What's new
By:

Roe v Wade Obvious Consequences

The Thriller

The Thriller

Well-Known Member
These were obvious to those of us who were actually in tune with what the “pro life” movement was really about (controlling women).

How is this helpful? Is this really the society we want to live in?


View: https://x.com/ronbrownstein/status/1759985546531877071?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw



View: https://x.com/mckenzieawilson/status/1759934549855789359?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw



View: https://x.com/jennycohn1/status/1759026584567284006?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw


www.businessinsider.com

125 House Republicans — including Speaker Mike Johnson — back a 'life at conception' bill without any IVF exception

An old Senate version of the bill included an exception for in vitro fertilization. Even some vulnerable Republicans have backed the hard-right bill.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com


View: https://x.com/mmfa/status/1760354985630482926?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw


Do we want to end IVF? Since IVF embryos are humans, can we deduct them from our taxes? Can they be used to increase our state’s representation in the House and Electoral College? Is it the obligation of the clinic to keep embryos cold forever since they’d die otherwise and be charged for murder?

Do we want to end birth control? What’s wrong with recreational sex? Can couples beyond the reproductive age still have sex? What about sterile couples?

Do we really want to live in a society where women cannot get abortion? Should we base our laws off the fundamentalist beliefs of evangelicals? Do we really want to live in a society where women have no privacy and can be prosecuted for not giving birth? If we’re going to force more people into having more children, will the social safety net be improved? Doesn’t seem like it:


View: https://x.com/mackenziemays/status/1758211961828049025?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/18/1111344810/abortion-ban-states-social-safety-net-health-outcomes
 
The Thriller said:
These were obvious to those of us who were actually in tune with what the “pro life” movement was really about (controlling women).

How is this helpful? Is this really the society we want to live in?


View: https://x.com/ronbrownstein/status/1759985546531877071?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw



View: https://x.com/mckenzieawilson/status/1759934549855789359?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw



View: https://x.com/jennycohn1/status/1759026584567284006?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw


www.businessinsider.com

125 House Republicans — including Speaker Mike Johnson — back a 'life at conception' bill without any IVF exception

An old Senate version of the bill included an exception for in vitro fertilization. Even some vulnerable Republicans have backed the hard-right bill.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com


View: https://x.com/mmfa/status/1760354985630482926?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw


Do we want to end IVF? Since IVF embryos are humans, can we deduct them from our taxes? Can they be used to increase our state’s representation in the House and Electoral College? Is it the obligation of the clinic to keep embryos cold forever since they’d die otherwise and be charged for murder?

Do we want to end birth control? What’s wrong with recreational sex? Can couples beyond the reproductive age still have sex? What about sterile couples?

Do we really want to live in a society where women cannot get abortion? Should we base our laws off the fundamentalist beliefs of evangelicals? Do we really want to live in a society where women have no privacy and can be prosecuted for not giving birth? If we’re going to force more people into having more children, will the social safety net be improved? Doesn’t seem like it:


View: https://x.com/mackenziemays/status/1758211961828049025?s=46&t=QT7YFlZ_IlHq81PpZAhKgw

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/18/1111344810/abortion-ban-states-social-safety-net-health-outcomes
Click to expand...

Reactionaries are feeling their oats in America’s present moment. I just don’t think they can sustain this for generations. If it’s a war against modernity, modernity is going to win.
 
Red said:
Reactionaries are feeling their oats in America’s present moment. I just don’t think they can sustain this for generations. If it’s a war against modernity, modernity is going to win.
Click to expand...
The puritans fought this same war coming out of the Victorian era, and it came to a head with the rise of American gangster culture and the implosion of prohibition. What will our prohibition be, and how will it bring things to a head? I don't think the fight around abortion is it, but it could be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red
Red said:
Reactionaries are feeling their oats in America’s present moment. I just don’t think they can sustain this for generations. If it’s a war against modernity, modernity is going to win.
Click to expand...
I think you are a bit backwards. The "reactionaries", as you label them, are fighting for modernity which dominated in the United States between 1910 and 1970. They are fighting against post-modernism. I hope you are right that modernity is going to win but I fear that we are too nihilistic as a society to hold that line.
 
One Brow said:
What about post-modernism can be fought against? How do you fight against reinterpretations of events?
Click to expand...
Postmodernism boils down to the smashing of all structure with no structure to replace it. There is reinterpretation, but it is done with the purpose to falsify the structure. Everything becomes a vague socially constructed spectrum with definitions up to each individual. Modernists want to replace the old structure with something new. Postmodernists want a pile of rubble.
 
