• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Social progress rollbacks

"It prevents rational discussion!" -people who responded to the epithet, but ignored everything else about the post



"Physician, heal thyself"
 
Argumemnon said:
Alright then. Stop chastising others for following your example, then.
Click to expand...

I've never chastised anyone for having fun. And you're in no position to lecture me about this either, given that when you want to try to change someone's behavior, you don't do it by modelling what you want them to do. Your advice was hypocritical from the start, trying to turn around now and accuse me of hypocrisy is pathetic.
 
Ziggurat said:
I've never chastised anyone for having fun.
Click to expand...

Not for having fun, for engaging in behaviour that destroys "any possibility of a rational discussion of contentious issues.", to quote a poster you agreed with.

And you're in no position to lecture me about this either, given that when you want to try to change someone's behavior, you don't do it by modelling what you want them to do. Your advice was hypocritical from the start, trying to turn around now and accuse me of hypocrisy is pathetic.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Of course when you want people to act a certain way in an activity you're participating in, it's likely to impress them a lot more if you act this way as well. There's no hypocrisy on my part, here, for merely pointing this out.
 
So Ohio might ban abortions after 20 weeks. That will bring them closer to Germany, where abortion is illegal after 12 weeks.

Bunch of Nazis! :mad:
 
Argumemnon said:
Nonsense. Of course when you want people to act a certain way in an activity you're participating in, it's likely to impress them a lot more if you act this way as well.
Click to expand...

And yet, that's not what you do.
 
Ziggurat said:
Model the behavior you want from others.
Click to expand...

You're a bit confused, here. I'm pointing out that YOU are not a model of the behaviour YOU are asking from your opponents. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of YOUR position, not offering my own.

And even if I did, you seem to have, ahem, forgotten to address the rest of my post.
 
Argumemnon said:
You're a bit confused, here. I'm pointing out that YOU are not a model of the behaviour YOU are asking from your opponents. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of YOUR position, not offering my own.
Click to expand...

You've offered your own hypocrisy elsewhere. I haven't forgotten. And I didn't ask for any behavior out of anyone in this thread, I merely noted what behavior was already taking place.
 
funny how when i was a kid, we always genuinely believed that the u.s., was light years ahead if the rest of us. With hindsight it has become totally apparent that it was just a snow job.
They have always been at least several decades behind the rest of the western world.
 
mikado said:
funny how when i was a kid, we always genuinely believed that the u.s., was light years ahead if the rest of us. With hindsight it has become totally apparent that it was just a snow job.
They have always been at least several decades behind the rest of the western world.
Click to expand...

Indeed. We're far too permissive on abortion rights, and should adopt some of the standard European restrictions.
 
I Am The Scum said:
Am I wrong?
Click to expand...

You're exemplifying the exact behavior you've condemned.

So you're projecting.

Why don't you address the relevant parts of that post or the numerous other posts rather than making a drive-by comment about a single snipped line?

That way you'd be contributing to a rational discussion of substantive issues, as you claim to want.
 
Ziggurat said:
So Ohio might ban abortions after 20 weeks. That will bring them closer to Germany, where abortion is illegal after 12 weeks.
Click to expand...

While I have some disagreements with Germany's laws in this regard, there are some notable differences that put this in a different context.

Germany is way better about reproductive education. Germany has public health care. Germany's public health care system covers abortions. Germany allows abortions afterwards in cases where the physical or psychological health of the mother is at stake.

Germany 2010: 6.1 abortions per 1000 women
United States 2011: "less than" 17 abortions per 1000 women

I could probably zero in a little better with more research if needed, but it's safe to say we are running a rate of 250% of the abortions (per capita) compared to Germany, which seems to indicate a huge difference in social behavior related to reproductive education.

We do not have public universal health care (what we have strains the definition even with the 'public' part dropped).

Our health care system almost universally rejects providing assistance for women's reproductive health. It almost seems like the only protections left have to do with the maintenance and healthy functioning of female genitals. One does not have to wonder for very long what demographic might be singularly concerned with that specific issue.

I'm not sure the Ohio Viability Law has exceptions, but I haven't read it thoroughly.

