552
submitted 10 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Red states would rather let a patient die than let her terminate a dangerous pregnancy. And they’re barely pretending otherwise.

For many years before S.B. 8 passed in Texas and was then swept into existence by the Supreme Court, and before Dobbs ushered in a more formal regime of forced childbirth six months later, the groups leading the charge against reproductive rights liked to claim that they loved pregnant women and only wanted them to be safe and cozy, stuffed chock-full of good advice and carted around through extra-wide hallways for safe, sterile procedures in operating rooms with only the best HVAC systems.

Then Dobbs came down and within minutes it became manifestly clear that these advocates actually viewed pregnant people as the problem standing in the way of imaginary, healthy babies—and that states willing to privilege fetal life would go to any and all lengths to ensure that actual patients’ care, comfort, informed consent, and very survival would be subordinate.

We are only beginning to understand the extent to which pregnant women are dying and will continue to die due to denials of basic maternal health care, candid medical advice, and adequate treatment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 27 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Here's the thing.

Mitch McConnell spent decades cultivating the GOP into the party that isn't there to govern, but to just be against anything the Democrats do purely for the sake of contrarianism. It doesn't matter what the Democrats do; the GOP must take the exact opposite position at all costs. However, this was largely just GOP ideology, which often did take a back seat when push came to shove. At the end of the day, they'd hem and haw over it, but at the end of the day, a deal would always be struck.

Donald Trump came along and turned what was previously a GOP ideology that could at least be reshaped when push comes to shove and turned that into a cult-like dogma that can never be disobeyed under any circumstances, consequences be damned. Logic be damned. Truth be damned. And he managed to get 70 million or so people to follow him, forcing the rest of the party to either fall in line and push the MAGA agenda or see the end of their political careers. No price, in his eyes, is too high a price to pay (mostly because he's not the one that has to do the paying). And that's GOP dogma now. How does the saying go? "Many of you will die, but it's a price I'm willing to pay."

And that's where we are now. Pick a subject, and the GOP must be against it. Try to say that doing so will affect something else, and they'll suddenly be against that too. Trying to reason with them about their position being too extreme only causes them to get more extreme. Try to tell them that exceptions must be made for the good of society, and they'll gladly tell you what they think of society. Because that's what their 70 million voters have been conditioned to want, even when it's against their own best interests. As long as it's hurting "them", no price is too steep for them to pay. If the only way to defend your position is to argue in favor of something that is irrational, illegal, nonsensical, heartless, and hurtful, then you still take that position, because GOP dogma must be maintained at all costs.

You know why the GOP are suddenly against exceptions for rape or life of the mother? Because the Democrats showed that these reasons are a need for why abortion care is necessary in the first place.

You know why the GOP are suddenly all sorts of interested in restricting interstate travel? Because Democrats pointed out that blue states will continue to provide abortion care, even to those travelling from out of state.

The answer to the question of "Well, what do we do about this?" or "What do we do about that?" isn't to reflect and adjust their position as the evidence guides them. It's just "Ban that too!". And if that causes even more problems? Keep swinging the banhammer. Don't address anything inconvenient. Ignore it. Sweep it under the rug. Forget about it. Ban it. The fallout? That's a future generation's problem. Dogma must be preserved at all costs, including the cost of the lives of you and your loved ones.

And that's where we are now. Because Democrats want to shore up abortion rights in their states, the GOP must be on a crusade against it. It is required. It is dogma. And anything that goes against the dogma must also be eradicated. Exceptions for things like rape and viability of the mother are no longer acceptable, because a woman might be able to use that reason to actually get an abortion. And their hard-line stand on the subject means that whenever someone like Kate Cox or the 10 year old rape victim from Ohio comes along and offers themselves as proof of why abortion care is necessary, they are literally treated as collateral damage. A sad statistic that can be dismissed 5 seconds after you read it. Because anything else would be an acknowledgement that they were wrong. It would poke a gigantic hole in what I very loosely refer to as their "logic". It would go against the dogma. And that is absolutely not allowed. If it's a choice between going against dogma and saving the woman's life, or letting both the woman and fetus die anyway in order to not break the narrative, they'd rather just let both of them die for what they consider the "greater good", even though their version of the "greater good" is basically a script from the Handmaid's Tale.

This is where we are now. The GOP are on one road, and they must stay on that road under any circumstances. If you come between them and their ideology, you will be run over. You will be made an example of. Even if it means you die. Never mind the fact that the fetus they're supposedly trying to "save" is going to die too. That part is conveniently ignored because it doesn't jive with their dogma. But their dogma must be preserved, defended, and advanced at all costs. Today's GOP will accept nothing less.

[-] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 15 points 10 months ago

Mitch just picked up the torch. Newt Gingrich is the one that started it with the 'moral majority' under Reagan. They made politics into religion, at which point any attempts to be bipartisan or negotiate was essentially making a deal with Satan. He ended any political viability to compromise on the right.

this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
552 points (97.8% liked)

politics

19135 readers
1092 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS