Anti-abortion law in the USA

[Peterkin]

8 minutes ago, iNow said:

I am unable to share this nonchalance about our shared future. 

Don't mistake loss of illusion for nonchalance.

 

9 minutes ago, iNow said:

But they do.

And i ask again: How effective are these citizen lobbies, petitioning for a change that ever poll clearly demonstrates is the majority's desire, against the heavily funded professional lobbies of huge financial interests?

[iNow]

1 hour ago, Peterkin said:

How effective are these citizen lobbies, petitioning for a change

It depends on which ones we’re talking about, what the actual issue is, what numbers they have supporting them, which populations are affected by the issue and how sympathetic or connected they are, and what tactics they use to advocate and push for said change. 

We don’t disagree that they’re usually outgunned by big money and big corporations. I’m simply saying they’re not useless nor worthy of being disallowed under the generalization that “lobbying = bad.”

Edited September 3, 2021 by iNow

[Peterkin]

'kay -  if you think they'll do some good....

I just hate the idea of hiring advocates to go after my legislative representatives and chivvy them to do the job they swore to do. 

[iNow]

Then lobbying needs to be reformed and regulated, not abolished. 

And this anti-abortion law didn’t come from big money corporate lobbyists. It came from groups of single issue base voters and groups who know how to move the levers of our governance and legislate by fiat / shadow dockets. 

Edited September 3, 2021 by iNow

[TheVat]

Heather Cox Richardson,  eminent historian,  on how,  politically,  the dog has finally caught the car:  

Quote

....But support for safe and legal abortion has always been strong, as it remains today. Until yesterday, Republican politicians could pay lip service to opposing the Roe v. Wade decision to get anti-abortion voters to show up at the polls, without facing the political fallout of actually getting rid of the decision.

Now, though, Texas has effectively destroyed the right to legal abortion.

The fact that the Fox News Channel is not mentioning what should have been a landmark triumph of its viewers’ ideology suggests Republicans know that ending safe and legal abortion is deeply unpopular. Their base finally, after all these years, got what it wanted. But now the rest of the nation, which had been assured as recently as the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh that Roe v. Wade was settled law that would not be overturned, gets a chance to weigh in.

https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/

Offers a fascinating (and disturbing) history of how politicians have used the abortion issue and magnified the degree to which conservatives opposed the procedure.   And created the mythology of "pro-abortion."   Try to think of anyone you know who actually favors abortion as a desirable method of birth control.  Anyone who's looked at the record knows that it is Republicans,  opposing sex education,  access to contraception,  reproductive counseling,  and women's rights more generally, who are responsible for most of the abortions in my country.  

[beecee]

On 9/2/2021 at 5:03 AM, Phi for All said:

This is the age of extremism, and more folks are coming out of the woodwork with intractable demands for our society. American Taliban, for sure. Terrorist religious tactics with heavy doses of toxic masculinity are rampant in right wing leadership.

Is this like the new Texas gun laws, where 60% of Texans don't approve, but they're saddled with partisan whackos in office who're going to push this through to please Trump?

I tend to agree...anti abortionists, anti vaxxers, anti prisons, etc etc, and all with that worn out slogan, what about our FREEDOM!!!

I have an hypothesis..... Could it be that the extremes of the left...the likes of extreme political correctness [and there are examples of that which I abhore] actually give rise to the extreme looney right movement? with religion being a subset of that extreme looney right?

Personally I have been labeled at both ends, perhaps that's because my views in general are probably just slightly left of centre. You're either with us or against us, seems to be another cry of extreme movements.

In my country, we also have anti abortionist movement, but any government that would secumb to their nonsense, would be kicked out pretty quickly. The same inversely applies to our health scheme that was implemented by a Labor government in 1972. If any Liberal government [that generally oppose it] ever tried to dismantle it, there would be hell to pay. 

 

[Peterkin]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

And this anti-abortion law didn’t come from big money corporate lobbyists. It came from groups of single issue base voters and groups who know how to move the levers of our governance and legislate by fiat / shadow dockets. 

Not lobbying. (In any case, I suspect most corporate and special interest lobbying isn't aimed at persuading legislators to enact something new, but to ensure that they stay the course, refrain form giving into voter pressure, remember who buttered their toast and could snatch it away.)  The powers behind the levers don't need to exercise their elbows by now; they can just blow the inaudible whistle. Corporate money may not be evident in this particular instance, but I can certainly see the hand-prints of Big Religion - which does a great deal of business and wields some very Big Money, as well as political clout, and has been intimate with Big Business for quite some time. Between them, they control most of the communications media in all the red states. Those voter groups didn't appear spontaneously; they were assembled, propagandized, and mobilized over many decades. 