Bunch of Nazis! :mad:
Click to expand...

Providing an abortion for a German woman (i.e. "Aryan") carried the death penalty. Exceptions existed when 'undesirable' racial mixing was a factor or the fetus was deformed or disabled. There were also restrictions against contraceptives. There was a whole host of laws meant to encourage something similar to the "quiverfull" movement we see today. Well, at least when it came to large, healthy, and productive German families.
 
Last edited:
Delphic Oracle said:
Providing an abortion for a German woman (i.e. "Aryan") carried the death penalty. Exceptions existed when 'undesirable' racial mixing was a factor or the fetus was deformed or disabled. There were also restrictions against contraceptives. There was a whole host of laws meant to encourage something similar to the "quiverfull" movement we see today. Well, at least when it came to large, healthy, and productive German families.
Click to expand...

The main connection being that in the Third Reich and the Conservative South, the only person who didn't seem to have a say in whether she got an abortion or not was the woman. If the fetus was an undesireable, it was mandatory; if it was Aryan, the mother was forced to complete the term. Both policies are anti-choice.


ETA: of interest, there is actually a closer parallel between the Third Reich and Conservative South than this describes. The South had a casual policy about negro abortions during the same period they had a death penalty for white abortions. Not surprisingly, the US Anti Miscegenation Laws are known to be the template for the German Racial Hygiene Laws and Wannsee definitions for Final Solution.
 
Last edited:
Delphic Oracle said:
You're exemplifying the exact behavior you've condemned.

So you're projecting.

Why don't you address the relevant parts of that post or the numerous other posts rather than making a drive-by comment about a single snipped line?

That way you'd be contributing to a rational discussion of substantive issues, as you claim to want.
Click to expand...

It makes more sense to patch a pot hole than to ask a hundred drivers to go around it. I'm pointing out a repetitive communication error, in the hopes that it will not be corrected.

I asked you if I am wrong. You did not answer that question.

This is a reliable method of destroying any possibility of a rational discussion of contentious issues.
Click to expand...

If this is incorrect, I'd really like to know.
 
Last edited:
blutoski said:
The answer is tied to the concerns about cabinet appointments. If a state chooses to violate the constitution, the federal government can also choose to ignore complaints about it.

Enforcement is at the discretion of the Attorney General. If Sessions becomes AG, it's highly probable that he will not enforce unconstitutional laws at the state level.

I would include seeing the creation/reenactment/enforcement of unconstitutional state level antiabortion, segregationist, theocratic, and anti miscegenation laws as possible at this point.
Click to expand...
If the SCOTUS has said that you cannot make a certain sort of law (i.e. Roe v Wade, Obergefell) and a state tries to make exactly that sort of law, how can that new law be taken to the SCOTUS for a possible reversal? Didn't they ALREADY decide?

I get what you are saying about ignoring the court and the AG not enforcing the court ruling, such that states can make whatever laws they damn well like, but I'm confused about how this works with SCOTUS.
 
sylvan8798 said:
If the SCOTUS has said that you cannot make a certain sort of law (i.e. Roe v Wade, Obergefell) and a state tries to make exactly that sort of law, how can that new law be taken to the SCOTUS for a possible reversal? Didn't they ALREADY decide?

I get what you are saying about ignoring the court and the AG not enforcing the court ruling, such that states can make whatever laws they damn well like, but I'm confused about how this works with SCOTUS.
Click to expand...


Well, three ways:

1. The current SCOTUS can argue that the past SCOTUS ruling was incorrect OR

2. that it was incomplete, and new clarifications about timeframes are required. Tor example, RvW originally restricted to 3rd trimester, but a challenge PPvC scrapped that in favour of 'viability'. Perhaps a future challenge could re-estimate 'viability' as 'the moment of conception'. Who knows? Corporations are people now. A motivated SCOTUS will find a sellable story.

3. Congress and POTUS can pass a constitutional amendment, which SCOTUS would dutifully enforce in their interpretation of any new challenges. This is absolutely within the realm of possibility.



And that's just abortion. There are congresscritters and an Attorney General appointee who are hostile to pornography and contraception. Plenty of work to be done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom