• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Beata on Once they’re in, you can’t vot…
    Beata on “Pet Peeves”
    Beata on “Pet Peeves”
    Propertius on Once they’re in, you can’t vot…
    William on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    HerStory Repeating on Once they’re in, you can’t vot…
    Beata on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    William on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    Beata on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    jmac on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    Beata on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    jmac on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    William on The Welcome Escape of a M…
    Propertius on “Pet Peeves”
    MAG on “Pet Peeves”
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    July 2022
    S M T W T F S
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

    • What Sheldon said
      A Supreme Court code of ethics is an absolute no-brainer. Since the justices won’t address the problem, here’s a solution: Congress can pass my Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act. It’s clearly time. — Sheldon Whitehouse (@SenWhitehouse) September 28, 2022
  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • The Attacks On Nord Stream I & II
      Let’s point out the obvious. Russia had no reason to attack its own pipelines. If it doesn’t want gas to go thru them it just turns off the tap. Sabotage to the pipelines weakens Russia’s position, since it will be months before they can offer to turn fuel back on, which they would have wanted to offer during the winter in order to pressure Germany in specif […]
  • Top Posts

Wishful thinking is not the same thing as morality.

Check out this conversation that Jordan Klepper had with John Kasich. Join me on the other side:

Kasich is one of the un-crazy Republicans, if we’re going to use January 6 terminology. Nevertheless, he still doesn’t get it and his reasoning is going to be the reason why we are going to make millions of women into human sacrifices. Here’s what I heard:

1.) Abortion is a divisive issue. Now it’s up to the states. This is the “Standard issue Republican talking point of 2022”. Lather, rinse, repeat. It’s one of those Frank Luntz focus group talking points that’s infuriatingly difficult to move past as Klepper finds. It stops any further argument. Klepper could have asked him about gerrymandered states where voting on state legislative seats is a pointless exercise. Would Kasich approve of referendums on the ballot so that everyone gets a crack at making the law in the state? What do you say, John Kasich? Can Ohio have a referendum on abortion rights? We’re all waiting for an answer. If it’s left up to the states, shouldn’t ALL the citizens of a state have a vote?

2.) Kasich is of the same mind as many other anti-choice people. There is only one choice. Motherhood. That’s it. He’s concerned that there are no exceptions for rape and incest, true, but his greater concern is that there was nothing in place for mothers. No crisis centers, no extra support, etc. I’m not disagreeing that economics have something to do with *some* abortions. But for the majority of women I have known who had abortions, and there were many, it was simply a matter of not wanting to be mothers and there’s just no way to get around that. Some women will kill themselves to not become mothers. Wishful thinking will not change this.

3.) Kasich just comes right out and says that now, other people’s opinions on this will be respected. I have heard this my entire life. You are never old enough or independent enough or mature enough to disagree with the opinions of a person with deeply held religiously derived moral beliefs. You may also hold moral beliefs as well. But to a religious person, they can be dismissed without consideration because theirs’ come from a more authoritative source and they’re saved and you’re not and you are not allowed (in their minds) to challenge them. No. Not on abortion or gay sex or evolution or any other thing they think is based on the Bible.

It’s astonishing to me how many Twitter commenters resort to saying the no abortions idea is based on biblical morality and the only way to not risk needing one is to not have sex. When it gets right down to it, the Bible has a lot more to say about FORNICATION than abortion. You can get stoned for fornicating but not for self-managing a medication abortion. The Bible is quite clear on sex and has plenty of examples of men sleeping with other men’s wives and seducing sisters and throwing daughters out to the town to rape and do with them what they will and incest of daughters with their fathers and concubines being chopped up by their husbands after they were thrown out to the town to be raped and nothing ever happens to those men in the Bible. These are transgressions that no ethical person in the 21st century would condone but in this Bronze Age text, it’s perfectly normal. It’s also perfectly normal to condemn women to death for illicit sex by throwing her to the dogs or stoning her. There are some passages about punishments for causing a pregnant woman to miscarry but those were the days when women and their offspring were considered valuable property of the owners m, potential workers, legal heirs and barter for transactions later.

That’s respectable. 🙄

In all the comments about abortion I see from the other side, the intensity of focus is on the fetus. There is almost never any mention of the human sacrifices that must be made in the service of the fetus.

Conclusion: We’ve been gathering data and observations on the anti-choice movement for 48 years now. We know definitively that the ability to get a safe abortion saved many human lives. But those who rely on religion for morality will not be satisfied until there are no abortions in the United States. They are also fanatically fixated on motherhood and what they perceive to be promiscuity. They are also either intolerant or unaware of the morality of abortion of other religious faiths other than fundamentalist Christianity or Catholicism. Muslim and Jewish morality on abortion is not considered nor are other faiths or no faiths.

The Dobbs decision cites morality as the reason why abortion is different from gay marriage or interracial marriage. But the morality applied has the strictest criteria and the proponents of that strict morality are the only authorities that are recognized and respected.

Excuse me for saying this but it looks like the justices have set up a state religion. The morality they are relying on can be traced back to the Old Testament proscriptions on extramarital sex and a handful of writings by medieval scholars.

The problem is the disrespect these moralists have for any other opinion.

I will offer mine anyway.

