Women are not stupid. Some are ignorant and that’s the vulnerability. Any woman who’s not a fundamentalist zealot will see through the BS. They need to vote is all.
We converted Jessica's examples of Republican gaslighting on abortion into an interactive app. Swipe to see what they say and what they really mean. It includes several Republicans running for office so you can hold them accountable.
There's also a podcast interview with Andra Watkins ("How Project 2025 Will Ruin Your Life") who was raised as a Christian Nationalist and what that means for women.
Did this get reported & I just missed it? To continue to repeat “tax $ not spent on abortions” when those abortions are for life of the mother, rape & incest is insane.
I really think that Democrats have to be much more aggressive in every area. Complacency just gets us run over by fucking republicans. Don't Democrats have lawyers who are good at ramming through what they want? What is the gd problem here?
The constitution favors conservatives and they control the highest court right now (with plenty of worse judges in lower courts). Essentially the system is rigged, and that's the problem. (And the other side has long figured out that it's rigged in their favor). I agree with you. I think Democrats need to accept that it's rigged, and act accordingly. Too many don't seem to be ready to do that yet. I suppose they're somehow afraid of stooping to Republicans' level, being 'just as bad as them', giving up the 'moral high ground'. I think it's absurd to accept that framing when vital human rights are at stake.
Another more worrying possibility is they don't think they have the power to back it up, if they engage in acts of defiance. They think the American people will fold, or that law enforcement leans conservative and so the actual boots in the streets who ultimately carry out orders will not obey a Democratic president going 'rogue'.
There will come the time, though, when Democrats have no other option. Either when we're on the cusp of a fascist regime on January 20th if Trump wins the election, or when Republican sympathizers start a violent insurgency if Biden wins.
Jessica this is a powerful piece!! It would be great to have this an op-ed. The message you send is succinct and sums everything up! Thank you for the work you do... BRAVO. I have nothing to add
How I despise republican politicians. Men and women had better wake up and vote republicans out of office because the situation will only get WORSE if republicans are elected.
"Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy chastised the physicians and Democrats for 'fear-mongering' about the consequences of abortion bans."
So the GOP creates intentionally vague abortion laws, makes the consequences a FELONY, and then punishes the doctors by accusing them of fear mongering.
How do right wing groups get the courts to deny women their freedoms. ALWAYS follow the money. Follow the money and favors flowing from shadowy right wing conservative groups to MAGA Supreme Court Justices and their spouses with this interactive chart.
And follow to Governors and state legislators. It’s hard to keep up with the PACS formed by these groups because they change the names often and splinter as well. Youngkin has received 1.4 million reportedly from Susan B Anthony aligned groups.
Yes, the groups, PACs, think tanks, societies, etc are so numerous & intertwined it’s like a spider’s web.
I recently found one I’d never heard of before explained on the Amicus podcast. The Mar 30 episode titled
“When RAGA Rhymes with MAGA” the description says: despite all the money changing hands & obvious conflicts of interest, few ppl have heard of them - and that’s very intentional.
They are adept at names that don't sound nearly as intrusive as some of us feel their policies are. Do you have link for that episode? I would be interested.
Those who speak of taking women back to the fifties are at least a couple of centuries behind in any realism of MAGA intent today. Controlling women, their autonomy, their reproductive health, and all of the consequences, MAGA brush under the mattress, isn't new it's just been bought and paid for and now once again is reality being faced in the 21st century.
The NEJM is writing a series, of articles, of their self-admitted complicity, since 1812 in their beginning, which are a kind of cathartic apologetic attempt to explain, at best, willingness to help make changes using their voice, and are informative, at a minimum. They speak to slavery, WWII, the U.S. hiring doctors who worked in the Nazi regime, impacts of policy, in rural and disenfranchised populations, systemic racism, immigration, abortion, LGBTQ+ and much more.
In the most recent article they speak to many issues regarding women in medicine, or lack thereof, until most recently, the midwife being "evil" and how their authors and distinguished white male professors and physicians spoke of abortion dating back to the early 1800's. I wasn't shocked, for that time period. I'm shocked groceries seem to sway a voter over policies literally killing women in today's America.
To quote a Harvard, professor of medicine, in 1869, that gave a commencement speech to that years graduating class said "an exact knowledge of women's organization (meaning mental fitness owing to reproductive processes and organs) and possible development, would show both what SHE can do and what SHE ought to do." Edward Clarke was a vocal opponent of women's education and saw them as unfit for medical practice. His views were in the medical field but surely expanded well beyond that,
Physicians in the 19th century had to "navigate" state policies and practices controlling and restricting women's reproduction. They asserted their medical-legal authority in such matters. They made pronouncements on the legal provision of abortion and contraception and issued eugenic judgments about the reproductive "fitness" of particular people and groups.
Massachusetts, as an example, criminalized abortion in 1845. In a journal article 12 years prior, in 1833, characterized an abortion resulting in the death of the patient as "sometimes a fortunate medico-legal accident". A woman willing to undergo an abortion, the article argued, "readily takes whatever physical risks pertain to the wretched business". Her death represents "an opportunity", in which she becomes "a better witness against her accessory and herself than she could possibly be if living." Seems the sentiment of today's MAGA and pro-life/death movement and also based on the Christian nationalist position, as well.
A different stance was taken regarding the reproduction capacity of enslaved women, for slave owners and southern physicians, as the reproduction of enslaved persons was necessary for the continuation of slavery as an institution. In 1841, an article detailed the treatment for an "obstruction of the menses"and claimed that her condition left her "unfitted" for duties of the plantation. If she recovered she was thus able to present "her master with an increase of family or rather increase of production, income, for the plantation".
I believe Speaker Mike Johnson alluded to a similar stance for the future of this country's revenue streams as being tied to the necessity of women's reproductive lives as being "fruitful". In other words, that white males feel they need to control women for the betterment of themselves. No master had a family with enslaved women nor does the US government have a family with freed, yet enshrined, women to their now destiny to help those who can't tell their own wife to fkn take the fkn flag down.
Thank you for reading my long reply if you could brave it!! We need MAGA out as they will not stop until women, of all colors and socioeconomics, become the new way to ensure the future "plantation masters", of the white male elite, are well equipped to maintain, a revenue stream for themselves and the women providing the conduit, in the filth of pro-life using the Bible as the mattress they lie, literally, underneath.
I, too, read this nightmare of experiments on black women, men, children, their corpses, with no consent even after slavery was abolished, and it isn't for the weak of heart. Learning we hired doctors who worked under Josef Mengele was about too much to bear.