Edited September 3, 2021 by Peterkin

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, beecee said:

I have an hypothesis..... Could it be that the extremes of the left...the likes of extreme political correctness [and there are examples of that which I abhore] actually give rise to the extreme looney right movement? with religion being a subset of that extreme looney right?

I always found that that to be bit of a a convenient excuse. See, folks do not have abhorrent believes, but it is because someone made them so. There are a few issues with that statement. The first is the use of political correctness of a pejorative of the right to criticize the left. In reality, there has always been an Overton window that determined what is palatable. The phrase PC has been weaponized by the right to shut down every criticism (justified or not) that stem from progressive ideas. In all honesty neither side is doing well with fostering dialogue, however it seems to me that the right has created a whole ecosystem to systematically shut them off from discourse, which is now exemplified by the presence of an alternative right-wing reality in which things like, say global warming or COVID-19 simply does not exist and antifa has taken over the government.

If you want to follow this route and where the origins are, you won't find those in the opposite camp. There is a large body of research now which discusses this in more detail, but in short, it is not a reactionary or even new phenomenon. It follows a long tradition of right-wing patterns which elements of authoritarianism and xenophobia which are rolled into a zero-sum worldview.

The only new thing is really the amplification of signals from all sides via the internet which allowed folks in fringe to create and maintain their own alternative universe. It should also be noted that one of the hallmark of these fringes is the duality of a) being heroes of their narratives but b) at the same time being downtrodden and forced to action by the enemy. The narrative that the left forces them to believe in crazy stuff because they have taken over mainstream media and science, is just another element to it.

[beecee]

20 minutes ago, CharonY said:

The phrase PC has been weaponized by the right to shut down every criticism (justified or not) that stem from progressive ideas. In all honesty neither side is doing well with fostering dialogue, however it seems to me that the right has created a whole ecosystem to systematically shut them off from discourse, which is now exemplified by the presence of an alternative right-wing reality in which things like, say global warming or COVID-19 simply does not exist and antifa has taken over the government.

The narrative that the left forces them to believe in crazy stuff because they have taken over mainstream media and science, is just another element to it.

Firstly, Informative post...let me say that "my hypothesis" was my own personal thingy and was certainly not as you say [and in part I agree] an effort by the right loonies, to shut down every criticism of proposed actions on things like global warming  and covid, which personally I don't see as "leftish" rather as dictated by science and the scientific method. The deeper methodology of the extreme right loonies is as I have said before, "F^&%$ you Jack, I'm alright" 

In saying that some PC notions, which I won't go into now, do make me cringe somewhat.

In essence personally, I don't like myself being catagorised as atheist, or leftish, or anything else for that matter, rather just someone who sees the benefits of science, the scientific method, and reasonablity.

Edited September 3, 2021 by beecee

[TheVat]

22 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I In reality, there has always been an overtone window that determined what is palatable. The phrase PC has been weaponized by the right to shut down every criticism (justified or not) that stem from progressive ideas. In all honesty neither side is doing well with fostering dialogue, however it seems to me that the right has created a whole ecosystem to systematically shut them off from discourse, which is now exemplified by the presence of an alternative right-wing reality in which things like, say global warming or COVID-19 simply does not exist and antifa has taken over the government.

 

First,  great post,  +1.  Second,  quick clarification for anyone uncertain about an overtone window -- I think our ferryman was subject to some mischief from their auto-correct and meant Overton window,  the term named for political analyst Joseph Overton.... 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

[iNow]

23 minutes ago, beecee said:

I don't like myself being catagorised as atheist, or leftish, or anything else for that matter

Because labels are flat and one dimensional, whereas we humans are complex, nuanced, and multi-dimensional. @Phi for All has had some excellent posts through the years here about the problem with labels that have resonated with me. 
 

14 minutes ago, TheVat said:

quick clarification for anyone uncertain about an overtone window -- I think our ferryman was subject to some mischief from their auto-correct and meant Overton window,  the term named for political analyst Joseph Overton.... 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

Fun fact: After chatting with Senator Elizabeth Warren briefly at an event in 2019, I got pulled aside afterward by a reporter. Long story short… I was quoted in the Washington Post using the phrase “Overton window.” It was part of my response to their question “Why Warren and not Bernie?” and I was praising Bernie for shifting the Overton window on topics like UHC and wealth inequality before answering why my preference was for Warren. I’m almost famous 😂 

I return you now to the previously scheduled Troubles in Texas topic. 

