I just listened to both parts of the podcast recommended in this column - the Viability Line. I am astounded. i studied Roe v. Wade in law school in the 1980’s. I researched and wrote articles about reproductive rights as a college professor. I fought for women’s rights for decades. I NEVER knew this about how the concept of viability became such a big part of the legal rules used by the courts. No wonder the anti-choice people have been using it against women for 50 years. I hope lots of people will listen to these podcasts and realize that it has to be women who make the decisions about their own bodies. It is far too emotionally and philosophically complex for other people to impose their beliefs on pregnant women.
I am also a paying subscriber to Erin Reid’s Erin in the Morning Substack newsletter, and hers is like yours except it’s not about reproductive rights but trans rights (and the GOP assault on both). Her latest post is also about Missouri, which adds more fuel to my belief that trans rights and reproductive rights are the same issue: bodily autonomy and Republicans restricting them against the will of their voters.
At its heart, this is about theocracy: forcing everyone to live by one group's interpretation of a faith document. It goes beyond reproductive rights and trans rights. They will absolutely remove no-fault divorce. They will outlaw all forms of birth control. They will restrict a woman's ability to own assets. They will outlaw homosexuality and aggressively enforce their theocratic laws with prison time. I know different issues motivate people. It's hard to believe we could all be forced to live by Mike Johnson's interpretation of the Bible. But subjugating and controlling EVERY body (except theirs, of course) is their goal. They start with one or two sets of issues and work toward total control from there.
I know that theocracy gets bandied around a lot, but there’s no basis in the Christian Bible (which includes the Jewish Tanakh) to oppose abortion or trans people (Galatians 3:28). We have a fact sheet on TexasChristians.org that shows this. We give too much credence to Mike Johnson’s beliefs that he wants to impose on others by assuming otherwise and attributing his and his ilk’s policy positions to well-founded doctrine. Even Catholic ‘tradition’ has been all over the place historically.
Not to mention that the Talmud has eight genders(!), albeit on a two-gender axis. So saying there are only two genders is akin to saying there are only two blood types. Allow me to explain:
The eight genders of the Talmud are:
1. Male
2. Female
3. Both
4. Neither
5. M->F naturally
6. M->F artificially
7. F->M naturally
8. F->M artificially
#5 and #7 describe certain intersex people, and #6 and #8 could describe trans people. The rabbis who wrote that particular section of the Talmud proposed that Adam (as in Adam and Eve) was #3.
So you see, there's room for trans and intersex people in Judaic doctrine as well, and why a narrow christian [nationalistic] interpretation does both Christianity and Judaism a disservice.
Hi Samuel. Unfortunately, people often believe what they think is correct regardless. I've tried to convince some ultraorthodox that Trans people exist. 🙃 was the result. We ended one talk with total logical insanity. It's quite possible that I used
'My Jewish Learning ' as one of my defense since it's one of my reads.
I don’t attribute his positions to well-founded doctrine. He interprets the Bible however he likes (whether it actually says what he wants to enforce or not), and his forcing everyone to live under that doctrine is theocratic. Most theocratic positions exist to protect their definition of male power, not to advance any Biblical ideology. (The same is true in countries that operate under Muslim sharia law.) Christians should be appalled by this (as are you and TX Christians; as am I.) By calling this theocratic, I mean no insult to Christians. In my view, Christian Nationalists are the insult to Christians.
I know. It’s make-it-up-as-you-go-along but even on the pro-choice side many people conflate the two. I just wish the media would ask the question, “Now what is that based on?” Too many people in Texas think they have to vote Republican or otherwise they’re going to hell. If we could disabuse even a small percentage of those people we might be able to change the politics of the state.
Christians made this problem. Much of the responsibility(not all) falls on us to fix it. I don’t blame anyone for being furious because of it.
Having grown up in the evangelical environment, I can only say the following to the "vote R or go to hell" mentality: It is really hard to leave these churches once one is enmeshed in them. They are designed to become the center of one's social universe. A person loses every friend they have if they choose to buck the leader, question the party line, or leave.
What you and TX Christians are doing is vital, Kim, to give people who choose to leave these churches but want Christian fellowship a place to land. It's isolating, hurtful and demeaning to leave. I know because I've done it. I wish more people would look to groups like TX Christians for hope and guidance. You are doing what Jesus would do.
