Abortion

oneniltothearsenal said:
This poll has 61% believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases
38% illegal in all or most cases

https://www.pewresearch.org/politic...legal-abortion-oppose-overturning-roe-v-wade/

Brookings divides slightly differently
25% to 35% believe always legal
10% to 15% believe it should never be legal
With the rest somewhere on between

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2022/06/24/roe-v-wade-overturned-despite-public-opinion/amp/

And here 64% oppose overturning Roe
33% support overturning Roe

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/19/1099844097/abortion-polling-roe-v-wade-supreme-court-draft-opinion

However the surveys are parsed it's clear that a majority take a view that is some form of pro choice.

I was at a smaller protest yesterday and the majority of cars, based on constant honking, would seem to oppose the decision though I do live in California which already has a trigger law that legalizes abortion.
Click to expand...

Amazing mate, thanks. It's a horrific state of affairs that a rogue president can stuff a court full of conservative pissbags to poison society for decades to come, but I cling to the hope that young people on the whole are moving away from conservatism (not that women in the US have that kind of time to wait to avoid harm).
 
12OunceEpilogue said:
Amazing mate, thanks. It's a horrific state of affairs that a rogue president can stuff a court full of conservative pissbags to poison society for decades to come, but I cling to the hope that young people on the whole are moving away from conservatism (not that women in the US have that kind of time to wait to avoid harm).
Click to expand...
The problem is there is a solid 30-40% of the country that are evangelical or members of some other extremist religious group, and those groups successfully indoctrinate the vast majority of young people that are brought up in them. I'm also not sure non-Americans understand just how fundamental being pro-life is to such groups. I had an evangelical roommate in law school who compared Roe v. Wade to Dred Scott (allowing slavery and denying birthright citizenship) and Korematsu (Japanese internment camps) in terms of being the most incorrect Supreme Court decisions. And he was a smart, reasonable guy about things that weren't directly influenced by his evangelical beliefs. But evangelicals really truly believe that abortion two weeks into a pregnancy is fundamentally the same as popping a one-year old in the microwave, and if you take that mindset into account, you can understand why this issue is so incredibly animating for such people.

I think some are overestimating how much this decision has to do with being anti-women as opposed to being based in evangelical Christianity and other extremist Christian religions - many many evangelical women are 100% behind the court here. (Of course if you want to say that Evangelical Christianity is itself anti-women, no arguments here. But I think the religious purpose is more important than any misogynistic purpose in terms of why this decision was made/supported.)
 
Caius said:
The problem is there is a solid 30-40% of the country that are evangelical or members of some other extremist religious group, and those groups successfully indoctrinate the vast majority of young people that are brought up in them. I'm also not sure non-Americans understand just how fundamental being pro-life is to such groups. I had an evangelical roommate in law school who compared Roe v. Wade to Dred Scott (allowing slavery and denying birthright citizenship) and Korematsu (Japanese internment camps) in terms of being the most incorrect Supreme Court decisions. And he was a smart, reasonable guy about things that weren't directly influenced by his evangelical beliefs. But evangelicals really truly believe that abortion two weeks into a pregnancy is fundamentally the same as popping a one-year old in the microwave, and if you take that mindset into account, you can understand why this issue is so incredibly animating for such people.

I think some are overestimating how much this decision has to do with being anti-women as opposed to being based in evangelical Christianity and other extremist Christian religions - many many evangelical women are 100% behind the court here. (Of course if you want to say that Evangelical Christianity is itself anti-women, no arguments here. But I think the religious purpose is more important than any misogynistic purpose in terms of why this decision was made/supported.)
Click to expand...
Spot on.
 
Balljy said:
The problem is the supreme court are the only ones that can make these decisions and are likely conservative for a decade or so
Click to expand...
That is a problem that has no solution. Every mode of governance will ultimately have some form of final authority that gets to interpret things.

The problem is good people sleeping on the job and allowing the court to get stacked with conservatives, the democrats and republicans are supposed to check and balance each other out, the democrats were sleep walking.
 
VidaRed said:
That is a problem that has no solution. Every mode of governance will ultimately have some form of final authority that gets to interpret things.

The problem is good people sleeping on the job and allowing the court to get stacked with conservatives, the democrats and republicans are supposed to check and balance each other out, the democrats were sleep walking.
Click to expand...

They knew what was happening, they had no power. And people like Machin make sure they never have the power.
 
