On abortion

[Northwestcoug]

I’m really struggling to understand how this is an answer to the main point I was making. Help me out.

You are saying we couldn’t have gotten to that point (a legislative solution) because we are too polarized, and I was arguing that Roe is at least partly why we are so polarized. Whether we would have gotten to precisely the same set of laws as Europe is beside the point.

Read the George Will article. He makes a similar point.

It isn’t really an answer to your point. But you did bring up the example of Europe as having more sensible abortion laws previously. I’m saying I don’t think using Europe as an example of what the US could have been had we legislated abortion laws is fair. I don’t think their unfettered access to abortion (albeit nominally restricted to the first trimester) would fly here.

I’m sure roe v wade has made the polarization worse. And if legal abortion had been legislated we may not have seen as much polarization as we do now. But I’m not sure I would agree with that eventual compromise. I think it should be more of a right than what I’m afraid many states allow.

[SeattleUte]

Your condescending (typical) and rambling reply here illustrates you missed a very simple point.

Rabid pro-life advocates focus exclusively on the rights and interest of the unborn child.
Rabid pro-choice advocates focus exclusively on the rights of the mother.

We can't begin to have a healthy and productive conversation about abortion in this country without both sides honestly addressing this tension.

You've done nothing but stick up with the leaked opinion. So your claim that you're criticizing extremists on both sides doesn't hold water. Hard not to be condescending when you say nobody but you knows this is about balancing interests, given what Roe says and after all these years. My post is not "rambling" because it covers several topics. It is well-organized, tight, and well-executed.

[Northwestcoug]

I disagree to an extent as I think certain laws (Obergfell is a good example) won’t be overturned because they are (1) based on actual rights guaranteed to all people and (2) it has widespread public support. Gay marriage has over 70% support and that goes higher when you ask if gays should at least have the same rights as married people even if they are denied the term “married”. Access to birth control has over 90% support. Interracial marriage has over 95% support. These decisions aren’t being overturned and even if they are there are no states that would ban them (well, maybe Idaho).

Abortion (without limitations) does not share widespread support even after 50+ years. There’s a reason for that and it’s because there are competing moral issues on both sides that are not easily reconcilable. No matter how many times someone claims I just want to control a woman’s body, it’s not about that for me. It’s about the life of the fetus/unborn child.

I saw this thread today. Guess what phrase Alito used in his Obergefell dissent? ‘Deeply rooted in the nation’s history’.

Embedded Tweet

it’s not a stretch to say that gay marriage would not be a right today if that case was argued before this court.

[Moliere]

I saw this thread today. Guess what phrase Alito used in his Obergefell dissent? ‘Deeply rooted in the nation’s history’.

Embedded Tweet

it’s not a stretch to say that gay marriage would not be a right today if that case was argued before this court.

How many times has gay marriage been challenged since Obergefell? There’s no appetite to overturn it. That cat is out of the bag and the vast majority support it.

Sure anything can happen with this new type of Trump conservative, but even the GOP has some high profile gay leaders.

If Obergefell gets overturned, I suspect 50 states would pass gay marriage laws. Yes, I suspect Utah would pass one as well.

[Jeff Lebowski]

You've done nothing but stick up with the leaked opinion. So your claim that you're criticizing extremists on both sides doesn't hold water. Hard not to be condescending when you say nobody but you knows this is about balancing interests, given what Roe says and after all these years. My post is not "rambling" because it covers several topics. It is well-organized, tight, and well-executed.

Lol. What a weird response. I never claimed that I am the only one who knows about balancing interests. Really surprised that such a simple, self-evident observation would trigger you like that.

[Jeff Lebowski]

It isn’t really an answer to your point. But you did bring up the example of Europe as having more sensible abortion laws previously. I’m saying I don’t think using Europe as an example of what the US could have been had we legislated abortion laws is fair. I don’t think their unfettered access to abortion (albeit nominally restricted to the first trimester) would fly here.

I’m sure roe v wade has made the polarization worse. And if legal abortion had been legislated we may not have seen as much polarization as we do now. But I’m not sure I would agree with that eventual compromise. I think it should be more of a right than what I’m afraid many states allow.

It has been interesting to see who people describe the laws in Europe. The link you provided from the "Center for Reproductive Rights" has a clear bias. Here is one from the other side:

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/n...law-comparison

Abortion restrictions in Europe are greater than in the U.S. Only three of 42 European countries that permit elective abortion permit it past 15 weeks, the restriction proposed by the state of Mississippi going before the Supreme Court.