I wish every Christian thought like you. What confounds me, and probably others, is that if someone thinks, "If I don't do X, I'm going to hell," the whole statement seems problematic, not just whatever 'X' is. I think it's hard for the nonreligious to believe that it would be any easier to change someone else's 'X' than to get them to drop the whole thing altogether. And maybe that's where the skepticism comes from? But whatever achieves the necessary results; we need every strategy available and then some.
The funny thing is, setting aside the theological debate over Hades, Gehenna, Sheol, etc. (some of these actual unpleasant places in the first century), what Jesus says gets you tossed in the ‘eternal flame’ in Matthew 25:31-46 has nothing to do with sex or abortion. It reads like the GOP platform--not taking care of the sick or oppressing immigrants. In Luke it’s neglect of those living in poverty.
Thank you for the compliment, Zach, but I worry I’m repeating myself and am on the verge of acting like those ranting Old Testament prophets, one of whom was purported to sling poo.
They are very much connected, we should, in a fair society, support both. Trans-rights are human rights. Republicans know this, but hate everyone not white, male, and faux-christian like themselves. The phony 'feminist' commenters who claim trans-rights threaten women's rights really piss me off. I always tell them: "I'm a woman, and they don't threaten me. Feminism is about "Equal rights" not 'superior, rights' and shitting on the next group that needs their rights acknowledged, means you are just as bad as those oppressing you.
Not only that, but being trans undermines sexists’ view of gender. I mean, if someone assigned male at birth feels more at home as a woman or vice versa, doesn’t that negate any gender hierarchy if one is not locked in to their gender at birth (not to mention those who choose not to subscribe to the binary)?
I love that non-binary people dare to challenge the status quo , they make me realize that I had been programmed to accept a very narrow view, of a very large spectrum of existence.
I just listened to both parts of the podcast recommended in this column - the Viability Line. I am astounded. i studied Roe v. Wade in law school in the 1980’s. I researched and wrote articles about reproductive rights as a college professor. I fought for women’s rights for decades. I NEVER knew this about how the concept of viability became such a big part of the legal rules used by the courts. No wonder the anti-choice people have been using it against women for 50 years. I hope lots of people will listen to these podcasts and realize that it has to be women who make the decisions about their own bodies. It is far too emotionally and philosophically complex for other people to impose their beliefs on pregnant women.
As a MO resident, I appreciate you covering all of this. You're a national treasure
Glad to be a paying subscriber of your invaluable work!
I am also a paying subscriber to Erin Reid’s Erin in the Morning Substack newsletter, and hers is like yours except it’s not about reproductive rights but trans rights (and the GOP assault on both). Her latest post is also about Missouri, which adds more fuel to my belief that trans rights and reproductive rights are the same issue: bodily autonomy and Republicans restricting them against the will of their voters.
At its heart, this is about theocracy: forcing everyone to live by one group's interpretation of a faith document. It goes beyond reproductive rights and trans rights. They will absolutely remove no-fault divorce. They will outlaw all forms of birth control. They will restrict a woman's ability to own assets. They will outlaw homosexuality and aggressively enforce their theocratic laws with prison time. I know different issues motivate people. It's hard to believe we could all be forced to live by Mike Johnson's interpretation of the Bible. But subjugating and controlling EVERY body (except theirs, of course) is their goal. They start with one or two sets of issues and work toward total control from there.
I know that theocracy gets bandied around a lot, but there’s no basis in the Christian Bible (which includes the Jewish Tanakh) to oppose abortion or trans people (Galatians 3:28). We have a fact sheet on TexasChristians.org that shows this. We give too much credence to Mike Johnson’s beliefs that he wants to impose on others by assuming otherwise and attributing his and his ilk’s policy positions to well-founded doctrine. Even Catholic ‘tradition’ has been all over the place historically.
Not to mention that the Talmud has eight genders(!), albeit on a two-gender axis. So saying there are only two genders is akin to saying there are only two blood types. Allow me to explain:
The eight genders of the Talmud are:
1. Male
2. Female
3. Both
4. Neither
5. M->F naturally
6. M->F artificially
7. F->M naturally
8. F->M artificially
#5 and #7 describe certain intersex people, and #6 and #8 could describe trans people. The rabbis who wrote that particular section of the Talmud proposed that Adam (as in Adam and Eve) was #3.
