics and law "Well that's settled" is a very weird statement to make.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 11:28 AM   #96
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,327
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
You suppose? Exactly which abortions are mandatory?
I'm not sure "mandatory" is the right word. Non-elective abortions are those that are necessary to save the life of the mother.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 11:38 AM   #97
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I'm not sure "mandatory" is the right word. Non-elective abortions are those that are necessary to save the life of the mother.
Nonsense those are also elective, just ask any catholic hospital.

Then there are the abortions that you would clearly class as elective because they merely threaten the woman's life and the fetus has 0 chance of survival.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 12:27 PM   #98
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,464
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
There's always going to be a balance on this and it's never gonna make everyone happy.

Yes, ignoring/circumventing/choosing to enforce/whatever a law is always crossing a line to some degree.

But on the other hand everything ever done ever could be taken to some unreasonable level by somebody somewhere. We are are not slaves to every possible outcome of every we take.

And besides in politics and law "Well that's settled" is a very weird statement to make.
I believe the a woman's' right to an abortion is a settled issue as of Roe v. Wade.

I believe that the Civil Rights act and the Voting Rights act are settled law.

I believe in marriage equality. Eventually the Supreme Court upheld marriage equality.

All those beliefs are A. O.K. in my state.

I don't believe that criminal illegal aliens ought to be protected from the legal consequences of their acts. The city I reside in has made the protection of criminally convicted illegal aliens a higher priority than protecting the safety of San Francisco residents and visitors.

And they've gotten away with it, at least so far. That may change if an important person is victimized, but evidently my friend Tony Bologna and two of his three sons getting murdered didn't rise to the level of political notice.

If a city/state can get away with protecting convicted criminals the way San Francisco and California has, some state will be emboldened to restrict or eliminate Civil/Voting/Abortion rights and possibly get away with it.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 12:53 PM   #99
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,327
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
I believe the a woman's' right to an abortion is a settled issue as of Roe v. Wade.
You weren't paying really close attention in civics class, were you?

The supreme Court giveth,and a newly appointed supreme Court might very well taketh away.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 13th May 2019 at 12:55 PM.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 04:29 PM   #100
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,327
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
The answer is never. I don't know what's in the Georgia law, but I am extremely confident that there is nothing in it that would make a woman stop seeing a doctor, and I am extremely confident it would not provide the death penalty for a pregnant woman who gets an abortion. I say that without even knowing the contents of the bill. I will probably look it up to say what the bill really says, but I'm confident it is not that.

I've read the law. I've read commentaries on the law.


Basically, it's not nearly as open and shut as the whole "Ohio ectopic pregnancy" thing was, but it's mostly straightforward. It's clear enough that there is a very obvious way in which the law is interpreted, and I would be very surprised if any other interpretation of the law that a judge would uphold, at least on appeal. (You never know what kind of idiotic ruling might happen at a local level.)


The bill amends a very specific section of Georgia law, dealing with illegal abortions. Yes, in every state of the union, some abortions are illegal. I can't just set up "Dave's abortion shop", and start performing abortions. I would be arrested and jailed. The same was true in Georgia, and said that anyone performing illegal abortions could get 1 to 10 years.


What the Georgia law does is amend that section on illegal abortions to make a whole lot more abortions illegal. In fact, most abortions would be illegal. The ones that would not be illegal would be

1) anything done before a fetal heartbeat.

2) any abortion before 20 weeks, if the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest, and a charge was made


3) The life of the mother is in danger

4) the pregnancy is "medically futile", meaning that the baby will not survive to the end of the term.


There might be a couple of other provisions, but those are the big ones.


Remember, in the above cases, it remains legal to get an abortion. All others, which is most of them, become illegal, and subject to Georgia's illegal abortion law, which has a jail term of 1 to 10 years.


In previous rulings, it has been said that only the provider can be jailed, not the actual woman having an abortion, even if self performed.



That's the straightforward, obvious, meaning of the bill. However, there is enough other language in the bill that I could see someone arguing that it means something else entirely. It's not likely the argument would succeed, but it isn't absolutely ridiculous to suggest that it might. In other words, someone might try to insist that it really means that killing an unborn child is murder. That's where all this hype about death penalties or life in prison come from. The bill doesn't say that. However, prosecutors and judges sometimes twist the meanings of statutes into tortuous interpretations, and it is not beyond possibility that they might do so here. It's not so absolutely, incredibly, clear in the bill that there's no room for someone to try it. It is America after all, and the law says what the lawyers want it to say, when all is said and done.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 13th May 2019 at 04:30 PM.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 04:42 PM   #101
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,327
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Conservative legislatures have been doing this for decades, knowing their laws would be struck down.
With Kavanaugh replacing Kennedy, that's no longer the case. It might not be struck down at the Supreme Court.

Quote:
Can you declare a zygote as a dependent on your tax returns?
When the Georgia law takes effect, yes. That's part of the bill. That applies only to Georgia state taxes. They cannot change the way federal law treats federal tax deductions, or those other federal programs you mentioned.

Quote:
Will there be custody fights? Etc.
Obviously, no one except the pregnant woman can have "custody" of the unborn child, but such things as financial support and paternal rights and responsibilities are included. A man can sue for damages if a woman aborts his child, under the new Georgia law.

Quote:
It also will make no sense to make exceptions for rape and incest, obviously.
Whether it makes sense or not, they did. At least, they treat pregnancies from rape or incest differently from consensual sex pregnancies. A pregnant woman has a longer amount of time to procure a legal abortion if the abortion was the result of rape or incest.

Quote:
And why stop at the fetal heartbeat? That's as arbitrary a point as any. We might as well extend it to zygotes, which will raise issues for the IVF industry.
Whether or not it makes sense, they did. They stopped it at fetal heartbeat for consensual sex pregnancies, and 20 weeks for rape or incest.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 05:09 PM   #102
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,653
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
That's the straightforward, obvious, meaning of the bill. However, there is enough other language in the bill that I could see someone arguing that it means something else entirely.
Helpfully, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp commented on the intent of the law:
Originally Posted by NPR

At the signing ceremony, Kemp said he is grateful to those "throughout Georgia who refused to be silent on this issue, who rejected the status quo, who believe, as I do that every baby has a right to life."

"We must protect life at all stages."
Emphasis mine.

I don't know why you think lawyers would have to "twist" the law in order to conclude that Georgia's bill makes abortion tantamount to murder. Gov. Kemp said every baby has the right to life. In context, it's clear that by "baby" he means any fetus with a detectable heartbeat.

If someone wants to state that life begins at conception, and follows that through to its logical conclusion, I would give them points for integrity. But any bill that makes exceptions for rape or incest is admitting that such fetuses are not actually babies just yet, even if they have a detectable heartbeat.

ETA: And if they're not "babies," what is the state's interest in regulating pregnant women's behavior?

Last edited by Minoosh; 13th May 2019 at 05:35 PM.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 05:17 PM   #103
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,653
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
And besides in politics and law "Well that's settled" is a very weird statement to make.
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Do you mean that it's a weird statement to make in any circumstances, including politics and law? Or that aside from politics and law, it's a weird statement?
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 05:32 PM   #104
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,327
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Helpfully, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp commented on the intent of the law:Emphasis mine.

I don't know why you think lawyers would have to "twist" the law in order to conclude that Georgia's bill makes abortion tantamount to murder. Gov. Kemp said every baby has the right to life. In context, it's clear that by "baby" he means any fetus with a detectable heartbeat.

Because I have read the bill, and the bill uses words, and the words have meaning.

ETA: Make no mistake. They are definitely trying to outlaw abortion, and I am in no way defending that. I just think that when we talk about the bill, we should talk about what it actually does, rather than make up flights of fancy or wild exaggerations. When people do that, it attracts attention and might "energize the base", and it may even take some people off the fence and decide to come to your side. However, when they find out they've been lied to, they get ticked off, and you can lose them for good. It's better to just tell the truth.

There will be no executions. There will be no life sentences. There will be no jail terms for miscarriages. There is no reason that a woman ought to fear talking to her doctor. That's all made up nonsense.

There will definitely be jail time for abortion providers. Reading the bill, it seems to me that there will be jail time for women who have an abortion, although I have read analyses that say it will not happen.

It is conceivable that someone might try to get from that bill to a charge of murder. The bill is just vague enough that someone might give it a shot, but if Georgia has judges with integrity, it won't stick, because the plain language of the bill says something else. However, there's enough vagueness in some parts that someone might give it a try.