Doctor's privileged right, under law, not to be discriminated against for "morally or religiously" refusing to treat patients is as bullshit as it gets. While black/brown/disabled/mentally ill, knocking on death's door females, trans-gender HUMANS can't get health care in the most wealthy country, in the world, due to the all mighty goal of stockholder wealth over absolutely everything else is always the issue. Wealth and power and I'm no bleeding heart. Capping malpractice was a fatal, literally, error done by whom? Not the "we's" of the country. Two-tiered anythings, from justice to medical access, is wealth and wealth only.
Kavanaugh left a wide berth in the mifpristone decision and it relies on this law and the chevron deference. How does a case get to the SCOTUS with no actual damages or charges?
Where is our autonomy? Even before Roe was over turned what exactly is "informed consent"? Consenting to the "NO" one receives from a doctor? Yes. Nothing compared to what protects a practitioner from their religion and even giving referrals for undesired morally reprehensible acts to saves lives is covered.
Women are being placed under conditions that are horrifying now. Wait until our daughters are subjected. It is now or never.
Thank you for replying. Also, thank you for reading and educating yourself so you may reach others.
So a woman suffering and dying in childbirth is fair because of Eve. If she doesn't die from an abortion, they want to kill her. And there is no way for a woman to actually have agency nor honor in any scenario. Women are evil.
Theocratically yes. The physicians thought the same of the female brain as they did the black brain. That of a pygmy. One thing I don't get is if it is Eve how is it a pigmy, as well? Can't be both.
The attitudes don't seem to have changed much over the centuries. These filth have just been biding their time. If by November groceries are still more important than the femicide being orchestrated by the Republican party, one or both of two things are true: the voters are sick, or we didn't get the message out. Everyone who reads here knows it, but I still don't know how much it's permeated the general public. Trump still leads in the polls.
I think Biden/Harris need to do social media Fireside Chats and put them out on every platform. Talk to the American people. Address their concerns, explain the week’s disinformation and speak to that by having a source, that’s not government, but an organization associated with the topic. No reporters, no questions, just them talking. The media gets it wrong regardless of the source or how it leans. They can’t poll, moderate discussion or discourse. Make it a big deal because it would be. It be fan-fkn-tastic. If it’s on SM there’d be the curious that may learn something as simple as Biden is not responsible for overturning Roe just because it happened while in office. 1/4 of the electorate thinks this. Immigration reform and talk drugs…Hunter is an addict and the teeny tiny particles needed for fentanyl aren’t coming from the Southern border exclusively but in teddy bears on barges from China. Biden didn’t meet with Xi to talk about learning Mandarin. How inalienable rights are only guaranteed by the constitution. People believe they are owed them and they’re automatic. Wrong. Define democracy. Who actually understands what that means and why they will not be protected without it. Asked if they want Biden or Putin they say Putin. Do they think they know Russia? By watching Tucker? Explain Russia. Define Putin. Explain the voucher system. The only way that you learn is to listen. Talk about King George. Who knows who that is and why framing the Constitution without a national religion isn’t to cut out religion but to keep it personal. I can’t imagine how little voters know. Why they watch Fox but don’t understand they paid nearly a billion dollars for lying about COVID and 2020’s election. Why and how many courts struck that down. Inflation and monetary change after the Great Recession had zero fed funding rates for two decades. In simple terms and layman terms. Talk! To the people. It wasn’t hush money and never use that term.
I sure hope so. He has the platforms but not the bombastic "speaks his mindless word soup" and is actually very aware of how things work. Trump didn't know about how to be POTUS that is why he issued Executive Orders in mass quantity. Biden is the right guy, for this moment. In 2028 we can put that younger energetic person on a platform. Whatever platform, other than this crazy, to stop whitewashing brains and get across the aisle again. I don't care if it is a true Republican but no one is a Republican today. That party is DOA. If they want to get it back they have to denounce Trump. I'll support Jeffries for POTUS in 2028 if we get that chance.
Successful politicians have to be able to control the narrative (and choose the right narrative). The stakes if we can't do that are higher than they've ever been.
And exactly what risks do we intend to take? Without risk reward is nearly impossible and waiting for Americans to "catch on" after 8 years seems implausible if not impossible. GAZA is an issue that has faced every POTUS in modern history and under Clinton the Palestinians had the best chance of land recoupment and declined with no counter. Containment not genocide is Biden's plan. Just think if the entire Arab world was GAZA? War has innocent victims and it's awful but who is protesting the invasion of a democracy by Trump's ally Putin? Read Bill Browder's books Red Notice and Freezing Order to know how Tucker Carlson/FOX News has played American people right into believing authoritarians are terrific but when those same people's friends disappear what will they think?
What is a "successful politician"? A liar? A negotiator, a fraud, felon, TV guy, sue everyone and seek revenge? Yeah, no. A non-corrupt politician was once just a 6 decade corrupt businessman? Now he's both.
Controlling the narrative, per the media and other SM outlets, is Trump. He doesn't speak to any policy, help for food pricing, explain gas reserves, truth on border bills, court outcomes in the 2020 Big Lie and who, where and why has been arrested/indicted and who's to do it?. He speaks about retribution. Biden could do the same, as a devout Catholic, following up with the part they don't read. The Sermon on the Mount. Southern states will execute 3 people this week. Why that is relevant is because most don't know anything about why it matters. They want justice, right, just not for the people lied to in order to get their vote...Trump is an innocent man with a platform that gives him oxygen en masse. Law is to prevail and to kill the victim's perp? What if DNA shows a different story, but technicality in law, and the chair wins? Does that mean wealth overcomes DNA as it is story told by the MAGA fools in Trump's defense? Retribution for a victim? Who is a victim in Trump's cases? WE THE PEOPLE are the victims and the enemy isn't within the country but within the psychosis of Trump's childhood nightmares by his Democratic father. The SCOTUS, Cannon are all taking the complicit NEJM previous stance. Will an Imperial POTUS need a SCOTUS? Hitler did for a bit but then they went away. Where did they go? I'll leave that up for individual ideas.
Biden controls his narrative but he's not a bombastic public populist. He's boring because he is doing his job, like it or not, and bombastic will create hardship for the believers so they need to know and that risk is one we can't wait to take. We must take it. PERIOD. Without democracy what is left?
Two key takeaways. 1. IF. We haven't lost our democracy, yet, and WE THE PEOPLE are more powerful than anyone believes us to be. We aren't a pure democracy, meaning simple majority, and why the electoral college exists. It is Trump's apparatus to return to the White House b/c, in my humble opinion, he'll lose the vote. The Dems will rue the day they saved Mr. Accountability and "ask me my values and I'll tell you to read the Bible" Johnson. 2. POINT. Nothing. But, in framing your comment you demonstrate what concerns me the most. People checking out. I'm guilty of being informed but not active enough. I'm not complicit but I'm unable to do much physically to get out but I write my representatives local, state level and, my favorite, MAGA senator. It has been spotty but enough that I add to the pile.