Nature already gave us the right to abortion. Animals, such as bears and mongooses, are capable of abortion under certain circumstances. Environmental pressures make it difficult to obtain resources for themselves and their offspring. Natural selection Favors organisms that are capable of passing their genetic material to the next generation. But you can’t get your offspring to the next generation if there are insufficient resources to sustain life. Better to conserve the energy of the adult and abort any fetuses that are unlikely to survive. Wait until next year. Seems sensible. As far as I know, animals don’t freak out about premarital sex.

Humans are also animals and face environmental stresses. Humans spontaneously abort. Maybe more of them spontaneously aborted back when our circumstances were more precarious hundreds of thousands of years ago. With better diets, vaccines, clean water, etc, spontaneous abortions are probably less likely. I’ll bet there are peer reviewed papers on this subject.

But our definition of environmental stress and resources have changed. It follows that our definition of reproductive success has also changed. Our definition of successful offspring has changed. Abortion isn’t proscribed by nature but like many things related to human gynecological medicine, human females can’t always do it for themselves. They need a little help.

Back in Roman times, women consumed herbs and plants they knew to be abortifacients. One of these was a plant called Sylphium. It was so popular it was over-farmed and is now considered extinct. There are many others still around like Queen Anne’s lace aka wild carrot. Medication abortions are our new Sylphium.

That coupled with the age of viability cutoff is my morality. Do what you need to do during the first trimester is my preference or up to viability. After that, doctors can help women facing health issues or fetal abnormalities.

My ethics and morality are based on actual evidence. Nature should override Bronze Age gods and mansplaining logic of medieval saints.

The moralists seem to think that if they force women to bear children, there will be no more promiscuity and the traditional role of motherhood will prevail. This goes against all experience. Everything we know from history proves that women will still engage in sex and they won’t necessarily want to be mothers. The ripping apart of little baby bodies that so abhors the tut-tutting moralists will now be performed by unregulated people who want to make immense profits by it. And thousands of tragedies will occur. For 49 years, we were able to stop these tragedies but now they will occur regularly and not one person who doesn’t want to be pregnant will be persuaded to not pursue an abortion by whatever means necessary.

Under Roe, no one who holds their morality above their own well being was forced to get an abortion. Now, anyone who values their own well being is required to become a human sacrifice and to reproduce when they aren’t ready or willing. But only one of these groups of people has respectable morality. The mistake we have made in the last 49 years that happier cultures have figured out is giving excessive respect and authority to the religious who rely on antiquated ideas of morality that do not value women. Not only do they rely on supernatural beings that can’t be proven to exist while ignoring nature, they also wish fervently that they get the unearned respect of people who don’t share their faith. I will refrain from commenting on what kind of personality issues those people have but their issues shouldn’t become the basis for everyone else’s major life decisions. No one should be forced into motherhood because some church lady feels oogy about premarital sex.

Wishful thinking should not be the basis of legal rulings and it is no more worthy of respect than personal ethics. I think it violates the first amendment on establishment of a state religion. That shouldn’t need to be said but, there, I’ve said it.

7 Responses

  1. There’s a big difference between respecting the beliefs of the religious (and *which* religious, pray tell?) and granting them the ability to use the power of the State to impose their religious principles on everyone else. If I wanted my live to be governed by the Catholic Church, I’d move to the Vatican.

  2. I’m tired of hearing how divisive this is when over 70% of the country is in favor of it. It’s not divisive, it just needs to be demystified for the idiots living their lives according to their interpretations of an ancient book… good luck with that though

    Roe V. Wade should’ve been required reading for the last 50 years. I keep seeing comments from people who genuinely believe abortion is legal up until the 9th month of pregnancy. How do we move forward when misinformation like that still persists? Women need to know their rights

    I just find this all so frustrating on so many levels. As I recall, Obama tried to hold us hostage with abortion in 2008 but did nothing to protect it. Even though the Republican he ran against never had intentions of criminalizing it. So I am still unsure what all the hoopla of having to elect him was about. He refused to codify Roe and allowed Republicans to steamroll him on Garland (don’t even tell me abortion was a non issue during his presidency as some revisionists are currently attempting, it was the number one issue I was hounded over when I refused to support him)

    • IKR?? When they stampeded us it was all about “OMG!! ROE YOU SILLY BINTS!!”
      So sick of hearing about his greatness because here we are and he did nothing.

  3. Honestly, the failure to codify Roe was 50 years in the making. Obama was particularly weak, but this all really stems from the abandonment of Bella Abzug’s (z”l) Abortion Rights Act in the wake of the original Roe decision. If we’d gone ahead and passed that sometime in the last 5 decades, this would not have been an issue.

  4. To be fair, both parties cynically played to their respective bases over Roe over the last 50 years. It was a fundraising bonanza. For every Republican “Save the Unborn – Give Money” email there was at least one “Protect Women’s Healthcare – Give Money” response from the DNC. Each party raised millions, and neither party wanted to do anything that might derail the gravy train. The Dems never codified abortion rights and the Republicans never made a serious effort to challenge Roe. Then one party got taken over by fanatics who believed their own propaganda and the unstable equilibrium collapsed.

    The moral of this story is: the side that breaks the stalemate wins, so trying to preserve a stalemate indefinitely for financial advantage will cost you in the long run.

  5. We need to redefine the GOP for what they are…abusers. Of everyone and everything they happen to set their sights on…

    • I think here,as you know, we’ve all done this quite some time ago. The issue, to me, is that the GOP’s 40+ year plan to dumb down Americans has worked so well, that there is between 40%-50% who will never do so, until the GOP has taken over and they are all serfs. At which point it will be too late.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: