"compared with other Americans, their views on gender roles are only slightly more conservative" - That... is an indictment of the rest of us, and could actually be true. If the emergency on bodily autonomy, which is fundamental to every other issue, had not mostly restricted Jessica to only being able to write about abortion, we'd be talking more about everything else this country does wrong to women. And of course that is exactly the point, to make women fight just for bare survival.
I think the viability standard sounds nice on paper because it tries to balance the rights of the parent/host with a new life. I don’t believe in forced pregnancy or childbirth. I think having some kind of heightened standard in the final weeks of pregnancy makes sense and I think most people are on board with that. Now would be a great time for pro-choice orgs to explain their preferred policies to the public and why their ideas are best. I mostly hear their policies in sound byte reactions to whatever anti-abortionists are saying.
That last sentence. That's exactly the concern. The preferred policy is 'pregnancy is too complicated to legislate', and I think stories of real women and real pregnancies are the best way to make the case. It might be the only way to make the case.
I think a lot of conservatives are extremely cynical about humanity.
I wonder if deep down conservatives believe that there are a significant number of “pregnant baby killers” out there who are waiting to get abortions until the second or third trimester either deliberately or because of laziness.
If that sounds bonkers crazy, *great*. I think it should.
I would love to hear pro-Choicers talk about third trimester abortion access policy full stop. I think starting that conversation by attacking how stupid the anti abortion’s third trimester position is, by calling BS, would be a great start.
1. Look how nuts their position is.
2. This is the real problem.
3. That’s why (this) is a better policy.
Instead I see:
1. Pro-Lifers like the Honorable Students for Life want X weeks, reasonable compromise, protect and defend, not a ban. Definitely not a ban.
2. Pro-Choices prefer Y, no limits, no bans. Pretty sure a ban is a ban.
(Note no one persuadable read the article bc news sucks so they just saw the headline that conservatives are fighting for a consensus and moved on).
Yes. If we were as good at politics and messaging as they are, it would have never gotten this far. We have twelve months to right the ship. Unfortunately I think we might be undone by issues other than abortion; it could be very very bad.
I agree. Why give the GOP and government in general a chance to make accessing an abortion more difficult at a time when you’re potentially experiencing the worst news of your life (and may need to act fast)? Criminalizing late-stage abortion also makes it more dangerous for doctors who perform these life-saving procedures (thinking of George Tiller in Kansas). I want pro-choice groups to be articulating just why women are getting abortions and (therefore) why they need to be available at every stage.
Exactly. What's the issue? Yeah, these stories are gory, and yeah they're upsetting. Yeah, the kind of fetal and birth defects that occur in nature ought to dispel anyone's belief in a god. But that's the reality. That's got to be what Republicans are counting on, everyone wanting to stay in safe comfortable imaginary-land instead, where the fucking stork brings the baby. Smh.
I know I've said this a million times, but the reason Republicans are able to get away with what they are doing is really important. They know that a sizable number of pro-choice voters are Republicans, and they expect those voters will continue to vote Republican, regardless of what the party does on abortion. It's the only way the whole enterprise makes any sense. If a majority of Florida voters are pro-choice (which they are, possibly by quite a large percentage), it would be political suicide to block this amendment if those voters were going to base their vote for offices on their position on abortion. The assumption is they will not. Moody and DeSantis were re-elected last year by 21 and 19 points respectively. They're both term limited, but Florida Republicans will expect to hold the offices in 2026 regardless of what happens to women's bodily autonomy. And that's true everywhere Republicans are doing this. It doesn't matter if you're pro-choice if you vote Republican anyway. I don't think there's really an equivalent for Democrats, but this hypothetical gets at the idea: suppose New York, Illinois, and the west coast states, disbanded all of their police departments. Would everyone expect the Democrats there to have no difficulty in the next election? And if not, we need to ask the very troubling question of why this current situation is different. It has much broader implications. What else will Republicans tolerate and continue to vote Republican?
Is there a date by which SCOTUS will make a decision on whether or not to hear the mifepristone case? I’m assuming they will hear it, given their response to it this past session, but god help us if they don’t and we’re left with that fifth circuit nonsense.
I don't know the answer to that, but it seems to me they would have to actively decide not to hear it, if that makes sense, because they put the 5th's decision on hold during the appeal, and I think that was indefinite, right? Although they could certainly still do that; one can never be sure with scotus.
Yes. They invariably say 'health' is a catch-all used as an excuse. The way I look at it, that's an admission that involuntary pregnancy is in fact very unhealthy.
I wanted to share this piece that ran in the Washington Post that does a good job of eviscerating Nikki Haley’s stance on abortion. It also includes a shoutout to Jessica 👍🏻
Absolutely mind-blowing that Dunnavant is an OBGYN. I have several friends who were going to her practice (she wasn't their doctor, they just went to the same practice) and left because of her, and told the admin staff exactly why. I wish someone would straight up ask her, "As a doctor, if you had a patient who needed an abortion at, say, 23 weeks because otherwise she would die, can you tell us *exactly* how you would handle it?" I'm sure she would lie but it would be nice to see her squirm.
https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2023/10/08/hpd-investigating-after-planned-parenthood-protester-is-shot-with-airsoft-gun/ Did you see this happened this week
"compared with other Americans, their views on gender roles are only slightly more conservative" - That... is an indictment of the rest of us, and could actually be true. If the emergency on bodily autonomy, which is fundamental to every other issue, had not mostly restricted Jessica to only being able to write about abortion, we'd be talking more about everything else this country does wrong to women. And of course that is exactly the point, to make women fight just for bare survival.