I watch Fox, research from far right to far left in a variety of areas. If I can change one person's mind I'm happy. I believe I've changed more than one. I also know I've made connections with people who were absolutely lost.
I can't change anything alone but I will mute the bots, reply with as many facts as possible and the rest is well....you can lead the horse to water but can't make it drink.
Your point is very important. There will be no point after the election and we won't have answer's from the two biggest court cases in government history which I'll leave, my contempt for that, alone for now. Never give up the resolve to take that comment and reframe it to a couple points directly tied to democracy vs. the opposite and what happens. If refuted, and it is not a bot, keep nice and give them factual hell!!
A necessary implication of the "life begins of conception" view of life, which can only be understood at a fundamental level as the acceptance by an ovum of a spermatozoa to create a zygote. A zygote begins mitotic cell division before implantation in the uterus. This process is called cleavage, and it starts shortly after fertilization. Here's a brief overview of the events:
1. Fertilization:
- Fertilization occurs in the fallopian tube when a sperm fuses with an egg, forming a zygote.
2. Cleavage:
- About 24 to 30 hours after fertilization, the zygote undergoes its first mitotic cell division, forming two identical cells called blastomeres.
- The blastomeres continue to divide mitotically every 12-24 hours, forming 4, 8, 16, and more cells.
- During this process, the total size of the embryo does not increase significantly, as the cells become smaller with each division.
3. Morula stage:
- Around 3 to 4 days after fertilization, the embryo reaches the 16-cell stage and is called a morula.
- The morula continues to divide as it moves through the fallopian tube towards the uterus.
4. Blastocyst stage:
- Around day 5 after fertilization, the embryo develops into a blastocyst, which consists of an inner cell mass (which will form the embryo) and an outer layer of cells called the trophoblast (which will form the placenta).
- The blastocyst hatches from the zona pellucida, a protective covering surrounding the embryo.
5. Implantation:
- Around day 6 to 10 after fertilization, the blastocyst implants into the uterine wall (endometrium).
- Implantation marks the end of the pre-embryonic stage and the beginning of the embryonic stage of development.
Most oral contraceptives derive their effectiveness from blocking ovulation, but a number of other effects come into play in the event that ovulation occurs anyway and a zygote is able to form in the fallopian tubes. The most common mechanism of oral contraception (birth control pills) to prevent implantation is through the combined action of synthetic estrogen and progestin hormones. These hormones work together to prevent pregnancy by:
1. Suppressing ovulation:
- The primary mechanism of action is the suppression of the release of gonadotropins (follicle-stimulating hormone [FSH] and luteinizing hormone [LH]) from the pituitary gland.
- By preventing the LH surge, the pills inhibit ovulation, so no egg is released from the ovaries.
2. Thickening cervical mucus:
- Progestin in the pill thickens the cervical mucus, making it more difficult for sperm to pass through the cervix and reach the fallopian tubes.
3. Thinning the endometrium:
- The hormones in the pill also thin the lining of the uterus (endometrium), making it less receptive to the implantation of a fertilized egg.
- This is the mechanism most directly related to preventing implantation.
4. Altering tubal motility:
- The synthetic hormones may also affect the motility of the fallopian tubes, slowing down the transport of the egg and reducing the likelihood of fertilization.
Different types of oral contraceptives contain varying doses and combinations of synthetic estrogen and progestin, which can affect the prominence of each mechanism. Progestin-only pills (the "mini-pill") primarily work by thickening cervical mucus and may not consistently suppress ovulation, relying more on the other mechanisms to prevent pregnancy.
In common with drugs that take effect after transplantation, oral contraceptions intervene to prevent the continued development of an embryo. Therefore, accepting the absurd premise that a zygote is life merely by reason of its potential future development, the Pill is abortion.
This isn't rocket science. I learned about it in 10th grade at a time when the Pill had only recently been introduced and school officials were totally freaked by the notion that they might be obtained and lead to that greatest of adolescent hazards, premarital sex. I have no idea what the current curriculum covers, but I'm sure it could be covered in an afternoon should the idiots advocating banning contraception to protect the supposed sanctity of live could sit still that long.
Thank you for all that. Lot's of rich detail there and some excellent language we have been hearing more and more of.
"The most common mechanism of oral contraception (birth control pills) to prevent implantation is through the combined action of synthetic estrogen and progestin hormones."
And again,
"3. Thinning the endometrium:
- The hormones in the pill also thin the lining of the uterus (endometrium), making it less receptive to the implantation of a fertilized egg."
We are talking about the Pill here, not the IUD. The Pill is not cited by the anti-abortionists as an abortifacient.
"Therefore, accepting the absurd premise that a zygote is life merely by reason of its potential future development, the Pill is abortion."
What is missing in all this detail and language is the word "pregnancy". And this last statement dodges the term completely. And nobody, not the anti-abortionists at least, claim that the zygote, or the blastocyst, or the ova and any point after the merging of sperm with ova is a human being because of its potential development. To their way of thinking, it is a human being, an unborn child, a baby, the minute that merging occurs.
What we are seeing here and in this post is discrediting the idea that pregnancy begins with the merging of ova and sperm. The anti-abortionists say that pregnancy begins with this merging and this has been the accepted language in medicine and biology ever since it was discovered that this occurs. And this is fairly new knowledge.
The anti-abortionists also claim that IUDs and morning after pills are abortifacients. They do not cite the Pill as an abortifacient, although we can see here -- and this is not the first time I've heard this -- that it can act as an abortifacient.
But wait! We have arguments here that it can't be an abortifacient because abortion by definition terminates a pregnancy and we say, here, that pregnancy does not begin until implantation.
It's time to realize that somewhere the "pro-choice" front has painted itself into a corner using language and convictions that lack substance to defend the moral certainty that should direct defending the right to abortion.
We should all agree,
Birth control includes early term abortifacients. This includes the IUD, the Morning After Pill, the Pill and who knows what else. We should seek new technologies that also prevent implantation.
Abortion is birth control.
Pregnancy begins with the merging of ova and sperm, this represents the cellular foundation of a new individual of any animal that is the result of sexual reproduction. And individuality is a necessary characteristic of all life.
Abortion is not murder, not at any stage of gestation and not at any point before a live, full term birth at the completion of gestation.