And of course, this is just one bill. Will they try to put even more restrictions on next year? I can't rule it out. On the other hand, it's possible that the Supreme Court will uphold Roe v. Wade and it will become a moot point. I can't see what will happen in the future. One thing I am certain is that if the Supreme Court hears a case, and upholds Roe v. Wade, the GOP legislatures will wait until one of the justices retires, and they'll pass yet another law that is clearly in violation of Roe v. Wade and try again. They are definitely trying to end abortion on demand in this country, and they are fairly determined to do it, but they aren't waiting to put young pregnant women on death row.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 13th May 2019 at 05:46 PM.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 08:19 PM   #105
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,653
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
They are definitely trying to end abortion on demand in this country, and they are fairly determined to do it, but they aren't waiting to put young pregnant women on death row.
That's just not at all reassuring to me. Earlier I acknowledged that some, including the OP, were putting an alarmist spin on things. But in this case, I'm not sure the OP is wrong.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th May 2019, 09:43 PM   #106
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 23,999
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
The answer is never. I don't know what's in the Georgia law, but I am extremely confident that there is nothing in it that would make a woman stop seeing a doctor, and I am extremely confident it would not provide the death penalty for a pregnant woman who gets an abortion. I say that without even knowing the contents of the bill. I will probably look it up to say what the bill really says, but I'm confident it is not that.

On the other hand, what they are actually doing is making it illegal to get an abortion. I am fairly certain that some of the various bills that have been passed lately could result in women being thrown in prison for getting, or possible even seeking, an abortion. I think that time is coming soon in America. On the other hand, I've thought that before. I remember the day that the opinion for Webster v. Missouri came out. For some reason, I happened to be home that day from work, and it was being covered live. There was a lot of anticipation that Roe was going to be overturned, but the Supreme Court surprised everyone. We'll see what happens this time around. That was a long time ago. I don't think anyone on the court today was on the court then.

Since women who have miscarriages will also be subject to prison I very well think women stuck in Georgia who suspect they might be pregnant might just do everything they can to keep it a secret from officials until it is born lest they end up doing time if it miscarries.



Already, on Twitter, women in professions that allow them to move are requesting transfers out of Georgia because they don't want to end up on the wrong side of these new laws should they want to have children.



Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
There's a handful of discussions, debates stuck in the popular consciousness that I think have been a symbolic fight for some vague, impossible to put into words broad almost philosophical divide that we've come full circle.

I'll put all my cards on the table. I'm 100% pro-abortion rights to pretty much the most liberal degree that's reasonably on the table (As in I'm for open, no fault access to abortions pretty throughout the entire pregnancy) while at the same time not fully grasping why this is the debate it is.

The abortion debate has now become part of the larger conspiracy, supposedly by Jewish bankers, to end white civilization. It is called "The Great Replacement" and when those crazies teamed up with the pro life crowd, infusing paranoid racism into it, things went a bit off the rail and now here we are.
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Zingiber Officinale

Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 03:22 AM   #107
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
I believe the a woman's' right to an abortion is a settled issue as of Roe v. Wade.

I believe that the Civil Rights act and the Voting Rights act are settled law.

I believe in marriage equality. Eventually the Supreme Court upheld marriage equality.
Bah those are no more settled than Plessy vs Ferguson. Now that we have a properly christian court again we can get the government back to how the founders intended. Getting rid of all of those has been a solid goal in chosing justices. They are no more settled than Seperate but equal was by the above case or the interpretation the courts used for the second amendment for over 100 years. But hey no big deal surely.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 03:32 AM   #108
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 19,642
Welcome to Crazy Town
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 03:34 AM   #109
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,747
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Helpfully, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp commented on the intent of the law:Emphasis mine.

I don't know why you think lawyers would have to "twist" the law in order to conclude that Georgia's bill makes abortion tantamount to murder. Gov. Kemp said every baby has the right to life. In context, it's clear that by "baby" he means any fetus with a detectable heartbeat.

If someone wants to state that life begins at conception, and follows that through to its logical conclusion, I would give them points for integrity. But any bill that makes exceptions for rape or incest is admitting that such fetuses are not actually babies just yet, even if they have a detectable heartbeat.

