It's strange but true, USA has as high religiosity as Iran. A fundamentalist Islamic country.
We fought and won this fight on abortion here (Denmark) in the 70's, it's outright insane to see USA fight it and lose half a century later.
I never thought a democratic society could move backwards so badly. But then again USA is a very flawed democracy.
We didn't fight and win. It was an awkward ruling to begin with otherwise it would have covered drugs and a whole lot of other health related issues. We counted a questionable ruling as a win, high fived and did nothing for 50 fucking years.
"Here" is Denmark. (I corrected my comment)
In Denmark we had a huge debate and lying campaigns by Christians against abortion, similar to what you have had in USA for 50 years now.
After a long struggle by women interest groups, and despite the misinformation by Christians, the Danish parliament finally decided to grant free abortion within 12 weeks of pregnancy in May 1973. So we have 50 year anniversary on the law this year.
In Denmark women won the fight against the extremely religious. But not just the victory of getting it legalized, the support in the population increased tremendously, and it was a huge prestigious loss for Christianity and their right to dictate morality based on religious views instead of reason based on current knowledge.
A poll in 2003 found that a whopping 93% of the population support it. Any talk by extreme Christians to remove it, has all but vanished. They know it's a lost case for them. Now there is talk of relaxing the law, because in some cases it's considered too strict.
Here in America they try to frame it as a non-religious opposition to abortion.
For most people it’s all about religion.
It’s one reason I support the right to abortion. Your religion shouldn’t impact other people.
Here in America they try to frame it as a non-religious opposition to abortion.
But we know the anti abortion movement are Christians. Right?
Your religion shouldn’t impact other people.
Agree.
How you cite?
As I said, they try to define it that way but for it’s tied to religion for most people.
I’m an atheist. I do attend mass but like Dawkins I just like the tradition and ceremony. I fully support abortion and even if I believed in God I’d support abortion.
I believe in the concept of a “soul”. Not in a paranormal way but there is more to us than just a chemical interaction but it goes away when we die. I do not think it’s formed until much later in life. As such, when we are in the womb, we are the potential for more but we are nothing special.
Now I don’t mind some crossover between religion and government. I like having Christmas off. I don’t really celebrate it but it’s a nice holiday.
What I don’t like is when we take purely religious concepts and try to ban others behavior because of your sky god. Abortion is an example since some religions allow it and some deny it.
Roe vs wade was a bad court decision looking to be overturned. I wish congress has done something knowing it was bad. Countless scotus judges have said it was a bad decision. Even rgb said it was flawed
I’m a republican but I am pro-choice. Yet the party is pushing abortion bans without compromise.
I won’t vote democrat which means most likely I won’t vote. Until the republicans want to negotiate on abortion. They won’t get my vote.
I fully support the right to an abortion for any reason up until a reasonable time frame. I don’t know a single person who supports these crazy bans. I know they’re out there but they’re not in the circles I keep.
I agree with you on timeframe, but we don't really have data that shows a need to limit abortion really so it seems kind of moot. As it turns out, carrying a fetus for 9 months and then merking it at the last minute isn't a thing women do, and certainly not intentionally.
The only reason I say we need a timeframe is compromise. Otherwise we end up with nothing.
I thought roe tried to balance it well.
This really is an issue with congress. They shouldn’t have sat around doing nothing all these years.
It's not a coincidence. Iran was less religious in the early 70's, too.
There's a reason so much media about the 60's/70's portrays hippies and that era of counterculture in general as lazy bums getting high instead of people tired of bullshit. It's because it was fucking working, and the powers that be didn't like that one bit and so put the full force of the propaganda machine behind making it into a mockery.
put the full force of the propaganda machine behind making it into a mockery.
Agreed, and Nixon making cannabis illegal was part of that, and probably a pretty crucial move, that gave the police enormous power to disrupt everything the "hippies" or protestors stood for.
Unfortunately I think it's still working, the search for a more humane society based on humane values kind of ended with the 70's.
Jesus Christ, how evil can they get? Filing an appeal targetted specifically at medically necessary abortions is low even by Texas Republican standards.
So, the reason the judge made an exemption is because doctors were basically saying, "We have no idea how to provide care in these situations and not break the law".
The Republicans response is, again basically, "The doctors have no reason to be worried about being prosecuted so the exemption isn't needed in the first place."
They could fix it in 5 minutes by passing a law specifically providing protections but they won't because any reasonable law would allow at-will abortions too because, say it with me, ABORTIONS ARE MEDICAL CARE.
I've seen it referred to as "The Shirley Exception"
"We don't need to do anything specific about this legally because SURELY they'll make an exception to this law in cases I agree with." And then when someone (obviously) does prosecute a case like this, it's all shocked pikachu faces.
https://lynmillerlachmann.com/unpacking-the-shirley-exception/
And I doubt the Texas Supreme Court will uphold the lower court’s opinion. Shitty that it automatically gets the opinion stayed too.
You give them too much credit. It is not too low for their standards.
Pro-life indeed! They're so pro-life, they're willing to kill!
The suffering is the point. It must be the point. There is no other reason to fight an order like this.
It's religious fanaticism.
Right, but the fanaticism is about making women suffer. Punishing them for the sin of having sex. And, of course, it's definitely God's punishment if there's something wrong with the pregnancy and you die. You must have deserved it, you wicked sinner.
Saying the suffering is the point gives them far too much credit I think. They lack the fundamental capability to understand the impacts of their decisions and position. They can't go past the basic and horrifically oversimplified "murder is wrong". They won't entertain situations in which the life of the woman could come into play. They can't fathom why anyone might not consider a fetus a person. They legitimately don't understand that they could be wrong. So how on earth could they be wrong?
They cannot process the full depth of the situation. So they revert to the simplest interpretation they can manage.
Maybe the rank and file, but the leadership knows what they are doing.
Blessed is the mind too small for doubt.
I can't imagine how any doctor can and chooses to work under these conditions. I am not in the medical field so maybe it's not relevant but I have had a few times where I flat out refused to keep working for an employer/project because the constraints made failure unavoidable. Walk away. Come to the North where we are always short of doctors.
Everyone needs doctors. Rural areas in particular have a dire PCP shortage.
They're voting against having healthcare for themselves. It's what they want
Sue Texas for all they're worth, this is the American way. Then use the money to move.
Because of course he is. Mfer’s under investigation by the FBI yet this is his priority.
Paxton was suspended from office upon impeachment, pending the Senate trial.
https://www.texastribune.org/2023/07/10/interim-attorney-general-angela-colmenero/
Thank you!
Sociopaths.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.