“No European nation allows elective abortion through all nine months of pregnancy, as is effectively permitted in several U.S. states, and America is one of only a small handful of nations, along with China and North Korea, to permit any sort of late-term elective abortion,” concluded the report’s author, Angelina B. Nguyen.

The closest analog to the U.S. law in Europe is arguably the Netherlands, a country of 17 million people known for pioneering controversial practices such as child euthanasia.

And here is a summary from the NYT:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/22/u...oe-global.html

Seventy-six countries, home to four in 10 women, allow abortion for any reason for a certain number of weeks. The most common threshold is 12 weeks. A dozen or so countries besides the United States allow abortion without any restrictions or conditions after 15 weeks, the cutoff in question in the Mississippi case. They include North Korea, China, Iceland, New Zealand, Singapore, Canada and Vietnam.

We can argue about degree, but Roe v. Wade has made the US an outlier.

[Non Sequitur]

Your condescending (typical) and rambling reply here illustrates you missed a very simple point.

Rabid pro-life advocates focus exclusively on the rights and interest of the unborn child.
Rabid pro-choice advocates focus exclusively on the rights of the mother.

We can't begin to have a healthy and productive conversation about abortion in this country without both sides honestly addressing this tension.

We can't have a productive conversation about abortion while one side insists that a fetus is the same thing as a child. Let's just call it a fetus. Not an unborn child nor an unrealized clump of cells.

[falafel]

We can't have a productive conversation about abortion while one side insists that a fetus is the same thing as a child. Let's just call it a fetus. Not an unborn child nor an unrealized clump of cells.

That's usually how pregnant mothers describe it. "I have to eat healthy now for my fetus."

[Jeff Lebowski]

That's usually how pregnant mothers describe it. "I have to eat healthy now for my fetus."

"When is your fetus due?"
"Have you announced the sex of your fetus yet?"
"What are you going to name your fetus?"

[Omaha 680]

"When is your fetus due?"
"Have you announced the sex of your fetus yet?"
"What are you going to name your fetus?"

Which reminds us that in the context of the current debate, for one extreme a fetus is only a person if it is wanted by the parents, no matter how developed the baby is. This speaks to your point of the unique issue of competing rights that abortion entails. As distasteful as it is to regulate pregnancy and childbirth, it is equally distasteful to place value and confer rights on a person solely based on whether they are wanted. This is not an easy issue and one of the things I think Europe does much better than us.

[Northwestcoug]

It has been interesting to see who people describe the laws in Europe. The link you provided from the "Center for Reproductive Rights" has a clear bias. Here is one from the other side:

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/n...law-comparison



And here is a summary from the NYT:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/22/u...oe-global.html



We can argue about degree, but Roe v. Wade has made the US an outlier.

yes, the us is an outlier, but not 2 standard deviations. Some states will now be an outlier on the other side of the curve.

[Northwestcoug]

How many times has gay marriage been challenged since Obergefell? There’s no appetite to overturn it. That cat is out of the bag and the vast majority support it.

Sure anything can happen with this new type of Trump conservative, but even the GOP has some high profile gay leaders.

If Obergefell gets overturned, I suspect 50 states would pass gay marriage laws. Yes, I suspect Utah would pass one as well.

even California passed prop 8 after they legalized marriage. Surely you can think of a few states that given sufficient legislative majorities would overturn it. Just check out the latest polling for each state.

[beefytee]

even California passed prop 8 after they legalized marriage. Surely you can think of a few states that given sufficient legislative majorities would overturn it. Just check out the latest polling for each state.

There are a lot of complications with gay marriage that you don't run into with abortions which would make it difficult to overturn. IIRC one of the reasons gay marriage was made legal everywhere was because when gay couples move to states that didn't recognize gay marriage, they couldn't get divorced. Abortion is kind of a one and done thing. No lasting legal complications.

[Pelado]

Abortion is kind of a one and done thing. No lasting legal complications.

Unless the mother decides against it.

[Moliere]

even California passed prop 8 after they legalized marriage. Surely you can think of a few states that given sufficient legislative majorities would overturn it. Just check out the latest polling for each state.

Back then even Obama ran on support for traditional marriage laws. Things have changed dramatically in the past decade in acceptance of gay marriage. It’s not even close to comparable to abortion.