[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Things You Thought Today - islander - Feb 8, 2023 - 7:21pm
 
Russia - R_P - Feb 8, 2023 - 7:12pm
 
Ukraine - Beaker - Feb 8, 2023 - 6:47pm
 
Anti-War - R_P - Feb 8, 2023 - 6:11pm
 
Wordle - daily game - Manbird - Feb 8, 2023 - 5:27pm
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Feb 8, 2023 - 4:36pm
 
Name My Band - Isabeau - Feb 8, 2023 - 3:07pm
 
The Abortion Wars - Isabeau - Feb 8, 2023 - 2:56pm
 
Trump - Isabeau - Feb 8, 2023 - 2:44pm
 
Other Medical Stuff - miamizsun - Feb 8, 2023 - 1:19pm
 
Beer - oldviolin - Feb 8, 2023 - 11:40am
 
When I need a Laugh I ... - oldviolin - Feb 8, 2023 - 11:37am
 
Casting from the app.... - jarro - Feb 8, 2023 - 11:11am
 
USA! USA! USA! - R_P - Feb 8, 2023 - 10:35am
 
Politics makes strange bedfellows? ... - miamizsun - Feb 8, 2023 - 10:33am
 
Share a Website you love or hate… - Steve - Feb 8, 2023 - 10:32am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - Beez - Feb 8, 2023 - 9:52am
 
Happy Birthday!!! - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Feb 8, 2023 - 8:31am
 
Earthquake - miamizsun - Feb 7, 2023 - 5:19pm
 
February 2023 Photo Theme - Odd Perspectives - fractalv - Feb 7, 2023 - 4:15pm
 
American History - Isabeau - Feb 7, 2023 - 3:02pm
 
New Music - R_P - Feb 7, 2023 - 12:27pm
 
Nobody panic - sunybuny - Feb 7, 2023 - 7:36am
 
Capitalism and Consumerism... now what? - Red_Dragon - Feb 7, 2023 - 7:36am
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - Bill_J - Feb 7, 2023 - 6:08am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - GeneP59 - Feb 6, 2023 - 7:35pm
 
Terrorist Watch! - Red_Dragon - Feb 6, 2023 - 6:23pm
 
Better Playlist - KurtfromLaQuinta - Feb 6, 2023 - 4:50pm
 
Omitted from Rock and Roll Hall of Fame - oldviolin - Feb 6, 2023 - 1:18pm
 
Earworm - Steely_D - Feb 6, 2023 - 9:59am
 
Messages in a bottle. - Isabeau - Feb 6, 2023 - 9:37am
 
The Dragons' Roost - GeneP59 - Feb 6, 2023 - 7:23am
 
Are you ready for some football? - GeneP59 - Feb 6, 2023 - 7:20am
 
I want an iPhone!!! - GeneP59 - Feb 6, 2023 - 7:16am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - huib - Feb 6, 2023 - 2:54am
 
Live Music - thisbody - Feb 6, 2023 - 1:45am
 
Counting with Pictures - yuel - Feb 6, 2023 - 12:47am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - R_P - Feb 5, 2023 - 12:23pm
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - Feb 5, 2023 - 11:36am
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - oldviolin - Feb 5, 2023 - 9:23am
 
Republican Party - Red_Dragon - Feb 5, 2023 - 9:02am
 
What Did You Do Today? - GeneP59 - Feb 5, 2023 - 8:44am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Feb 5, 2023 - 7:58am
 
Things I Saw Today... - KurtfromLaQuinta - Feb 4, 2023 - 9:17pm
 
RP app for LG OLED TV - jarro - Feb 4, 2023 - 6:59pm
 
Remembering Duane Allman - oldviolin - Feb 4, 2023 - 5:59pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Feb 4, 2023 - 5:07pm
 
Audio Settings - 2020xradio - Feb 4, 2023 - 4:54pm
 
China - Red_Dragon - Feb 4, 2023 - 2:58pm
 
Immigration - R_P - Feb 4, 2023 - 11:56am
 
COVID-19 - Red_Dragon - Feb 4, 2023 - 10:53am
 
Annoying stuff. not things that piss you off, just annoyi... - Coaxial - Feb 4, 2023 - 9:31am
 