Thanks for clarifying. My argument should have been more explicit in that I didn’t state clearly that I’ve granted the premise with fertilization as conception and then traced the following processes necessary to get the resulting cells to lodge firmly in the uterus, which arguably the first point at which some possibility of developing into eventual life, defined as an organism capable of independent existence can occur, even though there are necessary hazards. Interventions that prevent the lodging to occur, oral contraception, by the logic of life beginning at implantation are abortifacient. I also left to the reader to infer that the same rationale by which Red states are banning abortion applies to such methods of contraception. When that reaches the current Supreme Court, the same rationale applied in Dobbs will relegate regulation to the states, and Griswald will fall as the next domino.
"... I’ve granted the premise with fertilization as conception and then traced the following processes necessary to get the resulting cells to lodge firmly in the uterus, which arguably the first point at which some possibility of developing into eventual life, defined as an organism capable of independent existence can occur ..."
I'll rephrase that. I think you are saying that in your argument, you allow that conception begins with fertilization. But I think you also pose implantation as being the first step by which gestation occurs and you also pose the completion of gestation as that point where independent existence can occur.
Once again, not once does the word "pregnancy" enter your discussion. And even though you cite cellular division before implantation, this doesn't seem to have any significance in your arguments. And the notion of "independent existence" is an anti-abortionist narrative. Before the loss of RvW, restrictions on abortion were based on arguments based on "fetal survivability" a medical observation that ignores gestation as a process that needs completion before birth should occur. Current passions about the right to abortion are for cases far later than that barrier.
If we lose Griswald because birth control, in fact, includes functioning as an abortifacient, then abusing the language of what qualifies as gestation or pregnancy certainly deserves blame for it.
99+ % of today's Republicans couldn't read past your first sentence. That's what happens when we sort the parties by education, and then chase anyone with the tiniest bit of either brain or conscience out of the Republican party. We're left with a mob foaming at the mouth, and they're thisclose to gaining full power.
I love the ad about condoms! There needs to be one about vasectomies! If these extremists are willing to do all this to women, there’s really nothing holding them back from going after sperm blockers. After all, there are plenty of politicians to use footage of saying “the point is we need workers and babies.” Plant the seeds in peoples brains because even if they find the ad ludicrous now, they won’t find it so ludicrous as more & more stories come out about insane legislation being put forth by Rs, like forbidding IUDs & Plan B! The point I see most often from likely bots & ignorant Rs is still “women should keep their legs closed” which denies the existence of rape & incest. Imagine a 15 sec ad or digital video… 1st screen is all red, in white lettering - Rs plan to confiscate Plan B. Next few screens: a women sitting in an ER bed with a policeman in the room, a GYN office ultrasound showing, a doctor’s office with doc behind a desk, a police station, a college dorm, a living room, all faces are blurred or cut from screen… by-line says “Mothers, women & children living in states run by Republican legislatures” 1 after the other, all different ages, saying “I wanted to keep my legs closed, but I was force raped & impregnated & my state won’t protect me and I don’t feel free.” Last screen is all red, with white lettering, states stats of rape since Roe fell. Ad ends. Will Rs accuse of fear mongering ? Maybe, but there’s truth to an ad like that & everyone in those states will know it, many just don’t see it. Put a picture in their head & they won’t be able to let it go. Think KY Gov campaign. And if SCOTUS rules against the FDA approved medication … that is really going to wake people up too because that medication is used for non abortion medical needs.
Sometimes I wonder if anything will wake the American people up, or if enough voters have completely given up on the Democrats and this election is already decided. Was the progress of the last sixty years all dumb luck?
Also, I just read about a lady who said her 88 year old grandmother lived in a town in NY in the 1970s where the store would not sell condoms. She told her grand daughter to be very afraid of this direction they want to go. My comments might sound far out to some, but they are based on historical pasts which some would like to repeat.
One would think that allowing pharmacists to deny selling abortion pills would wake people up. Youngkin vetoed the contraceptive bill in VA because it left out exceptions for religious beliefs. Not only do they want to force their “beliefs” on the population as a whole, but they want businesses forced to provide cover & protection to do so. Business CEOs are so concerned about taxes they can’t see the forest for the trees. They find these extremists without a thought of how they are opening the door for their own headaches, all to presumably avoid taxes.
It is against their business interests. The minute that I heard that Walgreens corporate had decided not to sell mefipristone when state AGs were threatening to sue, even in states where abortion remained legal, I moved all my Rxs to a small independent pharmacy on the other side of town, despite that being an inconvenience for me.
I have several Rxs, 1 of which is very expensive & 1 for one of my dogs which is also expensive; so they lost a chunk of revenue from me. Then when I went to pick up my Rxs from the local pharmacy, I stated the reason I had moved my Rxs, & the pharmacist, whom I know personally, called out; “Yeah, you & about 100 other people.” I was really glad to learn that there were so many other people in my small town that had moral convictions.
A good rule of thumb, unfortunately, is that statements beginning with 'one would think' tend to turn out the other way, at least in the reality we inhabit now. I'm not quite sure why businesses think they'll do better under a fascist dictatorship. The experience of countries like Russia and Iran is that only a very insular inner circle enjoys wealth and prosperity; everyone else loses. It's like cheering on a massive natural disaster, with destruction all around you, thinking you're going to be the one to profit from it. If that's what the private sector has become then the socialists are right.
Women are not stupid. Some are ignorant and that’s the vulnerability. Any woman who’s not a fundamentalist zealot will see through the BS. They need to vote is all.
We converted Jessica's examples of Republican gaslighting on abortion into an interactive app. Swipe to see what they say and what they really mean. It includes several Republicans running for office so you can hold them accountable.
Get your 'FREE Abortion Ban Gaslighting Detector'
https://thedemlabs.org/2024/06/08/abortion-ban-gaslighting-detector-project-2025/
There's also a podcast interview with Andra Watkins ("How Project 2025 Will Ruin Your Life") who was raised as a Christian Nationalist and what that means for women.
Fantastic, Andra has been trying to shout the warning for many months now.
Did this get reported & I just missed it? To continue to repeat “tax $ not spent on abortions” when those abortions are for life of the mother, rape & incest is insane.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-republicans-pass-new-abortion-restrictions-veterans-affairs-bill-rcna155615
It won’t pass the Senate, but it’s still despicable. I looked Rep Garcia up on X & let him know what I thought about that nonsense
I really think that Democrats have to be much more aggressive in every area. Complacency just gets us run over by fucking republicans. Don't Democrats have lawyers who are good at ramming through what they want? What is the gd problem here?
The constitution favors conservatives and they control the highest court right now (with plenty of worse judges in lower courts). Essentially the system is rigged, and that's the problem. (And the other side has long figured out that it's rigged in their favor). I agree with you. I think Democrats need to accept that it's rigged, and act accordingly. Too many don't seem to be ready to do that yet. I suppose they're somehow afraid of stooping to Republicans' level, being 'just as bad as them', giving up the 'moral high ground'. I think it's absurd to accept that framing when vital human rights are at stake.
Another more worrying possibility is they don't think they have the power to back it up, if they engage in acts of defiance. They think the American people will fold, or that law enforcement leans conservative and so the actual boots in the streets who ultimately carry out orders will not obey a Democratic president going 'rogue'.
There will come the time, though, when Democrats have no other option. Either when we're on the cusp of a fascist regime on January 20th if Trump wins the election, or when Republican sympathizers start a violent insurgency if Biden wins.
I agree, Zach. We need to be much more proactive!! If fascists start something, Democrats will have boots on the ground, too!!
I agree!!! I like Jeffries!!
Jessica this is a powerful piece!! It would be great to have this an op-ed. The message you send is succinct and sums everything up! Thank you for the work you do... BRAVO. I have nothing to add
How I despise republican politicians. Men and women had better wake up and vote republicans out of office because the situation will only get WORSE if republicans are elected.
Why wasn't this a NYT guest Op Ed?
It should be!! It’s an excellent Father’s Day piece.
Because it is too truthful, they only approve propaganda opinions these days.
I suppose because NYT favors the fascists, or somehow thinks it will be in their good graces if they win.
They certainly hire enough of them.
And I fear people in general are getting more and more confused, and it's maddening.
Whenever someone gets confused about whether to vote for Biden or Trump, I have 3 words for them: The Supreme Court.
Yes! And I have one :Theocracy. As in they want it, sane people don't.
"Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy chastised the physicians and Democrats for 'fear-mongering' about the consequences of abortion bans."
So the GOP creates intentionally vague abortion laws, makes the consequences a FELONY, and then punishes the doctors by accusing them of fear mongering.
Got it.
How do right wing groups get the courts to deny women their freedoms. ALWAYS follow the money. Follow the money and favors flowing from shadowy right wing conservative groups to MAGA Supreme Court Justices and their spouses with this interactive chart.
https://thedemlabs.org/2024/06/07/maga-supreme-court-six-pack-of-corruption-follow-the-money/
And follow to Governors and state legislators. It’s hard to keep up with the PACS formed by these groups because they change the names often and splinter as well. Youngkin has received 1.4 million reportedly from Susan B Anthony aligned groups.
Yes, the groups, PACs, think tanks, societies, etc are so numerous & intertwined it’s like a spider’s web.
I recently found one I’d never heard of before explained on the Amicus podcast. The Mar 30 episode titled
“When RAGA Rhymes with MAGA” the description says: despite all the money changing hands & obvious conflicts of interest, few ppl have heard of them - and that’s very intentional.
I highly recommend it
They are adept at names that don't sound nearly as intrusive as some of us feel their policies are. Do you have link for that episode? I would be interested.
I don’t know how to link a podcast, just type Amicus into whatever podcast app that you use. It’s put out by Slate & the plain Amicus is free
Amicus on Slate Plus requires a subscription
I don't think it will save his political career, unless he moves to a red state.
Those who speak of taking women back to the fifties are at least a couple of centuries behind in any realism of MAGA intent today. Controlling women, their autonomy, their reproductive health, and all of the consequences, MAGA brush under the mattress, isn't new it's just been bought and paid for and now once again is reality being faced in the 21st century.
The NEJM is writing a series, of articles, of their self-admitted complicity, since 1812 in their beginning, which are a kind of cathartic apologetic attempt to explain, at best, willingness to help make changes using their voice, and are informative, at a minimum. They speak to slavery, WWII, the U.S. hiring doctors who worked in the Nazi regime, impacts of policy, in rural and disenfranchised populations, systemic racism, immigration, abortion, LGBTQ+ and much more.
In the most recent article they speak to many issues regarding women in medicine, or lack thereof, until most recently, the midwife being "evil" and how their authors and distinguished white male professors and physicians spoke of abortion dating back to the early 1800's. I wasn't shocked, for that time period. I'm shocked groceries seem to sway a voter over policies literally killing women in today's America.
To quote a Harvard, professor of medicine, in 1869, that gave a commencement speech to that years graduating class said "an exact knowledge of women's organization (meaning mental fitness owing to reproductive processes and organs) and possible development, would show both what SHE can do and what SHE ought to do." Edward Clarke was a vocal opponent of women's education and saw them as unfit for medical practice. His views were in the medical field but surely expanded well beyond that,
Physicians in the 19th century had to "navigate" state policies and practices controlling and restricting women's reproduction. They asserted their medical-legal authority in such matters. They made pronouncements on the legal provision of abortion and contraception and issued eugenic judgments about the reproductive "fitness" of particular people and groups.
Massachusetts, as an example, criminalized abortion in 1845. In a journal article 12 years prior, in 1833, characterized an abortion resulting in the death of the patient as "sometimes a fortunate medico-legal accident". A woman willing to undergo an abortion, the article argued, "readily takes whatever physical risks pertain to the wretched business". Her death represents "an opportunity", in which she becomes "a better witness against her accessory and herself than she could possibly be if living." Seems the sentiment of today's MAGA and pro-life/death movement and also based on the Christian nationalist position, as well.
A different stance was taken regarding the reproduction capacity of enslaved women, for slave owners and southern physicians, as the reproduction of enslaved persons was necessary for the continuation of slavery as an institution. In 1841, an article detailed the treatment for an "obstruction of the menses"and claimed that her condition left her "unfitted" for duties of the plantation. If she recovered she was thus able to present "her master with an increase of family or rather increase of production, income, for the plantation".
I believe Speaker Mike Johnson alluded to a similar stance for the future of this country's revenue streams as being tied to the necessity of women's reproductive lives as being "fruitful". In other words, that white males feel they need to control women for the betterment of themselves. No master had a family with enslaved women nor does the US government have a family with freed, yet enshrined, women to their now destiny to help those who can't tell their own wife to fkn take the fkn flag down.
Thank you for reading my long reply if you could brave it!! We need MAGA out as they will not stop until women, of all colors and socioeconomics, become the new way to ensure the future "plantation masters", of the white male elite, are well equipped to maintain, a revenue stream for themselves and the women providing the conduit, in the filth of pro-life using the Bible as the mattress they lie, literally, underneath.