So you see, there's room for trans and intersex people in Judaic doctrine as well, and why a narrow christian [nationalistic] interpretation does both Christianity and Judaism a disservice.
Here's more: https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-eight-genders-in-the-talmud/
❤️👏👏👏
I love this, Samuel. Thank you for sharing it.
I did not know this. Thanks, Samuel. I can already hear thousands of heads exploding at learning of this.
Hi Samuel. Unfortunately, people often believe what they think is correct regardless. I've tried to convince some ultraorthodox that Trans people exist. 🙃 was the result. We ended one talk with total logical insanity. It's quite possible that I used
'My Jewish Learning ' as one of my defense since it's one of my reads.
That's weird, because the source of My Jewish Learning is the Talmud itself, so…
Then again, I'm reform, so the Ultraorthodox probably don't consider me Jewish. 🤷🏻
I don’t attribute his positions to well-founded doctrine. He interprets the Bible however he likes (whether it actually says what he wants to enforce or not), and his forcing everyone to live under that doctrine is theocratic. Most theocratic positions exist to protect their definition of male power, not to advance any Biblical ideology. (The same is true in countries that operate under Muslim sharia law.) Christians should be appalled by this (as are you and TX Christians; as am I.) By calling this theocratic, I mean no insult to Christians. In my view, Christian Nationalists are the insult to Christians.
I know. It’s make-it-up-as-you-go-along but even on the pro-choice side many people conflate the two. I just wish the media would ask the question, “Now what is that based on?” Too many people in Texas think they have to vote Republican or otherwise they’re going to hell. If we could disabuse even a small percentage of those people we might be able to change the politics of the state.
Christians made this problem. Much of the responsibility(not all) falls on us to fix it. I don’t blame anyone for being furious because of it.
Having grown up in the evangelical environment, I can only say the following to the "vote R or go to hell" mentality: It is really hard to leave these churches once one is enmeshed in them. They are designed to become the center of one's social universe. A person loses every friend they have if they choose to buck the leader, question the party line, or leave.
What you and TX Christians are doing is vital, Kim, to give people who choose to leave these churches but want Christian fellowship a place to land. It's isolating, hurtful and demeaning to leave. I know because I've done it. I wish more people would look to groups like TX Christians for hope and guidance. You are doing what Jesus would do.
I wish every Christian thought like you. What confounds me, and probably others, is that if someone thinks, "If I don't do X, I'm going to hell," the whole statement seems problematic, not just whatever 'X' is. I think it's hard for the nonreligious to believe that it would be any easier to change someone else's 'X' than to get them to drop the whole thing altogether. And maybe that's where the skepticism comes from? But whatever achieves the necessary results; we need every strategy available and then some.
The funny thing is, setting aside the theological debate over Hades, Gehenna, Sheol, etc. (some of these actual unpleasant places in the first century), what Jesus says gets you tossed in the ‘eternal flame’ in Matthew 25:31-46 has nothing to do with sex or abortion. It reads like the GOP platform--not taking care of the sick or oppressing immigrants. In Luke it’s neglect of those living in poverty.
Thank you for the compliment, Zach, but I worry I’m repeating myself and am on the verge of acting like those ranting Old Testament prophets, one of whom was purported to sling poo.
They are very much connected, we should, in a fair society, support both. Trans-rights are human rights. Republicans know this, but hate everyone not white, male, and faux-christian like themselves. The phony 'feminist' commenters who claim trans-rights threaten women's rights really piss me off. I always tell them: "I'm a woman, and they don't threaten me. Feminism is about "Equal rights" not 'superior, rights' and shitting on the next group that needs their rights acknowledged, means you are just as bad as those oppressing you.
Not only that, but being trans undermines sexists’ view of gender. I mean, if someone assigned male at birth feels more at home as a woman or vice versa, doesn’t that negate any gender hierarchy if one is not locked in to their gender at birth (not to mention those who choose not to subscribe to the binary)?
I love that non-binary people dare to challenge the status quo , they make me realize that I had been programmed to accept a very narrow view, of a very large spectrum of existence.