Where's the Pro-Life thread?

[Cascadia]

I just took the time to read the last 7-8 pages. TDub definitely unhinged. Might be time for a break.

[TDub]

Lol. Of course thats what YOU got out of that.

[Cascadia]

Well, you did go nuts

[TDub]

No comment on Ousdahls fantastical theory huh? Dont worry about me, he wants your honest and sincere dialogue.

[ousdahl]

I think everyone can benefit from cooling off. We don’t need to get so worked up.

And for real, can we try to cut back on the ad hominems? It’s one thing to debate the substance of the discussion, but the name calling and personal attacks are lame. Let’s all try to be bigger than that.

And forgive me if I got under anyone’s skin, but honestly I don’t think I said anything that controversial. I’m just suggesting an economic correlation. and there are economic correlations to damn near anything! Not sure why that was such a touchy thing, except that so much about this thread is touchy.

The ironic thing is, we’re just a bunch of dudes acting like we’re all experts about a wimmin’s issue, go figure.

[ousdahl]

No comment on Ousdahls fantastical theory huh? Dont worry about me, he wants your honest and sincere dialogue.

Greater reproductive autonomy – whether in the form of access to birth control, abortion, paid family leave, or child care – affords women greater economic security and mobility. Expanding that autonomy will benefit not just individual women, but all working families. It is essential to re-establishing the economic security that can underpin an emerging phenomenon – the sleeping giant of a renewed working class in America.

Yet in our current go-it-alone system, parenthood for middle- and low-income Americans has become intensely correlated with economic harm, even more so for women of color. We must make it less onerous for American parents to raise children, by guaranteeing paid family leave, affordable child care, and ensuring jobs pay a family-supporting wage. At the same time, we must guarantee access to reproductive rights as key to economic opportunity for women with low incomes. Abortion in the US has become concentrated among poor women. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 42% of women having abortions are living below the federal poverty line. Moreover, 7 in 10 would have preferred to have their abortions earlier in the pregnancy but were forced to delay in order to find the money to pay for it. Women also report having to borrow from friends or family in order to pay for their abortion, or forgo expenses such as rent, utilities and groceries.

The systemic harms to women’s economic opportunity stemming from limits on reproductive freedom can be enhanced or mitigated by a number of public policy choices, including but not limited to: access to health insurance, proximity to health care providers, access to ready cash, ramifications of the Hyde amendment (which blocks federal funding for abortion services), access to public transportation, and pregnancy discrimination. The groundbreaking “Turnaway Study” found that most women who seek abortion are already struggling financially, and many cite poverty as their main reason to seek abortion. Moreover, according to the Reproductive Health Technologies Project, a woman who is turned away for an abortion is more likely to be in poverty two years after the fact. Denying women reproductive autonomy compounds our existing economic inequality...

https://www.demos.org/blog/reproductive ... n-decision

To understand the ways in which women’s reproductive autonomy and economic opportunity are linked, the authors analyzed economic outcomes for women who face varying degrees of reproductive health care access and found that:
Women living in states with a better reproductive health care climate—including insurance coverage of contraceptive drugs and services; expanded Medicaid eligibility for family-planning services; insurance coverage of infertility treatments; and the availability of state-supported public funding for medically necessary abortions—have higher earnings and face less occupational segregation compared with women living in states that have more limited reproductive health care access.
Women in states with robust reproductive health care climates also are less likely to work part time,13 giving them more opportunity for higher earnings; nonwage benefits such as access to paid sick days and paid leave; and greater promotion opportunities.14
Reproductive rights and health care access also reduce job lock, or the lack of labor mobility between jobs. Women who live in states with positive indicators of reproductive health care access, as measured by publicly available funding for abortion, are more likely to transition between occupations and from unemployment into employment. On the other hand, women in states with more limited abortion access, as measured by the presence of targeted regulation of abortion providers (TRAP) laws, are less likely to make these transitions.
Together, these findings start to paint a picture that shows how certain economic outcomes are connected to a woman’s ability to access the full range of reproductive health care services. Furthermore, the findings help clarify that women cannot achieve economic progress without securing greater autonomy to direct their futures.

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues ... ies-women/

[ousdahl]

Jesus Christ. The conspiracy is that there is a mysterious "powers that be" (conspiracy 1....right out of the trump playbook) that have ultimate control over any of this and that they manipulate (and have for 2k years) the construct of their followers and followers beliefs in such a way so as to make them believe that life of the unborn is important solely so that they can use the unborn as a future cheap labor source (conspiracy 2).


Im done. Have fun.

1. Isn’t manipulating the beliefs of followers, maybe kind of sort of exactly what religions do?

2. Pretty sure the whole “pro-life” movement as we know it today (read: anti-abortion and anti-birth control/“forced pregnancy radicalism” and the Catholic Church and the conservative right’s outrage about it all) is not nearly as old or as established as you might think.

[Deleted User 863]

It's so funny to me that you equate being religious to being on the "right". It's almost like you don't realize exactly how religious the black and hispanic communities are which are largely groups who vote left.

[ousdahl]

In the context of this thread and this issue, how does the “pro-life” demographic tend to vote though?

As in, if the most important or only issue a voter cares about is being pro-life in the sense of restricting abortions and access to contraception, which party do they vote for?

Which party panders to that demographic more?

[Deleted User 863]

You don't think Muslims are pro life? You don't think there are religious black and hispanic people who are pro life?

[TDub]

Dude. Not only are the goalposts moving, you dont even know which end youre shooting towards. No one is arguing women (and their partners) shouldnt have a choice in many scenarios...no one. Your links are wonderful but do not explain your conspiracy.

Also interesting how you dont like ad hominems when theyre directed at you but say nothing when theyre directed at others. When your buddies perpetuate this tactic you stay quiet, go have a manhattan and discuss.

If you were lumber you'd be Ipe

As i said before and this time i mean it....im done with this conversation.


Have a good day. Only 107 here today, a step in the right direction.

[ousdahl]

How am I moving the goalposts?

I say maybe there’s underlying economic considerations to the pro-life issue, the sincerity of which is often questionable. Then I provide links to research suggesting a correlation between reproductive rights and economic opportunities. Pretty sure that’s entirely on point, but if you think that’s moving goalposts, I wish you’d clarify instead of excusing yourself from the discussion.

And I tried to address the ad hominem collectively toward everyone, the royal we, but sorry if you think I am or am not singling anyone out.

Stay cool bro!

[ousdahl]

You don't think Muslims are pro life? You don't think there are religious black and hispanic people who are pro life?

Actually, I’m not as familiar with those demographics off the top of my head.

If you have a point you’d like to discuss, feel free.

[PhDhawk]

How am I moving the goalposts?

That there are negative economic implications by denying access to abortions is VERY VERY different than, Rich people want to ban abortions so they have cheap labor to exploit.


You keep mentioning sincerity, I think you need question your own on this subject.

[PhDhawk]

You don't think Muslims are pro life? You don't think there are religious black and hispanic people who are pro life?

Actually, I’m not as familiar with those demographics off the top of my head.

If you have a point you’d like to discuss, feel free.

About 40% of Muslims are anti-abortion. Less than 20% of Muslims are Republican. Mathematically, AT LEAST half of anti-abortion muslims are not republican.

Also, Muslim women are much more likely to be anti-abortion than Muslim men, which contradicts your notion that it's largely men trying to control women's bodies and choices.

https://www.pewforum.org/religious-land ... -abortion/

[ousdahl]

well again, it’s not like the powers that be can come out and say it. Trust me, I read it on one of lobster’s nazi message boreds!

But perhaps the question is, how did the party of pro-life and the party of supply side wealth ended up being bedfellows?

How did the right wing media embrace so much pro-life messaging right along side their pro-gun, pro-war, anti-healthcare, anti-immigration, anti-living wage, climate change denial, etc kind of messaging?

How did the pro-life movement become so singularly focused on “pro-birth” to the exclusion of so many other issues that could otherwise be so effective at protecting lives?

[PhDhawk]

well again, it’s not like the powers that be can come out and say it. Trust me, I read it on one of lobster’s nazi message boreds!

But perhaps the question is, how did the party of pro-life and the party of supply side wealth ended up being bedfellows?

How did the right wing media embrace so much pro-life messaging right along side their pro-gun, pro-war, anti-healthcare, anti-immigration, anti-living wage, climate change denial, etc kind of messaging?

How did the pro-life movement become so singularly focused on “pro-birth” to the exclusion of so many other issues that could otherwise be so effective at protecting lives?

Again, if you really wanted the answers to these questions, you wouldn't be asking them in a liberal echo chamber.

Sparko's gonna tell you you're on the right track.

But if you want someone who is pro-life to explain their stance to you, I'd encourage you to seek them out.

[Deleted User 863]

You don't think Muslims are pro life? You don't think there are religious black and hispanic people who are pro life?

Actually, I’m not as familiar with those demographics off the top of my head.

If you have a point you’d like to discuss, feel free.

My point is that religous people consist of FAR more people than white republican catholics.

[ousdahl]

well again, it’s not like the powers that be can come out and say it. Trust me, I read it on one of lobster’s nazi message boreds!

But perhaps the question is, how did the party of pro-life and the party of supply side wealth ended up being bedfellows?

How did the right wing media embrace so much pro-life messaging right along side their pro-gun, pro-war, anti-healthcare, anti-immigration, anti-living wage, climate change denial, etc kind of messaging?

How did the pro-life movement become so singularly focused on “pro-birth” to the exclusion of so many other issues that could otherwise be so effective at protecting lives?

Again, if you really wanted the answers to these questions, you wouldn't be asking them in a liberal echo chamber.

Sparko's gonna tell you you're on the right track.

But if you want someone who is pro-life to explain their stance to you, I'd encourage you to seek them out.

Honestly, most of the pro-life Catholic friends I have and have had start and end the political discussion at pro-life. As in, they have little interest or concern for other issues (even their own economic interests!), and decide how to vote entirely and exclusively based on which candidates they perceive as more “pro-life” (in the narrow context of being opposed to access to reproductive rights)

I think who I’d really like to meet, is the shrewd power broker politician or businessman or whatever who recognizes that correlation between restricting reproductive rights and reduced economic and educational opportunities, and works to manipulate that in their own economic favor.

Maybe there’s no such thing. Even if there is, it’s not likely anyone is gonna come out and candidly just say that.

“Truth is, we couldn’t care less about the pro-lifers, but if they’re so worried about restricting reproductive rights that they’re willing to vote against their own economic interests that we can then use to…oh shit, is that mic hot?”

Here’s a question: whether the supply side of things might really even want that cheap unskilled labor, or whether they’d prefer more educated workers?

[Deleted User 863]

I gotta call bullshit on that one. I don't believe ANYONE votes solely on abortion rights.