Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
I know it's not the same thing, that's my point. You pulled the "even if it's alive" card" and my point is I see no conflict between "yes, it's alive" and "no, a woman still has to right to remove it if she wishes."
Edited by LSBK on Aug 14th 2019 at 3:40:18 AM
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
Laws requiring your organs to be taken from you is completely indefensible
Oh really when?
Shin Megami Tensei IV
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Honestly, I think they legit can be argued, especially in cases of recently deceased bodies in unexpected ways. I get the religious argument and I can make exceptions for it based on that, but using the organs of healthy people that died on accidents could save the lives of many.
Edited by KazuyaProta on Aug 14th 2019 at 3:43:07 AM
Watch me destroying my country
A cancer is also alive.
>That's not really how maternal mortality works, though. Most deaths happen at or after birth, it's less "oh, you need an abortion to save your life" and more "you roll the dice when giving birth, especially if you have limited access to decent healthcare."
>So when you say "life of the mother is an acceptable reason for an abortion," it should be considered a pro-choice argument because an "elective" abortion can still save her life.
While this doesn't change my mind, it is a good argument. I've typically seen complications as something that is essentially predictable with modern medical care. Can you strengthen your argument by providing sources?
Shin Megami Tensei IV
A cancer have no chance to developt into a sentient human being. Comparing fertilizated eggs to a cancer just serves as a insult.
But honestly, this talk will never be over, everyone should just drop it before we get a Mod Stick
Edited by KazuyaProta on Aug 14th 2019 at 3:43:58 AM
Watch me destroying my country
She/her
And pregnancy takes the uterus from a woman, plus it drastically affects the rest of her body. That’s why it’s such a bodily autonomy issue. Emphasis throughout added by me.
We have a term for that: organ donation.
It is uncontroversial in this country that other types of organ donation should never be forced. Parents are under no legal obligation to donate their organs to save their children's lives after they are born, even though there is no debate about the "personhood" of children who are living outside the womb. Yet when it comes to fetuses whose personhood is a subject of debate, pro-life activists demand that this obligation be legally enforced.
...
To be sure, unlike some kinds of organ donation, if all goes well with a pregnancy, the mother gets her body back in good working order after about nine months. But that isn’t so different from bone marrow or liver donations, each of which eventually regenerates after a partial donation. And the physical burdens that pregnancy places on the mother can be debilitating.
The mother's uterus provides a safe space for the fetus to grow. Her body produces about 50 percent more blood in order to provide the growing fetus with oxygen and nutrients. Her lungs oxygenate it, her heart pumps it. Her digestive system produces the nutrients both of them need.
That is miraculous, to be sure. As it happens, I am currently about six months into my first pregnancy, and I am constantly amazed at the way my body turns out to know how to create another human life, without any need for input or guidance from me. It's like discovering that my car has been Optimus Prime all along.
But that also means I have no control over how the baby in my belly can use my body. She has access to my oxygen, my nutrition, my heart, my lungs. My organs respond automatically to what she needs, even if that means I am left exhausted or ill.
To me, that is all worth it: The thought of meeting my baby in a few months thrills me. I am a willing participant in this process. But not all women and girls who become pregnant are themselves willing participants. And that is a distinction that a lot of abortion opponents just do not seem to find very important. The idea that pregnancy and its physical burdens could be forced onto me, or, more specifically, could in many cases be forced onto a woman or girl who has not signed up for surrendering control over her internal organs, appalls me.
...
There's another way that pregnancy is akin to organ donation: It comes with some unavoidable physical harm as well as the risks of complications, potentially fatal, for the donor or mother.
We often think of the dangers of pregnancy as a problem that modern medicine has overcome, or that is limited to poor women in developing countries. But that's not true: Although good medical care can make the risks of pregnancy much lower, it cannot eliminate them. And even uncomplicated pregnancies are still tremendous physical undertakings, with serious consequences and side effects.
Consider, for instance, what an ordinary, uncomplicated pregnancy involves: weeks of nausea and exhaustion in the first trimester. A depressed immune system, which is essential for preventing the mother's body from rejecting her growing fetus, but unfortunately leaves her susceptible to any stray virus that happens to float past. Hormones that soften the connective tissue of her joints and bones, leaving her susceptible to strains and other injuries.
And then, of course, there is the challenge of getting the baby out, which turns out to be a problem with no good solution. A vaginal birth is usually the best bet, but is very painful, often causes tearing, and can damage the mother's pelvic floor, sometimes seriously enough to require corrective surgery later. Aiding a vaginal delivery with instruments such as forceps or a vacuum makes tearing and damage even more likely, and can be even more painful if done without an epidural. That epidural, by the way? Though it's usually very safe, about 1 in 100 women will suffer minor complications such as crushingly painful headaches, and as many 1 in 20,000 will suffer permanent complications such as paralysis.
Cesarean sections, in which the baby is delivered surgically through an incision in the mother's abdomen, are likewise generally quite safe, and often are the best possible choice when it comes to preserving the lives of the mother and baby. But the baby-size incision that must be cut into the mother's abdomen can come with potentially severe side effects, including blood clots, infections, and scarring that can make future pregnancies more difficult and future births more dangerous.
And that's just when things go fairly well. There are a number of severe complications that can easily occur during pregnancy. Preeclampsia, for instance, in which the mother's body has a massive adverse reaction to the pregnancy, affects up to 8 percent of pregnancies worldwide. It has no known cure but to deliver the fetus and placenta — and left untreated can lead to organ failure and death.
Other complications are rarer, but still terrifying. I will spare you the gory details, which I've researched pretty extensively as my own personal means of coping with the medical risks of pregnancy. But the point is that the more I've learned, the more certain I've become that pregnancy can be magical, yes, but even the most magical pregnancy also comes with significant physical tolls and substantial medical risks.
Like an organ donation, that is something that makes it all the more beautiful if it's something you've affirmatively chosen, but all the more traumatic if you've been forced into it. The idea of forcing someone into an organ transplant is indeed so appalling that it is the subject of several horror films, not to mention urban myths the world over. But the idea of forcing someone, by law and against their will, to endure the physical tolls and dangers of pregnancy is somehow considered a mainstream political position.
It's time for the abortion debate in this country to come to terms with what pro-life politicians like Huckabee are really saying. Banning abortion isn't "preventing killing," it's forcing pregnancy. And forcing a person to substantially compromise her own health against her will for another's benefit, even her own child's, is wrong. We don't do that after birth. We shouldn't do it before it, either.
Edited by wisewillow on Aug 14th 2019 at 1:47:22 AM
@Silasw: No. "You're a hypocrite if you don't believe men should do as much labor as women" is a disingenuous argument and I don't think it was made in good faith. Men can't carry a fetus to term, because we're humans, not seahorses.
Seriously, we should either be able to do better than this, or find another topic.
Sooooo, that stock market dive today? Cause what the world needs right now is another global recession to further discredit mainstream politics and liberal democracy....
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
Disasturbator
Your missing the point,there is a potential for that clump of cells to develop into a person,where as cancer cells only exist the harm the body,they are in no way the same thing
> Sooooo, that stock market dive today?
Not unexpected,happened the last time with Bush too,its something we'll have to ride out for awhile while the next president has fix things,just like last time with Obama
I hate it when history and people repeats themselves
Edited by Ultimatum on Aug 14th 2019 at 8:50:35 AM
New theme music also a box
She/her
Global recession could arguably be blamed on many things, including unrestrained capitalism and reckless vicious 1% practices.
Edited by wisewillow on Aug 14th 2019 at 1:49:31 AM
Well, it's going to suck, but it's not like we can vote against it or something.
Edited by Kayeka on Aug 14th 2019 at 10:49:53 AM
Source on most deaths during/after births: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/cdc-says-more-half-us-pregnancy-related-deaths-are-preventable-180972140/
Of the 2,990 deaths for which timing was known, 31 percent took place during pregnancy, while 36 percent occurred during or in the week after delivery. Thirty-three percent happened between one week to one year postpartum.
Now, you're not wrong that most (well, half) are considered preventable with modern medical care. But it's difficult to know that in the process and more of a hindsight thing. The fact is that they keep happening even if they're preventable.
Like, the fact that maternal deaths in the US is going up is indefensible.
I could understand the pro-life argument if those supporting it didn't generally also support cutting back on medical and child support too.
Edited by Larkmarn on Aug 14th 2019 at 4:55:24 AM
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
Excellent Job! I'll have to think about it. I'm not sure it changes my mind, but we'll see.