ETA: And if they're not "babies," what is the state's interest in regulating pregnant women's behavior?
Agreed. If fetuses have the right to life, this doesn't depend on how fetuses were conceived since the fetus played no role in that. If, on the other hand, the pregnancy threatens the life of the mother, it is reasonable to allow for an abortion (but not necessarily inconsistent not to do so, depending on one's reasoning -- if killing is worse than allowing the woman to die, then an abortion in that case may be morally prohibited, even if both mother and fetus would die in the end).
phiwum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 03:35 AM   #110
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,327
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
Since women who have miscarriages will also be subject to prison....
Utter and complete hogwash.

If you are going to live in a fantasy world of your own making, why choose dystopia? Come up with some more pleasant delusions. It will lower your blood pressure.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 04:46 AM   #111
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 43,969
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
There will be no jail terms for miscarriages.
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
Since women who have miscarriages will also be subject to prison
Who to believe, who to believe....

Quote:
Already, on Twitter,
I think I found your problem.

Travis. Get off social media. Itís bad for you. You arenít saving the world, youíre making yourself miserable.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 05:27 AM   #112
IsThisTheLife
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 372
Originally Posted by AnonyMoose View Post
Biden may like to sniff women's hair, but at least he hasn't felt self-entitled enough to grab them by their kitty-kat.

Just by that measure alone, he's already much farther ahead of the game than the orange octopus.
Some might see it as nuzzling them. And he does it to females of all ages [ETA >> except oldsters AFAIK, so at least he's not a granny-chaser like Micron] including very young girls.

Last edited by IsThisTheLife; 14th May 2019 at 05:30 AM.
IsThisTheLife is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 06:20 AM   #113
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,327
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Who to believe, who to believe....



I think I found your problem.

Travis. Get off social media. Itís bad for you. You arenít saving the world, youíre making yourself miserable.
To be fair, it isn't just morons on Twitter saying these things. There are a lot of almost mainstream sources, e.g. Slate, printing it.

These ideas are not in the bill, but might reasonably be said to be within the penumbras and emanations of the legislation.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 06:31 AM   #114
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 37,237
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
To be fair, it isn't just morons on Twitter saying these things. There are a lot of almost mainstream sources, e.g. Slate, printing it.



These ideas are not in the bill, but might reasonably be said to be within the penumbras and emanations of the legislation.
Does the Slate reference improve the reputation of the idea, or harm the reputation of Slate?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 06:34 AM   #115
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,084
If a baby is born with problems due to the mother having used drugs/alcohol etc. during pregnancy - can it sue?
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 06:44 AM   #116
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,978
One thing is different than pre-RvW: If abortion is illegal in this state, there is likely a state nearby that will do it.

I predict if too many states effectively outlaw abortion:
1. Abortion tourism will become a thing. Take a vacation pregnant, come home not pregnant;
2. Foundations will eventually pay for poor women to take the vacation;
__________________
- "Who is the greater fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 06:58 AM   #117
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Utter and complete hogwash.

If you are going to live in a fantasy world of your own making, why choose dystopia? Come up with some more pleasant delusions. It will lower your blood pressure.
You know this has happened already right?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.15f57b90d018

ANd how countries with strong abortion bans deal with miscarriages.

https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-12-...me-miscarriage

Really if her neglect caused the miscarriage it only makes sense to charge her. There really is nothing new about this.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 07:29 AM   #118
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,464
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
You weren't paying really close attention in civics class, were you?

The supreme Court giveth,and a newly appointed supreme Court might very well taketh away.
And in the meantime, a state or municipality that attempts to ban abortion has a serious uphill battle.
__________________
"When a man who is honestly mistaken, hears the truth, he will either cease being mistaken or cease being honest." - Anonymous

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 07:49 AM   #119
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,327
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
If a baby is born with problems due to the mother having used drugs/alcohol etc. during pregnancy - can it sue?
That has already happened, and nothing in the Georgia law affects that.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th May 2019, 08:10 AM   #120
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,327
Originally Posted by BStrong View Post
And in the meantime, a state or municipality that attempts to ban abortion has a serious uphill battle.
True. If that was your point you are absolutely correct. But some states are just
Itching to get into that fight.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:54 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.