[CharonY]

20 minutes ago, TheVat said:

First,  great post,  +1.  Second,  quick clarification for anyone uncertain about an overtone window -- I think our ferryman was subject to some mischief from their auto-correct and meant Overton window,  the term named for political analyst Joseph Overton.... 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

Indeed, thanks for pointing that out. I am notoriously bad at proof reading my posts as they are generally more of a stream of thought thing that I do between doing other things, so my general apologies for having to put up with them. I did correct it now but now am unsure whether I should have. Anyway...

[beecee]

23 minutes ago, CharonY said:

 I am notoriously bad at proof reading my posts as they are generally more of a stream of thought thing that I do between doing other things, 

Join the club! I have been known to edit my posts three or four times!

[TheVat]

I've heard there's a $10,000 fine,  if you walk up that ramp... 

On 9/3/2021 at 5:37 PM, iNow said:

 

Fun fact: After chatting with Senator Elizabeth Warren briefly at an event in 2019, I got pulled aside afterward by a reporter. Long story short… I was quoted in the Washington Post using the phrase “Overton window.” It was part of my response to their question “Why Warren and not Bernie?” and I was praising Bernie for shifting the Overton window on topics like UHC and wealth inequality before answering why my preference was for Warren. I’m almost famous 😂 

I return you now to the previously scheduled Troubles in Texas topic. 

When I used to love in Eastern Nebraska,  there was a point when I considered moving to Iowa.   Partly because it seemed like a place that got really fun and interesting every four years.   Not that it couldn't be every year,  if you're in the right spots.   😁

[MigL]

On 9/3/2021 at 7:37 PM, iNow said:

’m almost famous

You've always been famous on ScienceForums.net 😄 .

[StringJunky]

On 9/2/2021 at 11:40 PM, beecee said:

And yes, we also have an emergence of such extreme right nonsense in Australia, known as "Ünited Australia Party" guess what there motto is? Make Australia Great!!!🤮

... for once! :p

Edited September 5, 2021 by StringJunky

[beecee]

50 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

... for once! 😛

😉

[iNow]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

You've always been famous on ScienceForums.net 😄 .

Sometimes infamous, too.  

[StringJunky]

Just thought I'd add that I think current methods of the GOP regarding the OP are beyond the pale.

[iNow]

Quote

 

I think next the state of California should follow this same path and allow private citizens to sue others for owning a gun, or driving someone to a gun show, or for frequenting a shooting range. That’s the type of vigilantism Texas is showing is works. 

[TheVat]

2 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Just thought I'd add that I think current methods of the GOP regarding the OP are beyond the pale.

The GOP has currently moved beyond the Hubble radius as it is observed at the pale.   

I think it says something that even the online platform Epik,  notorious refuge of the vilest extremists you can imagine,  has now forced this Texas RtL group to disable it's tipline.   Epik, folks.  

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, TheVat said:

The GOP has currently moved beyond the Hubble radius as it is observed at the pale.   

I think it says something that even the online platform Epik,  notorious refuge of the vilest extremists you can imagine,  has now forced this Texas RtL group to disable it's tipline.   Epik, folks.  

It's almost as if "It's not in the rules it's allowed". That's a path to more criminality and disorder. We generally act in the spirit of our laws, which are not necessarily specific, and the GOP seems to be mining into that type of subversive abuse of principles society stands on to operate with some degree of amicable consensus.

[iNow]

I’ve heard this said by different people and more than once recently: Republicans right now are the biggest threat to the survival of democracy in the US 

It’s nihilistic 

 

[beecee]

7 hours ago, iNow said:

I’ve heard this said by different people and more than once recently: Republicans right now are the biggest threat to the survival of democracy in the US 

It’s nihilistic 

Sounds as if they're trying to establish the old American west and Wyatt Earp and the old Tombstone/boot Hill scenario again. 

Edited September 6, 2021 by beecee

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, beecee said:

Sounds as if they're trying to establish the old American west and Wyatt Earp and the old Tombstone/boot Hill scenario again. 

Sound's more like they're aiming for 1984; I think George would have had a lot to say about "the echo chamber" in the sequel, 2084...