I loved the snippets of medical history related to the treatment of women. I just recently read Medical Apartheid by Harriet A Washington
The ghastly surgical experimentation that was done on enslaved women without anesthesia just made my skin crawl.
I, too, read this nightmare of experiments on black women, men, children, their corpses, with no consent even after slavery was abolished, and it isn't for the weak of heart. Learning we hired doctors who worked under Josef Mengele was about too much to bear.
Doctor's privileged right, under law, not to be discriminated against for "morally or religiously" refusing to treat patients is as bullshit as it gets. While black/brown/disabled/mentally ill, knocking on death's door females, trans-gender HUMANS can't get health care in the most wealthy country, in the world, due to the all mighty goal of stockholder wealth over absolutely everything else is always the issue. Wealth and power and I'm no bleeding heart. Capping malpractice was a fatal, literally, error done by whom? Not the "we's" of the country. Two-tiered anythings, from justice to medical access, is wealth and wealth only.
Kavanaugh left a wide berth in the mifpristone decision and it relies on this law and the chevron deference. How does a case get to the SCOTUS with no actual damages or charges?
Where is our autonomy? Even before Roe was over turned what exactly is "informed consent"? Consenting to the "NO" one receives from a doctor? Yes. Nothing compared to what protects a practitioner from their religion and even giving referrals for undesired morally reprehensible acts to saves lives is covered.
Women are being placed under conditions that are horrifying now. Wait until our daughters are subjected. It is now or never.
Thank you for replying. Also, thank you for reading and educating yourself so you may reach others.
So a woman suffering and dying in childbirth is fair because of Eve. If she doesn't die from an abortion, they want to kill her. And there is no way for a woman to actually have agency nor honor in any scenario. Women are evil.
Not in their world, we are birthing vessels who ought to die giving birth, so they can go get a younger breeder.
Theocratically yes. The physicians thought the same of the female brain as they did the black brain. That of a pygmy. One thing I don't get is if it is Eve how is it a pigmy, as well? Can't be both.
The attitudes don't seem to have changed much over the centuries. These filth have just been biding their time. If by November groceries are still more important than the femicide being orchestrated by the Republican party, one or both of two things are true: the voters are sick, or we didn't get the message out. Everyone who reads here knows it, but I still don't know how much it's permeated the general public. Trump still leads in the polls.
I think Biden/Harris need to do social media Fireside Chats and put them out on every platform. Talk to the American people. Address their concerns, explain the week’s disinformation and speak to that by having a source, that’s not government, but an organization associated with the topic. No reporters, no questions, just them talking. The media gets it wrong regardless of the source or how it leans. They can’t poll, moderate discussion or discourse. Make it a big deal because it would be. It be fan-fkn-tastic. If it’s on SM there’d be the curious that may learn something as simple as Biden is not responsible for overturning Roe just because it happened while in office. 1/4 of the electorate thinks this. Immigration reform and talk drugs…Hunter is an addict and the teeny tiny particles needed for fentanyl aren’t coming from the Southern border exclusively but in teddy bears on barges from China. Biden didn’t meet with Xi to talk about learning Mandarin. How inalienable rights are only guaranteed by the constitution. People believe they are owed them and they’re automatic. Wrong. Define democracy. Who actually understands what that means and why they will not be protected without it. Asked if they want Biden or Putin they say Putin. Do they think they know Russia? By watching Tucker? Explain Russia. Define Putin. Explain the voucher system. The only way that you learn is to listen. Talk about King George. Who knows who that is and why framing the Constitution without a national religion isn’t to cut out religion but to keep it personal. I can’t imagine how little voters know. Why they watch Fox but don’t understand they paid nearly a billion dollars for lying about COVID and 2020’s election. Why and how many courts struck that down. Inflation and monetary change after the Great Recession had zero fed funding rates for two decades. In simple terms and layman terms. Talk! To the people. It wasn’t hush money and never use that term.
I really like that idea! Maybe if a lot of us suggest it to all the Dem SM sites??
Fireside chats!! I really like that idea!! White House, are you listening?
I sure hope so. He has the platforms but not the bombastic "speaks his mindless word soup" and is actually very aware of how things work. Trump didn't know about how to be POTUS that is why he issued Executive Orders in mass quantity. Biden is the right guy, for this moment. In 2028 we can put that younger energetic person on a platform. Whatever platform, other than this crazy, to stop whitewashing brains and get across the aisle again. I don't care if it is a true Republican but no one is a Republican today. That party is DOA. If they want to get it back they have to denounce Trump. I'll support Jeffries for POTUS in 2028 if we get that chance.
Successful politicians have to be able to control the narrative (and choose the right narrative). The stakes if we can't do that are higher than they've ever been.
And exactly what risks do we intend to take? Without risk reward is nearly impossible and waiting for Americans to "catch on" after 8 years seems implausible if not impossible. GAZA is an issue that has faced every POTUS in modern history and under Clinton the Palestinians had the best chance of land recoupment and declined with no counter. Containment not genocide is Biden's plan. Just think if the entire Arab world was GAZA? War has innocent victims and it's awful but who is protesting the invasion of a democracy by Trump's ally Putin? Read Bill Browder's books Red Notice and Freezing Order to know how Tucker Carlson/FOX News has played American people right into believing authoritarians are terrific but when those same people's friends disappear what will they think?
What is a "successful politician"? A liar? A negotiator, a fraud, felon, TV guy, sue everyone and seek revenge? Yeah, no. A non-corrupt politician was once just a 6 decade corrupt businessman? Now he's both.
Controlling the narrative, per the media and other SM outlets, is Trump. He doesn't speak to any policy, help for food pricing, explain gas reserves, truth on border bills, court outcomes in the 2020 Big Lie and who, where and why has been arrested/indicted and who's to do it?. He speaks about retribution. Biden could do the same, as a devout Catholic, following up with the part they don't read. The Sermon on the Mount. Southern states will execute 3 people this week. Why that is relevant is because most don't know anything about why it matters. They want justice, right, just not for the people lied to in order to get their vote...Trump is an innocent man with a platform that gives him oxygen en masse. Law is to prevail and to kill the victim's perp? What if DNA shows a different story, but technicality in law, and the chair wins? Does that mean wealth overcomes DNA as it is story told by the MAGA fools in Trump's defense? Retribution for a victim? Who is a victim in Trump's cases? WE THE PEOPLE are the victims and the enemy isn't within the country but within the psychosis of Trump's childhood nightmares by his Democratic father. The SCOTUS, Cannon are all taking the complicit NEJM previous stance. Will an Imperial POTUS need a SCOTUS? Hitler did for a bit but then they went away. Where did they go? I'll leave that up for individual ideas.