It's the economy stupid. - Isabeau - Feb 4, 2023 - 4:07am
 
Linking to "What's Playing" - ladron - Feb 3, 2023 - 6:41pm
 
Out the window - GeneP59 - Feb 3, 2023 - 2:17pm
 
TV shows you watch - kcar - Feb 3, 2023 - 1:31pm
 
Love is... - Isabeau - Feb 3, 2023 - 1:12pm
 
Music To Get A Haircut To - Red_Dragon - Feb 3, 2023 - 11:58am
 
R.I.P. Jeff Beck - black321 - Feb 3, 2023 - 11:53am
 
Eclectic Sound-Drops - Peyote - Feb 3, 2023 - 9:54am
 
Outstanding Covers - miamizsun - Feb 3, 2023 - 3:54am
 
Evolution! - R_P - Feb 2, 2023 - 5:29pm
 
Guns - westslope - Feb 2, 2023 - 3:42pm
 
Canada - westslope - Feb 2, 2023 - 3:19pm
 
RightWingNutZ - Isabeau - Feb 2, 2023 - 1:18pm
 
More reggae, less Marley please - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Feb 2, 2023 - 10:30am
 
Podcast recommendations??? - marko86 - Feb 2, 2023 - 8:51am
 
Let's build a city - Red_Dragon - Feb 2, 2023 - 8:46am
 
How to Sync to Current Feed? - otto802 - Feb 2, 2023 - 8:13am
 
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see - Antigone - Feb 2, 2023 - 7:13am
 
Nuclear power - saviour or scourge? - Steve - Feb 2, 2023 - 6:40am
 
Work - sunybuny - Feb 2, 2023 - 5:53am
 
Race in America - R_P - Feb 1, 2023 - 8:42pm
 
NASA & other news from space - Steely_D - Feb 1, 2023 - 8:03pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - Steely_D - Feb 1, 2023 - 7:50pm
 
Index » Regional/Local » USA/Canada » The Abortion Wars Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 16, 17, 18  Next
Post to this Topic
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 19, 2022 - 3:50am

 thisbody wrote:


Seems you're lying to yourself as your media prompt you to keep going. Otherwise, it'd be hard to stand, I suppose.
What's "falling apart" in your eyes has never been there, me tends to think, radically.


You don't look very radical to me, more like confused.

Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 18, 2022 - 4:11pm

@RBReich : Thanks to the filibuster, 41 Senate Republicans representing just 21% of the country are blocking abortion rights, clean energy, health care, and basic investments supported by the vast majority of Americans. This is not how democracy is supposed to work.
thisbody

thisbody Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 17, 2022 - 4:28pm

 Steely_D wrote:
Seriously that post makes no sense. You’re just mad, bro. Enjoy.

While I might be somewhat off-topic... really? - So, tell us, what is it the world needs from America right now? It shouldn't be hard for you to tell, as you are such a superior MAGA nation, of course...
My madness seems to serve me, as the days of Coca-Cola and Rock'n'Roll have gone by.
So, what will be next from your beloved ministry of democratic marketing? - Will it be "Duck And Cover", again?

Meanwhile... to call you back to reality:
Have you had an abortion? The border guard in California asks the Australian woman on her way to Canada during the stopover.
California! Not Alabama!
Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 17, 2022 - 4:11pm

 thisbody wrote:


Seems you're lying to yourself as your media prompt you to keep going. Otherwise, it'd be hard to stand, I suppose.
What's "falling apart" in your eyes has never been there, me tends to think, radically.


Seriously that post makes no sense. You’re just mad, bro. Enjoy.


thisbody

thisbody Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 17, 2022 - 4:06pm

 Steely_D wrote:
This has got nothing to do with most Americans, so your screed is nonsense. 

There are some Americans who are against abortion or whatever, and their strategies have included infiltrating positions of power to change/create/rescind laws allowing abortion that most people want.
This doesn’t mean that society isn’t free, or that it’s now â€œa bunch” of fundamentalists (a vague term at best). It does mean that there are that sort of people - a minority - who did a dance around the complacent, and fooled the naive, and managed to pull some levers that they hope will force others into doing what they want.

That requires action. All the folks who feel differently need to recognize their numbers, protest and vote and say out loud what they believe in so the minority opinion doesn’t control the nation. But your Chicken Little garment-rending about how it’s all falling apart…well, it just means you need to go decaf.


Seems you're lying to yourself as your media prompt you to keep going. Otherwise, it'd be hard to stand, I suppose.
What's "falling apart" in your eyes has never been there, me tends to think, radically.

Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 17, 2022 - 3:16pm

 thisbody wrote:

... and please, spare me comments starting with, "This has got nothing to do with X, Y, Z."

Umrika is shapeshifting herself, far too quickly for that one, and Umrikans (most likely) haven't begun noticing this yet, as ever-proud they were born to save the world from anything undemocratic by implying very undemocratic means to other nations.

The question of abortion can only arise in a free society. Umrika has successfully shown, they are not that. Instead, they are made to be a bunch of fundamentalists, with true monetary and power intentions hidden behind a religious veil.