I think the viability standard sounds nice on paper because it tries to balance the rights of the parent/host with a new life. I don’t believe in forced pregnancy or childbirth. I think having some kind of heightened standard in the final weeks of pregnancy makes sense and I think most people are on board with that. Now would be a great time for pro-choice orgs to explain their preferred policies to the public and why their ideas are best. I mostly hear their policies in sound byte reactions to whatever anti-abortionists are saying.
That last sentence. That's exactly the concern. The preferred policy is 'pregnancy is too complicated to legislate', and I think stories of real women and real pregnancies are the best way to make the case. It might be the only way to make the case.
I think a lot of conservatives are extremely cynical about humanity.
I wonder if deep down conservatives believe that there are a significant number of “pregnant baby killers” out there who are waiting to get abortions until the second or third trimester either deliberately or because of laziness.
If that sounds bonkers crazy, *great*. I think it should.
I would love to hear pro-Choicers talk about third trimester abortion access policy full stop. I think starting that conversation by attacking how stupid the anti abortion’s third trimester position is, by calling BS, would be a great start.
1. Look how nuts their position is.
2. This is the real problem.
3. That’s why (this) is a better policy.
Instead I see:
1. Pro-Lifers like the Honorable Students for Life want X weeks, reasonable compromise, protect and defend, not a ban. Definitely not a ban.
2. Pro-Choices prefer Y, no limits, no bans. Pretty sure a ban is a ban.
(Note no one persuadable read the article bc news sucks so they just saw the headline that conservatives are fighting for a consensus and moved on).
Yes. If we were as good at politics and messaging as they are, it would have never gotten this far. We have twelve months to right the ship. Unfortunately I think we might be undone by issues other than abortion; it could be very very bad.
I agree. Why give the GOP and government in general a chance to make accessing an abortion more difficult at a time when you’re potentially experiencing the worst news of your life (and may need to act fast)? Criminalizing late-stage abortion also makes it more dangerous for doctors who perform these life-saving procedures (thinking of George Tiller in Kansas). I want pro-choice groups to be articulating just why women are getting abortions and (therefore) why they need to be available at every stage.
Exactly. What's the issue? Yeah, these stories are gory, and yeah they're upsetting. Yeah, the kind of fetal and birth defects that occur in nature ought to dispel anyone's belief in a god. But that's the reality. That's got to be what Republicans are counting on, everyone wanting to stay in safe comfortable imaginary-land instead, where the fucking stork brings the baby. Smh.
I know I've said this a million times, but the reason Republicans are able to get away with what they are doing is really important. They know that a sizable number of pro-choice voters are Republicans, and they expect those voters will continue to vote Republican, regardless of what the party does on abortion. It's the only way the whole enterprise makes any sense. If a majority of Florida voters are pro-choice (which they are, possibly by quite a large percentage), it would be political suicide to block this amendment if those voters were going to base their vote for offices on their position on abortion. The assumption is they will not. Moody and DeSantis were re-elected last year by 21 and 19 points respectively. They're both term limited, but Florida Republicans will expect to hold the offices in 2026 regardless of what happens to women's bodily autonomy. And that's true everywhere Republicans are doing this. It doesn't matter if you're pro-choice if you vote Republican anyway. I don't think there's really an equivalent for Democrats, but this hypothetical gets at the idea: suppose New York, Illinois, and the west coast states, disbanded all of their police departments. Would everyone expect the Democrats there to have no difficulty in the next election? And if not, we need to ask the very troubling question of why this current situation is different. It has much broader implications. What else will Republicans tolerate and continue to vote Republican?
Is there a date by which SCOTUS will make a decision on whether or not to hear the mifepristone case? I’m assuming they will hear it, given their response to it this past session, but god help us if they don’t and we’re left with that fifth circuit nonsense.
I don't know the answer to that, but it seems to me they would have to actively decide not to hear it, if that makes sense, because they put the 5th's decision on hold during the appeal, and I think that was indefinite, right? Although they could certainly still do that; one can never be sure with scotus.
That’s what I’m thinking, too.
I haven’t heard any Republicans supporting an exception for health of the mother. Just life of the mother.
Yes. They invariably say 'health' is a catch-all used as an excuse. The way I look at it, that's an admission that involuntary pregnancy is in fact very unhealthy.
Except we know that the mother has to be almost dead to take “advantage” of that exception.
🎯
I wanted to share this piece that ran in the Washington Post that does a good job of eviscerating Nikki Haley’s stance on abortion. It also includes a shoutout to Jessica 👍🏻
https://wapo.st/3SboXdN
Great article!
Absolutely mind-blowing that Dunnavant is an OBGYN. I have several friends who were going to her practice (she wasn't their doctor, they just went to the same practice) and left because of her, and told the admin staff exactly why. I wish someone would straight up ask her, "As a doctor, if you had a patient who needed an abortion at, say, 23 weeks because otherwise she would die, can you tell us *exactly* how you would handle it?" I'm sure she would lie but it would be nice to see her squirm.
I would love to see them all squirm, because we know the 'exceptions' don't exist to them.