Caius said:
The problem is there is a solid 30-40% of the country that are evangelical or members of some other extremist religious group, and those groups successfully indoctrinate the vast majority of young people that are brought up in them. I'm also not sure non-Americans understand just how fundamental being pro-life is to such groups. I had an evangelical roommate in law school who compared Roe v. Wade to Dred Scott (allowing slavery and denying birthright citizenship) and Korematsu (Japanese internment camps) in terms of being the most incorrect Supreme Court decisions. And he was a smart, reasonable guy about things that weren't directly influenced by his evangelical beliefs. But evangelicals really truly believe that abortion two weeks into a pregnancy is fundamentally the same as popping a one-year old in the microwave, and if you take that mindset into account, you can understand why this issue is so incredibly animating for such people.

I think some are overestimating how much this decision has to do with being anti-women as opposed to being based in evangelical Christianity and other extremist Christian religions - many many evangelical women are 100% behind the court here. (Of course if you want to say that Evangelical Christianity is itself anti-women, no arguments here. But I think the religious purpose is more important than any misogynistic purpose in terms of why this decision was made/supported.)
Click to expand...

Yep. This is what I've been saying for long and it's tiring to see this is just a way for men to "control women".

I know people in my own social circle who are Catholics, hardly practicing and believe abortion is murder even in the first trimester.
 
Caius said:
The problem is there is a solid 30-40% of the country that are evangelical or members of some other extremist religious group, and those groups successfully indoctrinate the vast majority of young people that are brought up in them. I'm also not sure non-Americans understand just how fundamental being pro-life is to such groups. I had an evangelical roommate in law school who compared Roe v. Wade to Dred Scott (allowing slavery and denying birthright citizenship) and Korematsu (Japanese internment camps) in terms of being the most incorrect Supreme Court decisions. And he was a smart, reasonable guy about things that weren't directly influenced by his evangelical beliefs. But evangelicals really truly believe that abortion two weeks into a pregnancy is fundamentally the same as popping a one-year old in the microwave, and if you take that mindset into account, you can understand why this issue is so incredibly animating for such people.

I think some are overestimating how much this decision has to do with being anti-women as opposed to being based in evangelical Christianity and other extremist Christian religions - many many evangelical women are 100% behind the court here. (Of course if you want to say that Evangelical Christianity is itself anti-women, no arguments here. But I think the religious purpose is more important than any misogynistic purpose in terms of why this decision was made/supported.)
Click to expand...

I disagree that being evangelical Christian means you are extremist. Some will be, yes. But I think its very unfair to label, in general terms, evangelical Christians as extremist.
 
Reiver said:
I disagree that being evangelical Christian means you are extremist. Some will be, yes. But I think its very unfair to label, in general terms, evangelical Christians as extremist.
Click to expand...
Religious extremism progenates almost exclusively from evangelicals. Christofascist dominionism shares the same DNA as evangelicals do. It’s nigh on impossible to jump from a ‘normal’ religious person to extremist without touching the evangelical base (‘base’ as in baseball).

It doesn’t mean all evangelicals are extremist, you are correct, but a heavy, heavy percentage of extremists are / were evangelical.
 
Reiver said:
I disagree that being evangelical Christian means you are extremist. Some will be, yes. But I think its very unfair to label, in general terms, evangelical Christians as extremist.
Click to expand...
I certainly don't mean to say that all evangelical Christians are themselves necessarily extremists. Nevertheless, I think the average evangelical Christian, and the evangelical movement as a whole, is and has been for decades actively seeking to eliminate the separation of church and state as much as possible. See for instance this article about Billy Graham, one of the foundational figures in modern evangelical Christianity. Or the Encyclopedia Britannica entry on Jerry Falwell, another key figure. Both men who actively crossed religion and politics and sought to enforce their own religious norms upon everyone else. To me, a religious interpretation is extreme when a core aspect of it is trying to enforce itself upon everyone else through what should be secular government, and that is at the core of modern day American evangelical Christianity.
 
Caius said:
The problem is there is a solid 30-40% of the country that are evangelical or members of some other extremist religious group, and those groups successfully indoctrinate the vast majority of young people that are brought up in them. I'm also not sure non-Americans understand just how fundamental being pro-life is to such groups. I had an evangelical roommate in law school who compared Roe v. Wade to Dred Scott (allowing slavery and denying birthright citizenship) and Korematsu (Japanese internment camps) in terms of being the most incorrect Supreme Court decisions. And he was a smart, reasonable guy about things that weren't directly influenced by his evangelical beliefs. But evangelicals really truly believe that abortion two weeks into a pregnancy is fundamentally the same as popping a one-year old in the microwave, and if you take that mindset into account, you can understand why this issue is so incredibly animating for such people.

I think some are overestimating how much this decision has to do with being anti-women as opposed to being based in evangelical Christianity and other extremist Christian religions - many many evangelical women are 100% behind the court here. (Of course if you want to say that Evangelical Christianity is itself anti-women, no arguments here. But I think the religious purpose is more important than any misogynistic purpose in terms of why this decision was made/supported.)
Click to expand...

All well said. Some basic reading I've done around religious affiliation of younger Americans suggests there are many more unaffiliated from religion and that there is more religious diversity among the young than at any time before: https://www.prri.org/research/2020-census-of-american-religion/

I'm hoping the PRRI are worth a damn and that if so the trends they identified in 2020 can continue. Again generational trends are cold comfort to young women suffering now because of the decisions today's Supreme Court take. I know it's a contentious issue in terms of the precise mechanisms you would need for abolition of the Court but I'd think warmly of any politician who tabled the idea.
 
I always wondered why this was always called pro-choice vs pro-life. It's pro-murder vs pro-life. I'm not religious, but terminating progression of a fetus is terminating life. Those that murder pregnant women are charged with a double murder (rightfully so).
 
ExoduS said:
I always wondered why this was always called pro-choice vs pro-life. It's pro-murder vs pro-life. I'm not religious, but terminating progression of a fetus is terminating life. Those that murder pregnant women are charged with a double murder (rightfully so).
Click to expand...
You didn't wonder very hard or you are not paying attention but thank you for your insight.
 
shamans said:
Yep. This is what I've been saying for long and it's tiring to see this is just a way for men to "control women".

I know people in my own social circle who are Catholics, hardly practicing and believe abortion is murder even in the first trimester.
Click to expand...

Part of the trick is making it into vs women to further entrench
the divide.

Just like 2nd ammandment isnt about taking away libery or allowing you to be killed without being able to shoot back
 
Reiver said:
I disagree that being evangelical Christian means you are extremist. Some will be, yes. But I think its very unfair to label, in general terms, evangelical Christians as extremist.
Click to expand...

It's not about labelling evangelical christians but understanding why the abortion issue is so crazy is America
 
ExoduS said:
I always wondered why this was always called pro-choice vs pro-life. It's pro-murder vs pro-life. I'm not religious, but terminating progression of a fetus is terminating life. Those that murder pregnant women are charged with a double murder (rightfully so).
Click to expand...

They are not charged with a double murder. Maybe aggravated assault or something along those lines along with the murder of the mother.
 
adexkola said:
They are not charged with a double murder. Maybe aggravated assault or something along those lines along with the murder of the mother.
Click to expand...
The Bush administration made killing a pregnant woman a double homicide with the Unborn Victims of Violence Act in 2004. Scott Peterson was actually convinced of double homicide under California’s version of this law.

ExoduS said:
It's pro-murder vs pro-life.
Click to expand...
The feck it is.
 
Last edited:
shamans said:
Yep. This is what I've been saying for long and it's tiring to see this is just a way for men to "control women".

I know people in my own social circle who are Catholics, hardly practicing and believe abortion is murder even in the first trimester.
Click to expand...
Two things can be true at the same time.
 
Reiver said:
I disagree that being evangelical Christian means you are extremist. Some will be, yes. But I think its very unfair to label, in general terms, evangelical Christians as extremist.
Click to expand...

In the US, most hold views that would be radical for the majority of the population, even amongst the youth population of evangelicals as the pastors are effective at brainwashing. Growing up in Arizona, I saw it wasn't restricted to one domination but related to most of them (Baptists and pentecostals for example but also Catholics and Mormons). Heck, Baptists dont even think Mormons or Catholics are Christian so its not limited only to views that have broad awareness in society. It's like the Saudi-funded madrassas in Muslim majority countries that have fueled Wahhabism in recent years.
 
Last edited:
ExoduS said:
I always wondered why this was always called pro-choice vs pro-life. It's pro-murder vs pro-life. I'm not religious, but terminating progression of a fetus is terminating life. Those that murder pregnant women are charged with a double murder (rightfully so).
Click to expand...
Balls.
 
Carolina Red said:
The Bush administration made killing a pregnant woman a double homicide with the Unborn Victims of Violence Act in 2004. Scott Peterson was actually convinced of double homicide under California’s version of this law.


The feck it is.
Click to expand...

Ah, I stand corrected. Of course that idiot of a president did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.