Biden controls his narrative but he's not a bombastic public populist. He's boring because he is doing his job, like it or not, and bombastic will create hardship for the believers so they need to know and that risk is one we can't wait to take. We must take it. PERIOD. Without democracy what is left?
If we lose our democracy, what is the point of anything?
Two key takeaways. 1. IF. We haven't lost our democracy, yet, and WE THE PEOPLE are more powerful than anyone believes us to be. We aren't a pure democracy, meaning simple majority, and why the electoral college exists. It is Trump's apparatus to return to the White House b/c, in my humble opinion, he'll lose the vote. The Dems will rue the day they saved Mr. Accountability and "ask me my values and I'll tell you to read the Bible" Johnson. 2. POINT. Nothing. But, in framing your comment you demonstrate what concerns me the most. People checking out. I'm guilty of being informed but not active enough. I'm not complicit but I'm unable to do much physically to get out but I write my representatives local, state level and, my favorite, MAGA senator. It has been spotty but enough that I add to the pile.
I watch Fox, research from far right to far left in a variety of areas. If I can change one person's mind I'm happy. I believe I've changed more than one. I also know I've made connections with people who were absolutely lost.
I can't change anything alone but I will mute the bots, reply with as many facts as possible and the rest is well....you can lead the horse to water but can't make it drink.
Your point is very important. There will be no point after the election and we won't have answer's from the two biggest court cases in government history which I'll leave, my contempt for that, alone for now. Never give up the resolve to take that comment and reframe it to a couple points directly tied to democracy vs. the opposite and what happens. If refuted, and it is not a bot, keep nice and give them factual hell!!
Yes, I have thought that somehow actual explanatory information has to get out to the public, and on numerous topics. Great Ideas.
👆🏻💯
Very powerful stuff and nicely 👌 put.
Hey 👋, noticed you were a Vegan. I almost just possibly sickened myself with improperly cooked kidney beans 😳
A necessary implication of the "life begins of conception" view of life, which can only be understood at a fundamental level as the acceptance by an ovum of a spermatozoa to create a zygote. A zygote begins mitotic cell division before implantation in the uterus. This process is called cleavage, and it starts shortly after fertilization. Here's a brief overview of the events:
1. Fertilization:
- Fertilization occurs in the fallopian tube when a sperm fuses with an egg, forming a zygote.
2. Cleavage:
- About 24 to 30 hours after fertilization, the zygote undergoes its first mitotic cell division, forming two identical cells called blastomeres.
- The blastomeres continue to divide mitotically every 12-24 hours, forming 4, 8, 16, and more cells.
- During this process, the total size of the embryo does not increase significantly, as the cells become smaller with each division.
3. Morula stage:
- Around 3 to 4 days after fertilization, the embryo reaches the 16-cell stage and is called a morula.
- The morula continues to divide as it moves through the fallopian tube towards the uterus.
4. Blastocyst stage:
- Around day 5 after fertilization, the embryo develops into a blastocyst, which consists of an inner cell mass (which will form the embryo) and an outer layer of cells called the trophoblast (which will form the placenta).
- The blastocyst hatches from the zona pellucida, a protective covering surrounding the embryo.
5. Implantation:
- Around day 6 to 10 after fertilization, the blastocyst implants into the uterine wall (endometrium).
- Implantation marks the end of the pre-embryonic stage and the beginning of the embryonic stage of development.
Most oral contraceptives derive their effectiveness from blocking ovulation, but a number of other effects come into play in the event that ovulation occurs anyway and a zygote is able to form in the fallopian tubes. The most common mechanism of oral contraception (birth control pills) to prevent implantation is through the combined action of synthetic estrogen and progestin hormones. These hormones work together to prevent pregnancy by:
1. Suppressing ovulation:
- The primary mechanism of action is the suppression of the release of gonadotropins (follicle-stimulating hormone [FSH] and luteinizing hormone [LH]) from the pituitary gland.
- By preventing the LH surge, the pills inhibit ovulation, so no egg is released from the ovaries.
2. Thickening cervical mucus:
- Progestin in the pill thickens the cervical mucus, making it more difficult for sperm to pass through the cervix and reach the fallopian tubes.
3. Thinning the endometrium:
- The hormones in the pill also thin the lining of the uterus (endometrium), making it less receptive to the implantation of a fertilized egg.
- This is the mechanism most directly related to preventing implantation.
4. Altering tubal motility:
- The synthetic hormones may also affect the motility of the fallopian tubes, slowing down the transport of the egg and reducing the likelihood of fertilization.
Different types of oral contraceptives contain varying doses and combinations of synthetic estrogen and progestin, which can affect the prominence of each mechanism. Progestin-only pills (the "mini-pill") primarily work by thickening cervical mucus and may not consistently suppress ovulation, relying more on the other mechanisms to prevent pregnancy.
In common with drugs that take effect after transplantation, oral contraceptions intervene to prevent the continued development of an embryo. Therefore, accepting the absurd premise that a zygote is life merely by reason of its potential future development, the Pill is abortion.
This isn't rocket science. I learned about it in 10th grade at a time when the Pill had only recently been introduced and school officials were totally freaked by the notion that they might be obtained and lead to that greatest of adolescent hazards, premarital sex. I have no idea what the current curriculum covers, but I'm sure it could be covered in an afternoon should the idiots advocating banning contraception to protect the supposed sanctity of live could sit still that long.
Thank you for all that. Lot's of rich detail there and some excellent language we have been hearing more and more of.
"The most common mechanism of oral contraception (birth control pills) to prevent implantation is through the combined action of synthetic estrogen and progestin hormones."
And again,
"3. Thinning the endometrium:
- The hormones in the pill also thin the lining of the uterus (endometrium), making it less receptive to the implantation of a fertilized egg."
We are talking about the Pill here, not the IUD. The Pill is not cited by the anti-abortionists as an abortifacient.
"Therefore, accepting the absurd premise that a zygote is life merely by reason of its potential future development, the Pill is abortion."
What is missing in all this detail and language is the word "pregnancy". And this last statement dodges the term completely. And nobody, not the anti-abortionists at least, claim that the zygote, or the blastocyst, or the ova and any point after the merging of sperm with ova is a human being because of its potential development. To their way of thinking, it is a human being, an unborn child, a baby, the minute that merging occurs.
What we are seeing here and in this post is discrediting the idea that pregnancy begins with the merging of ova and sperm. The anti-abortionists say that pregnancy begins with this merging and this has been the accepted language in medicine and biology ever since it was discovered that this occurs. And this is fairly new knowledge.