Al-O-Meter said:
Postmodernism boils down to the smashing of all structure with no structure to replace it. There is reinterpretation, but it is done with the purpose to falsify the structure. Everything becomes a vague socially constructed spectrum with definitions up to each individual. Modernists want to replace the old structure with something new. Postmodernists want a pile of rubble.
Click to expand...
Again, what is there to fight against? Even assuming the questionable accuracy of that summation, how do you fight rubble?
 
One Brow said:
Again, what is there to fight against? Even assuming the questionable accuracy of that summation, how do you fight rubble?
Click to expand...
You fight to preserve against those who only want to destroy. It might not be winnable in the long run. Smashing things is much easier than building things.
 
Al-O-Meter said:
The "reactionaries", as you label them, are fighting for modernity which dominated in the United States between 1910 and 1970.
Click to expand...

Al-O-Meter said:
Postmodernism boils down to the smashing of all structure with no structure to replace it. There is reinterpretation, but it is done with the purpose to falsify the structure. Everything becomes a vague socially constructed spectrum with definitions up to each individual. Modernists want to replace the old structure with something new. Postmodernists want a pile of rubble.
Click to expand...
You’re making it too complex for my simple mind. I just see MAGA as a reactionary movement, and Christian nationalism seems to be part of that, and that political movement, by self-identified “real Americans”, and “”real Christians”, (such as MTG, who claims “most Americans are Christian nationalists”), itself is in part justification for exclusion of and discrimination against many otherwise fellow citizens. We are not all real Americans to MAGA and Christian nationalism. I must presume I am excluded from that “real America”. Really does seem to be a reaction against pluralism. As I suggested, I just don’t think this reactionary attitude can sustain itself long term. I do not believe their “ideal” America will be realized, I don’t think it stands a snowball’s chance in Hades of becoming the future of our nation. In the long term.

www.bushcenter.org

Pluralism is a Big Deal | George W. Bush Presidential Center

www.bushcenter.org www.bushcenter.org
 
LogGrad98 said:
The puritans fought this same war coming out of the Victorian era, and it came to a head with the rise of American gangster culture and the implosion of prohibition. What will our prohibition be, and how will it bring things to a head? I don't think the fight around abortion is it, but it could be.
Click to expand...
How many people need to suffer because the GOP has decided to fight against the modernity of vaccines, birth control, IVF, abortion, etc? Especially if these poor people live in a completely brainless state like Alabama or Utah? I get that a national abortion ban is off the table if Democrats can hold at least one chamber of congress. But that’s not stopping red states from trying to outcompete each other in crafting the most restrictive laws possible. And when that happens, what alternative does a citizen in such a state have?

I truly feel sorry for couples in Alabama who were in the middle of IVF treatments. Now all those months and thousands of dollars are going to waste. I truly feel bad for women in Texas who have suffered from ectopic pregnancies and haven’t had the care that they’ve deserved. It’s awful that girls in Ohio are forced to give birth to their rapists’ children or seek an abortion elsewhere. It’s horrifying to me that children are coming down with measles in Florida because republicans have decided that vaccines don’t work.

One of the best kept secrets before the big mean federal gubbamint took a more active role in states pre-Great Society era is that federalism was stronger. But federalism doesn’t mean better. And historically, it actually has been a detriment to the lives of women, POC, etc because it’s much easier for bullies at the local level to throw their weight around. Which is exactly what we’re seeing now in most red states. It’s a race to the bottom.
 
fishonjazz said:
Looks like the people in that video are all kneeling around someone in cardiac arrest and one of them is performing CPR.
Then I turned the sound up and realized that they are just super religious weirdos.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Somehow the man in the sky will give them their prayer while ignoring millions of prayers from others. Dem mysterious ways doe.
 
Red said:




www.theguardian.com

Arizona Republicans denounce revived 1864 abortion ban in sudden reversal

As the party struggles to talk about abortion, response marks fastest and strongest rebuke of bans since the fall of Roe
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

www.thecut.com

Arizona’s Draconian Abortion Ban Belongs to Trump

This is what leaving the issue up to the states looks like.
www.thecut.com www.thecut.com



Click to expand...

Oh noes!! That means a mother intent on killing her child will have to be inconvenienced by a 2 hour car ride to get to California.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Somehow the man in the sky will give them their prayer while ignoring millions of prayers from others. Dem mysterious ways doe.
Click to expand...
As a Christian, this really makes me feel icky. I don’t want to be associated with weirdo crazy people. Yet it seems like weirdo crazy people are getting all the attention in Christianity. It makes all of us Christians look bad imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top