Roe is dead

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by NJlonghorn, Jun 24, 2022.

  1. bystander

    bystander 10,000+ Posts

    It is a compromise position. I am not in favor of a total ban and I was not thrilled with the six week law formerly in Texas. It was workable if a woman would immediately begin her testing after unprotected sex (however many days it takes for a pregnancy to show up). But it left very little room for error.

    We don't need more children being born. The idea that everyone is going to start practicing safe sex is not credible to me. It's going to happen. It's unfortunate but that's the reality.
     
  2. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Liberals love it when those on the Right compromise. It means they win.
     
  3. BrntOrngStmpeDe

    BrntOrngStmpeDe 1,000+ Posts

    Liberals also love it A LOT, when the GOP nominate zero tolerance candidates on abortion in swing states because it means they win, ON EVERYTHING, not just abortion.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  4. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Give me an example. Because I can give you the last 100 years as an example for my point. Scare-dy cat Republicans always compromise because they say if they are actually conservative they will lose. But that have been losing for 100 YEARS! Sounds to me like you like to lose.
     
  5. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    Not that hard. Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock immediately come to mind. We pissed away two Senate seats on those guys, and they weren't even really in swing states. They were in "lean red" states that typically elect Democrats only when we massively screw up.
     
  6. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Todd Akin was in Congress for 13 years. He lost his attempt to become a Senator because he said something really strange about women not getting pregnant if they were "legitimately" raped. As far as I can tell, his problem wasn't that he was too conservative. Saying very strange things about rape is not being conservative. But I think him being elected to the House for 13 years proves this was not a good example.

    Looks like Richard Mourdock said something similar to Akin at about the same time. Mourdock's comment wasn't as bad but it was taken out of context and used against him. Did he lose his Senate election because he was too conservative, or was he the victim of a successful smear campaign? He was a Tea Party guy. Is that too conservative for Indiana? It also looks like a Libertarian candidate took many of the votes Mourdock would have otherwise received. The Democrat only had 50.04% of the vote. This example also has too much other things happening for this to be a good example of saying a candidate lost because he was too conservative.
     
  7. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    The point both were making is that abortion shouldn't be allowed in cases of rape. Like I said above, I agree with them, but it was stupid and shouldn't have been the hill to die on.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    Due to safe districts you can't compare a 13 year house seat to a senate seat. Hell, Marjorie Green Taylor will likely win her race and she's a fool. I'm sure you guys can find similar fools on the left. Also, 50.04% is greater than 50%. The Libertarian only impacted the percent of loss.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Yes. True. But they also said some really strange things to explain their views too. That wasn't a hill to die on, I agree. But they could have simply said a life is a life regardless of how it starts. But they said something additional that was confusing, awkward, easy to twist too.
     
  10. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Good points. I also understand the math. The LP candidate presence wasn't the only factor. The other one was his very awkward, confusing statement about rape. If he doesn't say that, it would have been a very different situation.
     
  11. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    I think the issue is that you're advocating them speaking their opinions on topics. Turns out they seem to have very unpopular opinions of rape. I think people should know this and the right should filter out this kind of misogyny in the primary.
     
  12. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Um. Not really. I was just looking into these examples of supposed candidates that were too conservative to win an election in a red state.

    I agree that Republicans should vet and prepare their candidates better. But the Republican Party is controlled opposition for the neoliberal administrative state, so this is what they are supposed to do.
     
  13. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    It's not misogyny. It's a good faith position and has nothing to do with contempt or hostility to women. Keep in mind that presumably half of the abortions are on girls. Personally, I have a problem with abortion when rape is involved because it's just as hard to morally defend it as it is to defend any other abortion. The only reason I'm willing to compromise on it is political expedience. I'll play ball on the outlier cases to get what's right on the normal cases.
     
  14. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    Don't you think they would have been pressed on the issue if they had given that answer? It wouldn't have been the end of it.
     
  15. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

    Sure, you say, “I’m willing to make an exception for rape if the other side is willing to ban abortion for cases when it is done out of convenience.” Then notice how the other side never mentions it again.
     
  16. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

     
  17. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    When the other side brings up rape, it's done entirely out of bad faith. I fully recognize that.
     
  18. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    It's not just their opponents. They'd be pressed on it relentlessly until they gave an answer. Keep in mind that these are Republicans. They don't get back massage and foot rub treatment.
     
  19. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    So it's a good faith position that rapists don't impregnate their victims? Making a victim bear her rapists child is just another victimization.

    I think a majority are willing to play ball. The fringes of each side are not.
     
  20. LonghornCatholic

    LonghornCatholic Catholic like Sarkisian

     
    • Like Like x 2
  21. guy4321

    guy4321 500+ Posts

    • Like Like x 2
  22. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    No, it's a good faith position that rape doesn't justify abortion. I'll be honest. I used to believe in the rape exception. It's politically easier, but if you believe abortion kills a distinct and innocent life (as I do), then it's impossible to morally justify it. It was an argument that I simply couldn't win with myself or with others, though I tried. If you think you can justify it, I'm all ears, but I really doubt that you can other than by rationalizing away the value of the life.

    So I am on the fringe, but like I said, I'm willing to compromise on the matter to build a broader consensus on stopping the other 99.9 percent of abortions that don't involve rape. However, I'll readily admit that I'm making a moral trade-off.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  23. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    Thank you, but I have no special attachment to Baylor. I graduated from their law school, but nobody there did a friggin thing for me that I didn't pay for. I didn't get cheated or anything. I did get what I paid for, but that's the end of arrangement and the relationship. I bought some food from Tesco (British grocery store) yesterday, but I don't have any special loyalty to them. Why should I have any for Baylor?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  24. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    It doesn't change the fact that the abortion in the case of rape ends a real life. But one factor that gives a tiny bit more justification for it is that the pregnancy wasn't voluntary. The woman didn't choose to have sex. The woman was forced into it. I don't have sympathy for adult women who choose to have unprotected sex and get pregnant because they knew what they were getting into and used their own moral agency to do so. A rape victim didn't. Doesn't change the overall equation for me, but it is another complicating factor that a reasonable person should listen and be sensitive to.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  25. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    The rape victim obviously has my profound sympathy. However, my problem with abortion in that situation is it that we're committing an act of violence against someone who's innocent to undo the damage caused by another. That's wrong. If I get robbed, do I get to rob someone else to make myself whole? No.
     
  26. nashhorn

    nashhorn 5,000+ Posts

    My concession in the case of rape is the morning after pill or the ‘shot’. My understanding is that would prevent attachment, or my conscience accepts as justification.
     
  27. horninchicago

    horninchicago 10,000+ Posts

    I admit, I am mostly scrolling past most of this page of replies. However, I will repeat what I have previously written.

    If rape is acceptable for abortion, the number of rapes will increase 10,000%.

    "I was raped after partying at the club!"
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  28. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    That's another consideration that will warrant being looked at. If you have a rape exception, how would it be verified? Would simply saying, "I was raped" be enough?
     
  29. horninchicago

    horninchicago 10,000+ Posts

    I thought I have read that there are ways to somehow determine rape, but frankly, I just think doctors will go along with it to allow abortions if said doctors are in favor of it.

    Otherwise, I agree. Any woman can claim that after a night of partying and frivolous behavior.

    Also, I don't trust doctors on the woman's life being at risk if she gives birth thing either. Lots of room for corruption there.

    The left seems to think life begins at birth, but in the case of the woman's life being at risk, we always hear that it is the "mother's" life at risk. Aren't they just fetus carriers up until birth?
     
  30. nashhorn

    nashhorn 5,000+ Posts

    Interesting comments.
     

Share This Page