The anti-abortionists also claim that IUDs and morning after pills are abortifacients. They do not cite the Pill as an abortifacient, although we can see here -- and this is not the first time I've heard this -- that it can act as an abortifacient.
But wait! We have arguments here that it can't be an abortifacient because abortion by definition terminates a pregnancy and we say, here, that pregnancy does not begin until implantation.
It's time to realize that somewhere the "pro-choice" front has painted itself into a corner using language and convictions that lack substance to defend the moral certainty that should direct defending the right to abortion.
We should all agree,
Birth control includes early term abortifacients. This includes the IUD, the Morning After Pill, the Pill and who knows what else. We should seek new technologies that also prevent implantation.
Abortion is birth control.
Pregnancy begins with the merging of ova and sperm, this represents the cellular foundation of a new individual of any animal that is the result of sexual reproduction. And individuality is a necessary characteristic of all life.
Abortion is not murder, not at any stage of gestation and not at any point before a live, full term birth at the completion of gestation.
Thanks for clarifying. My argument should have been more explicit in that I didn’t state clearly that I’ve granted the premise with fertilization as conception and then traced the following processes necessary to get the resulting cells to lodge firmly in the uterus, which arguably the first point at which some possibility of developing into eventual life, defined as an organism capable of independent existence can occur, even though there are necessary hazards. Interventions that prevent the lodging to occur, oral contraception, by the logic of life beginning at implantation are abortifacient. I also left to the reader to infer that the same rationale by which Red states are banning abortion applies to such methods of contraception. When that reaches the current Supreme Court, the same rationale applied in Dobbs will relegate regulation to the states, and Griswald will fall as the next domino.
"... I’ve granted the premise with fertilization as conception and then traced the following processes necessary to get the resulting cells to lodge firmly in the uterus, which arguably the first point at which some possibility of developing into eventual life, defined as an organism capable of independent existence can occur ..."
I'll rephrase that. I think you are saying that in your argument, you allow that conception begins with fertilization. But I think you also pose implantation as being the first step by which gestation occurs and you also pose the completion of gestation as that point where independent existence can occur.
Once again, not once does the word "pregnancy" enter your discussion. And even though you cite cellular division before implantation, this doesn't seem to have any significance in your arguments. And the notion of "independent existence" is an anti-abortionist narrative. Before the loss of RvW, restrictions on abortion were based on arguments based on "fetal survivability" a medical observation that ignores gestation as a process that needs completion before birth should occur. Current passions about the right to abortion are for cases far later than that barrier.
If we lose Griswald because birth control, in fact, includes functioning as an abortifacient, then abusing the language of what qualifies as gestation or pregnancy certainly deserves blame for it.
99+ % of today's Republicans couldn't read past your first sentence. That's what happens when we sort the parties by education, and then chase anyone with the tiniest bit of either brain or conscience out of the Republican party. We're left with a mob foaming at the mouth, and they're thisclose to gaining full power.
I love the ad about condoms! There needs to be one about vasectomies! If these extremists are willing to do all this to women, there’s really nothing holding them back from going after sperm blockers. After all, there are plenty of politicians to use footage of saying “the point is we need workers and babies.” Plant the seeds in peoples brains because even if they find the ad ludicrous now, they won’t find it so ludicrous as more & more stories come out about insane legislation being put forth by Rs, like forbidding IUDs & Plan B! The point I see most often from likely bots & ignorant Rs is still “women should keep their legs closed” which denies the existence of rape & incest. Imagine a 15 sec ad or digital video… 1st screen is all red, in white lettering - Rs plan to confiscate Plan B. Next few screens: a women sitting in an ER bed with a policeman in the room, a GYN office ultrasound showing, a doctor’s office with doc behind a desk, a police station, a college dorm, a living room, all faces are blurred or cut from screen… by-line says “Mothers, women & children living in states run by Republican legislatures” 1 after the other, all different ages, saying “I wanted to keep my legs closed, but I was force raped & impregnated & my state won’t protect me and I don’t feel free.” Last screen is all red, with white lettering, states stats of rape since Roe fell. Ad ends. Will Rs accuse of fear mongering ? Maybe, but there’s truth to an ad like that & everyone in those states will know it, many just don’t see it. Put a picture in their head & they won’t be able to let it go. Think KY Gov campaign. And if SCOTUS rules against the FDA approved medication … that is really going to wake people up too because that medication is used for non abortion medical needs.
And the republicans that say that, often ARE the rapists,
That would be an excellent ad!!
Sometimes I wonder if anything will wake the American people up, or if enough voters have completely given up on the Democrats and this election is already decided. Was the progress of the last sixty years all dumb luck?
Also, I just read about a lady who said her 88 year old grandmother lived in a town in NY in the 1970s where the store would not sell condoms. She told her grand daughter to be very afraid of this direction they want to go. My comments might sound far out to some, but they are based on historical pasts which some would like to repeat.
One would think that allowing pharmacists to deny selling abortion pills would wake people up. Youngkin vetoed the contraceptive bill in VA because it left out exceptions for religious beliefs. Not only do they want to force their “beliefs” on the population as a whole, but they want businesses forced to provide cover & protection to do so. Business CEOs are so concerned about taxes they can’t see the forest for the trees. They find these extremists without a thought of how they are opening the door for their own headaches, all to presumably avoid taxes.
It is against their business interests. The minute that I heard that Walgreens corporate had decided not to sell mefipristone when state AGs were threatening to sue, even in states where abortion remained legal, I moved all my Rxs to a small independent pharmacy on the other side of town, despite that being an inconvenience for me.
I have several Rxs, 1 of which is very expensive & 1 for one of my dogs which is also expensive; so they lost a chunk of revenue from me. Then when I went to pick up my Rxs from the local pharmacy, I stated the reason I had moved my Rxs, & the pharmacist, whom I know personally, called out; “Yeah, you & about 100 other people.” I was really glad to learn that there were so many other people in my small town that had moral convictions.
Correction - *fUnd these extremists* I still need an edit button & it doesn’t show up when I press the 3 dots🤷🏼♀️
A good rule of thumb, unfortunately, is that statements beginning with 'one would think' tend to turn out the other way, at least in the reality we inhabit now. I'm not quite sure why businesses think they'll do better under a fascist dictatorship. The experience of countries like Russia and Iran is that only a very insular inner circle enjoys wealth and prosperity; everyone else loses. It's like cheering on a massive natural disaster, with destruction all around you, thinking you're going to be the one to profit from it. If that's what the private sector has become then the socialists are right.
don't know how you wade through all this shit everyday, Jessica.
some days all i can do is skim what's happening.
fuck them, indeed.
...with a railroad tie.