Assuming for a moment that you have successfully convinced me to allow abortions in the case of rape/incest, how do you feel about the argument that in non rape/incest cases, the risk of pregnancy and what that entails is consented to by having sex? (Again, rape is not included here.)
Well, how many people in this thread hold a substantial amount of their wealth in stocks? I am willing to bet that most people won't even notice a stock market move.
I also think that once we begin to compare embryos to cancers, abortion discussions need to be dialed back.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
A procrastination in of itself
I can’t source anything but I do know that in the (mainland) UK carrying a pregnancy to term (especially an unwanted one) is considered inherently harmful to the women carrying it. That’s the entire legal logic behind abortion over here, carrying a pregnancy is an inherently harmful exercise and such such a women should have a choice to halt the harmful activity.
Sure, but a genuine belief in the sanctity of life should extent to at least some life beyond the womb, and those are lives that men can provide very direct aid to.
It’s the same rank hypocrisy that we’ve pointed out before, the vast majority of the ‘pro-life’ movement don’t give a single shit about a child’s life the moment it’s outside its mother’s womb.
I’ll tag into this, consent needs to be informed consent to matter, as such I’d argue that the provision of proper sex-education and family planning facilities are needed before you can claim that such consent exists. Also the women needs to be above the age of consent.
Edited by Silasw on Aug 14th 2019 at 8:59:53 AM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Screaming Into The Void
I think the essential problem with the Republican pro-life crowd in the US, is that it conflicts with most of the rest of their policies. Banning abortion doesn't save 'children'; better healthcare for pregnant mothers, better support for young parents, and sex education are what are critically important if you actually want to reduce abortion rates (and even then I think abortions should be an available service before a certain point in a pregnancy).
Edit: Okay I posted this before Silasw's post. Basically what he said.
Edited by Pseudopartition on Aug 14th 2019 at 3:57:48 AM
She/her
I might break my ankle while jogging but that doesn’t mean I consented to it. I should be able to go to the hospital and get it fixed, not be screamed at and told that I accepted the risk, that I shouldn’t have run on an uneven trail, that I should have watched my step, that I was stupid to run in the rain, etc.
Edited by wisewillow on Aug 14th 2019 at 1:59:04 AM
Hear hear. I may not agree with the pro-life position, but I am honestly appalled by how many pro-lifers support cutbacks to medical care for pregnant women, mothers and children.
Edited by Ramidel on Aug 14th 2019 at 1:00:26 AM
Well, there's something to be said for "Silent Consent", where every citizen is considered a donor unless they specifically opted out. I think they do that in Belgium, among others.
I mean, if you don't feel strongly enough about refusing to potentially save a life to fill out an online form, then you probably don't actually have much feeling on the matter at all, right?
Edited by Kayeka on Aug 14th 2019 at 11:00:52 AM
I mean, going on about "consented to it" brings up uncomfortable reminders of "if she didn't want to be raped, she shouldn't have dressed like that."
Consenting to sex is consenting to sex. Nothing more, nothing less.
Especially since the same pro-life party is again, generally those advocating against educating people and allowing them to make a so-called informed decision.
Like, I can understand being pro-life in a vacuum. I really can. But with the sheer number of nefarious legislations and pressures in place, it's outright dangerous.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
A procrastination in of itself
Yeah being pro-life kinda makes moral sense if one accepts that the person believes in some basic facts that I do not, but being part of the “pro-life movement” is much harder for me to understand morally.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
I have one stock currently, a super volatile health stock. When everything’s going up, it loses half its value. When the market’s crashing, my itty bitty shitty health stock goes up.
I’m just glad my mom got her savings out of stocks a while ago.
i. hear. a. sound.
Sure and when you let sick children go without healthcare you’re allowing a life to end that presumably would go on, in both cases a life is gone because we didn’t force someone to do something against their will. Now I’m actually okay with that, I don’t think we should enslave people (even temporarily) so as to protect the lives of children they aren’t responsible for (incidentally I also oppose the draft).
It still requires effort and physical output from a person, I’d say that’s close enough.
Sure, but if my dentist doesn’t floss but insists I should it’s fair for me to wonder if he might not care about my teeth and just be doing it because he likes seeing me in pain.
Edited by Silasw on Aug 14th 2019 at 8:39:48 AM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran