Jump to content
Tweety Tweety (New Member) New Member

Presidential Election 2020

Politics   (5,357 Views 325 Comments)
1,077 Likes; 6 Followers; 47,832 Visitors; 27,033 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.
advertisement

You are reading page 21 of Presidential Election 2020. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

10 minutes ago, SC_RNDude said:

Really?  You are of course entitled to you opinion, but that hasn’t been my experience.  Have you actually ever had a discussion with someone who is pro-life, or have you only listened to the liberal rhetoric?

Yes, really.   I've talked with people who are pro-life and people who are pro-fetus.  Big difference there.  Our current flavor of conservatism skews heavily towards pro-fetus.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course liberals have actually talked to profetus and forced pregnancy advocates.  I go to church with them and make them uncomfortable at the Lion's club or any other number of places where they feel comfortable condemning abortion. In my experience, it isn't the pro choice advocates that isolate themselves in ideological bubbles and struggle to explain their position with facts, data, or evidence.  Maternal morbidity and mortality rates have been on the rise in the USA and we compare very poorly to the developed nations in this area. Yet, conservatives want to leave women no options beyond pregnancy and birth. 

Heck, conservative judges and the like are known to even bend the laws to prevent very young women from aborting by delaying their work product. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, herring_RN said:

In 2017 Missouri Republicans proposed a bill to allow employers and landlords to refused to hire or rent to women who use birth control

Quote

Contrary to news reports, a controversial new bill in Missouri does not attempt to allow employers to discriminate against women who used birth control, the governor's spokesman told Newsweek Thursday. 


The bill, SB 5, would, among other things, impose tighter restrictions on abortion providers and allow real estate agents to refuse to sell or rent them land. The bill would also allow “alternatives to abortion agencies”—a term that includes places that encourage women to carry their babies to term—to function without the risk of political restriction.
What it would not do is bar women on birth control from working. The impact of the bill was erroneously reported last week by Newsweek, Bustle, the Associated Press and Feministing. The bill was widely misinterpreted to include measures that made reproductive health care decisions a criteria for employers, but focused primarily on abortion providers and alternative agencies.
[…]


WOMEN ON BIRTH CONTROL COULD NOT BE BARRED FROM WORKING, ACCkORDING TO NEW MISSOURI BILL

[…]The bill, signed by the governor in late July, touches on a lot of provisions, such as tissue report modifications, local abortion policies, employee disclosure policies and abortion facility inspections.


Under the political subdivision authority part of the bill, it allows property owners to refuse to rent or sell to a person who plans to use the facility as an abortion clinic that isn’t for the sole purpose of saving the mother’s life.
Within the same guidelines, it also doesn’t require healthcare providers or employers to provide coverage "that includes benefits that are not otherwise required by state law."
[…]
A columnist for Feministing claimed that SB 5 will allow employers to fire their workers for using birth control.
While the bill will impose higher level of restrictions on abortion providers and allow real estate agents to refuse to sell or rent them land, the bill does not say employers can fire workers for using contraceptives.
We rate this claim Pants on Fire.


Column on Feministing website about abortion law is Pants on Fire
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BCgradnurse said:

Yes, really.   I've talked with people who are pro-life and people who are pro-fetus.  Big difference there.  Our current flavor of conservatism skews heavily towards pro-fetus.  

I’m curious.  What kinds of things do these pro-fetus (first time I’ve ever heard that term) folks say to indicate that “it’s all about not trusting or allowing women to have autonomy over our own bodies. ”?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chare said:

THANK YOU! I usually look at the text of a law or bill, but was lazy today. I remembered reading that women could be fired, not hired, or refused a rental and didn't verify it. The Associated Press, and many papers reported this error. Newsweek's retraction included:

Quote

...   The confusion began after Missouri’s governor, Eric Greitens, recalled the state legislature for a special session “to protect the lives of the innocent unborn and protect women's health.” In a Facebook Live video explaining his decision, Greitens referred to “a new city law making St. Louis an abortion sanctuary city,” one in which, he said, pro-abortion pregnancy care centers were under attack.

The law he referred to was a city ordinance passed in St. Louis in February that intended to pre-empt any laws that the state’s Republican-controlled legislature might pass that would affect women’s reproductive health care. Among other things, the ordinance stated that no employer could “fail or refuse to hire, to discharge or otherwise to discriminate against any individuals because of their reproductive health decisions.” A similar protection was made to protect women in their housing choices...

https://www.newsweek.com/missouri-abortion-sb-5-crisis-pregnancy-centers-630165

I was suspicious enough that I read the bill looking for the removal of protections preventing landlords and employers from asking women about their birth control. I could NOT find it. 

Facts are IMPORTANT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, SC_RNDude said:

I’m curious.  What kinds of things do these pro-fetus (first time I’ve ever heard that term) folks say to indicate that “it’s all about not trusting or allowing women to have autonomy over our own bodies. ”?

Here's an opinion piece that offers some insight.  

http://swaay.com/theyre-not-pro-life-theyre-anti-woman/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
advertisement
7 hours ago, BCgradnurse said:

Here's an opinion piece that offers some insight.  

http://swaay.com/theyre-not-pro-life-theyre-anti-woman/

 

Quote

When Does Life Begin? A Jewish View

...   Most often in Jewish sacred literature, a fetus in the womb is considered a human life “under construction.” The soul is usually described as arriving when the first breath of life is taken at birth...

http://www.reclaimingjudaism.org/teachings/when-does-life-begin-jewish-view 

Quote

When Does Life Begin? It’s Not So Simple.

In March of 2011, Ohio Republicans invited an ultrasound technician and two pregnant women to a House committee meeting and watched, on a large screen, as the women underwent ultrasounds. They were trying to garner support for legislation that would ban abortions after the embryo’s heartbeat can be detected, which happens at around 6 weeks’ gestational age or 4 weeks following conception...  

...   The belief underlying the Ohio measure, which never made it to the Senate floor, is that the heartbeat serves as final and irrefutable proof of the arrival of a unique human being, one who should be treated with the same respect and care as a person outside the womb...

...   Supporters of these bills have embraced the ultrasound as offering scientific proof of their religious belief that life begins as early as conception...

...    In a number of religions, when an embryo or fetus becomes a person remains a mystery, something that occurs not in a single moment but in a series of moments, none necessarily more important than the next. And, for all the anti-abortion side’s embrace of ultrasounds, the medical community tends to agree...

...    The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and many American Baptists don’t believe abortion is akin to murder. Presbyterians concede that they “may not know exactly when human life begins” and encourage their followers to make their own careful decisions on abortion....

...   Among Muslims, there is no universally agreed-upon moment when a fetus becomes a person. “Some say it takes 40 days, others say it takes 120 days, for a human soul to be breathed into a fetus,”...

...    The majority of Jews do not believe that life begins at conception but instead see the creation of life as something that happens over time. During this process, the fetus is seen as part of the mother, whose well-being, both immediate and future, takes precedence...

...   There are also a number of biblical passages in which the breath, and not the heartbeat, serves as the central symbol for life, including, most famously, Genesis 2:7: “Then the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”...

https://slate.com/human-interest/2017/04/when-does-life-begin-outside-the-christian-right-the-answer-is-over-time.html

I believe that we need to do what we can to prevent abortion. Respecting different beliefs is necessary. I think a priority on age appropriate factual education is essential. 

Like many boomers boys and girls were first separated for education about our bodies in fifth grade. I Jr. High and HS we learned from our PE teachers. I learned about STDs. Then only rhythm method and condoms were available. I didn't become sexually active until I was married at age 21. In my mind I knew that (at the time) a condom would be best protection against disease and pregnancy. Sex education did not lead to action.

PS: Here is the text of the 2017 Missouri bill: 

 https://legiscan.com/MO/text/SB5/id/1642347

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, herring_RN said:

 

I believe that we need to do what we can to prevent abortion. Respecting different beliefs is necessary. I think a priority on age appropriate factual education is essential. 

Like many boomers boys and girls were first separated for education about our bodies in fifth grade. I Jr. High and HS we learned from our PE teachers. I learned about STDs. Then only rhythm method and condoms were available. I didn't become sexually active until I was married at age 21. In my mind I knew that (at the time) a condom would be best protection against disease and pregnancy. Sex education did not lead to action.

PS: Here is the text of the 2017 Missouri bill: 

 https://legiscan.com/MO/text/SB5/id/1642347

Agree, Herring.  I wish abortion wasn't necessary.  However, I feel strongly that the government does not have the right to legislate what I do with my body, especially when the actions I choose do not affect the well being of society as a whole.  I find it especially hypocritical when those calling for such legislature (who are mostly men) turn around and state they don't want government interference in their lives. I find it heartbreaking when those who are "pro-fetus" don't give a whit about children once they are born, a/e/b cutting medical coverage for children, cutting funding for education, supporting those who separate children from their parents at the borders, etc.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk is cheap.

  Pro-fetus advocates generally have no agenda to support life or to elevate the lives of children born of unwanted pregnancies to women who often have few economic choices or opportunities.  They by and large support legislative efforts to obstruct access to information, birth control, and reproductive health care. Often, their preferred political agenda cuts social safety nets which feed and care for these children. 

It's not their words that define them as pro-fetus or forced birth rather than prolife as they prefer to identify, it's their actions and lack of compassion. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BCgradnurse said:

Here's an opinion piece that offers some insight.  

http://swaay.com/theyre-not-pro-life-theyre-anti-woman/

That doesn’t really offer insight.  I’ve heard that all before.  She took an incident, if it even happened, and used it over thirty years to demonize those on the other side of the issue.  In that whole article, it doesn’t indicate she’s ever even one time had a discussion with someone on the other side.

I asked you specifically what kind of discussions you’ve personally had with pro-life or pro-fetus that indicate their point of view is born from wanting to control women’s bodies and decision making.  And this is what you pointed me to.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BCgradnurse said:

Agree, Herring.  I wish abortion wasn't necessary.  However, I feel strongly that the government does not have the right to legislate what I do with my body, especially when the actions I choose do not affect the well being of society as a whole.  I find it especially hypocritical when those calling for such legislature (who are mostly men) turn around and state they don't want government interference in their lives. I find it heartbreaking when those who are "pro-fetus" don't give a whit about children once they are born, a/e/b cutting medical coverage for children, cutting funding for education, supporting those who separate children from their parents at the borders, etc.  

Men and women equally have similar views on abortion.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/235646/men-women-generally-hold-similar-abortion-attitudes.aspx

Your statement about pro-fetus folks not giving a whit about children after their born is a bunch of bs.  Just another example of liberals demonizing others with a different point if view.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SC_RNDude said:

Men and women equally have similar views on abortion.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/235646/men-women-generally-hold-similar-abortion-attitudes.aspx

Your statement about pro-fetus folks not giving a whit about children after their born is a bunch of bs.  Just another example of liberals demonizing others with a different point if view.  

In your opinion it is BS. Currently Republicans are defending the Trump agenda and practice of separating children from families at the southern border as a deterrent. That's not BS. Current Republican political agenda includes a roughly 29% cut to SNAP and a 20% cut to CHIP.  That's not BS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×