It’s totally fine if you believe that life starts at conception.
The thing that actually baffles me are the states that passed anti-abortion laws, but struggle to provide adequate health care, especially for those who are not financially stable.
I found this article, “States with more abortion restrictions have higher maternal and infant mortality”, but feel free to correct or educate me on the topic.
Edit: removed “this article” appearing twice and tried to fix preview
Those of us who aren’t far-right chuds in the USA have a saying about right-wing policy that may explain the phenomenon: “The cruelty is the point.”
More generously, as someone who knew a large number of religious rural folk growing up, what is important to them is to avoid the prospect of someone ‘committing murder’; whether society offers the born child a slow death is of no consequence, as long as no one person or group pulls the metaphorical trigger.
If I wanted to be even more generous, I would say that they imagine a support network of nongovernment religious organizations and families to indoctrinate the struggling parents and their child… but honestly, I don’t think most of them even think that far ahead.
Same people who read the parable of the good Samaritan in church and don’t appreciate the irony.
That’s even absolute bullshit. They give “lip service” to murder is bad at best. They don’t care if the “wrong” people murder each other.
That and controlling women is the point as well.
Yeah it’s this, it’s all about protecting the in crowd and punishing the rest
Exactly. They enjoy killing people, plain and simple. They’re fascists, after all. It’s what they do.
They just want to control women.
It’s got nothing to do with morality.
It makes more sense when you realize it’s not about protecting life. It’s about controlling women and punishing them for having sex.
Don’t forget…
-
Say that only people born in this country count as Americans
-
Refuse to pass legislation supporting maternity / paternity leave, Pre-K childcare, paid school lunches, or aid for first-time home buyers
-
Make the act of getting pregnant incredibly dangerous
-
Freak the fuck out when the youngest generation of adults starts having fewer children
-
Two reasons this falls apart:
- Abortion is healthcare. There are conditions that can’t be helped by anything else.
- They don’t give a shit about mortality rates because it’s someone else doing all the dying (until it’s not).
The only people who buy that lie are the useful idiots they got marching in the streets. The decision makers themselves know very well what they’re doing. Don’t mistake cruelty for ineptitude.
Hell, it’s okay to be against abortion and advising people against it if that aligns with your belief, but legislating against it to the detriment of women too? Women who want to get an abortion will get an abortion, whether it’s freely available or not. I live in a country where that is the case, and trust me, it being illegal does not “save” or help anyone. We just see more women risking their lives for something that could’ve been safe for at least one of the “living” beings involved in the process.
Same thing with alcohol prohibition. People are going to break the law, legal or not. The US is said to be the freedom land, but women can’t have autonomy over their bodies.
What I gathered is that 70% of the US congress is men, so it’s not their freedom that they sacrifice.
Christian values are important to some voters, so politicians can gain free points by promising anti-abortion laws.
The politicians who make such decisions think one term at a time and disregard the consequences as long as it doesn’t affect them. If they actually cared, they would also advocate for childcare benefits.deleted by creator
Still, the owners of those private prisons are going to make a killing when all those unwanted kids grow up into unwanted, traumatised adults.
Can’t believe the Eugenics Party would do this.
This is surprisingly dense with info https://youtu.be/yts2F44RqFw
That was a good watch, I can see binary view being at least part of the problem. I did think that religion might be part of the reason for some laws, but somehow didn’t realize how big. And the video had many other good points worth of the watch.
Logically one must conclude that it’s not at all about saving lives.
I would be much less against pro-life if the movement would focus on better care for would-be-mothers, easier adoption and better oversight, financial support for girls who give up their children, increasing adoption numbers, better sex ed, etc. instead of banning abortions.
They are exclusively focusing on the worst way to reduce abortions.
What you’re witnessing is a travesty to be sure. As someone that doesn’t think like these assholes, I’m left as confused as you are. That said, I’m sitting in this frying-pan and have had some time to think about it while the heat rises.
An optimistic view would have me think: these are religious fundamentalists that are focused on the present and are not at all future-focused on outcomes or unintended consequences. As die-hard religious types, data, logic, and sound reasoning are all superseded by faith and feelings. It’s no conspiracy, but rather an outcome of The Southern Strategy which is more or less an artificial “movement” generated by the GOP. Hopefully, a major shift in politics would see this all go away or greatly diminish in the public eye.
A pessimistic view has me thinking that this is an artifact, a symptom, of an upper-class funding policy to punch down on everyone in order to create a robust underclass to rule. This means saddling the middle-class with more debt, expenses, and fewer options than before, rendering them poor and less of a threat. For the whole abortion issue, it means eliminating all but the most expensive and labor-intensive option for pregnancy: birth and child-rearing. This may also be a ham-fisted way to force positive (or more positive) population growth which also translates to more economic activity an profit for the top. This is also fueled by a very expensive child-care and healthcare markets. These days, parents get horribly crunched trying to balance two household incomes, health expenses, and basic workday supervision for their kids. People are being asked, more and more, to either settle for a lower standard of living, spend their way to being poorer, or just have fewer children. The latter stops being an option with right-wing policy like the topic at hand.
What pseudoscientific ideology has to day that life doesn’t beging at conception? Is left denying science now?
Life began billions of years ago.
This phrasing is meant to hide a religious argument as a scientific one. The question they’re really asking is “When does God insert a soul into a body?”
I agree with the biological definition, “organism that can survive as an individual”. Even if the fetus has a parasitic relation, it is capable of developing all functions to fit the full definition.
There are other definitions of ‘life’ and anyone is free to believe either way, but the more subjective question is: When does the fetus become a person?