This has got nothing to do with most Americans, so your screed is nonsense. 

There are some Americans who are against abortion or whatever, and their strategies have included infiltrating positions of power to change/create/rescind laws allowing abortion that most people want.
This doesn’t mean that society isn’t free, or that it’s now â€œa bunch” of fundamentalists (a vague term at best). It does mean that there are that sort of people - a minority - who did a dance around the complacent, and fooled the naive, and managed to pull some levers that they hope will force others into doing what they want.

That requires action. All the folks who feel differently need to recognize their numbers, protest and vote and say out loud what they believe in so the minority opinion doesn’t control the nation. But your Chicken Little garment-rending about how it’s all falling apart…well, it just means you need to go decaf.



thisbody

thisbody Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 17, 2022 - 12:33pm

 Steely_D wrote:
Interesting opinion piece in the NYT today where this same idea is referenced obliquely - but there’s an excellent distinction between conscientious objectors (who won’t provide what the patient wants out of conscience, so deniers of what someone’s entitled to) versus conscientious providers (who break the law to give the patient what they need, regardless). 

FTA: The American legal regime that governs medical conscience is broken. 
While conscientious providers find virtually no refuge in the conscience clauses that are codifiedin almost every state, refusers are protected almost categorically. And just about all of these conscience laws are reserved for denials of care. 
Conscientious refusers are often shielded from being fired, disciplined, held liable or found guilty for violating standards of care and endangering patients, even in serious ways. 
Conscientious refusers usually don’t have to tell patients about their options, or help them to access care elsewhere. 

But few protections exist for doctors who have equally conscientious reasons to provide abortions.

The middle ages are here again!

Could be Pakistan, or Afghanistan, or Iran. Not to mention Saudi Arabia, as today's ever more popular heads-off regime, shapeshifting from failed to friendliest state ever! - It is because, y'all know, sanctions we imposed are must!


... and please, spare me comments starting with, "This has got nothing to do with X, Y, Z."

Umrika is shapeshifting herself, far too quickly for that one, and Umrikans (most likely) haven't begun noticing this yet, as ever-proud they were born to save the world from anything undemocratic by imposing quite undemocratic means on other nations.

The question of abortion can only arise in a free society. Umrika has successfully shown, they are not that. Instead, they are made to be a bunch of fundamentalists, with true monetary and power intentions hidden behind a religious veil. More interested in selfish financial, and power gains.
(Lowest chakra, base of spine. Spirituality=None, whatsoever. Completely materialistic society, as we've known for long, and not interested in the interests of other living beings. Egotistical to the utmost...)


Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 17, 2022 - 10:52am

 Steely_D wrote:

It would take a lot, but I’d suggest that ALL women’s health care providers should just go about their business, without modification. What happens next? Prosecution (tying up the courts), imprisonment (really?), loss of license (more likely) and then - what happens to women’s health care in general in the nation? Not that it’s already great.

But just like police have to give up on arresting EVERYONE that takes a toke in states where it’s illegal, if provision of abortion is so widespread that it’s impossible to enforce the law practically…



Interesting opinion piece in the NYT today where this same idea is referenced obliquely - but there’s an excellent distinction between conscientious objectors (who won’t provide what the patient wants out of conscience, so deniers of what someone’s entitled to) versus conscientious providers (who break the law to give the patient what they need, regardless). 

FTA: The American legal regime that governs medical conscience is broken. 
While conscientious providers find virtually no refuge in the conscience clauses that are codifiedin almost every state, refusers are protected almost categorically. And just about all of these conscience laws are reserved for denials of care. 
Conscientious refusers are often shielded from being fired, disciplined, held liable or found guilty for violating standards of care and endangering patients, even in serious ways. 
Conscientious refusers usually don’t have to tell patients about their options, or help them to access care elsewhere. 

But few protections exist for doctors who have equally conscientious reasons to provide abortions.


Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Jul 15, 2022 - 7:48am

Texas conservatives have a plan to get around DAs who won't enforce abortion laws
westslope

westslope Avatar

Location: BC sage brush steppe


Posted: Jul 12, 2022 - 11:45am

 rgio wrote:

To me, the follow-up study done a few years ago provides strong support for the original assertions.  It's possible that the numbers benefit from a coincidence of timing and other policies, norms, etc... but it's hard to completely ignore a very high correlation using decades of data.  


Agreed.

In order for people to live well, be at least moderately 'successful' in life, the amount of human capital that must be invested in one individual is bigger than at any other time in human history.
rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 12, 2022 - 11:05am

 R_P wrote:
To me, the follow-up study done a few years ago provides strong support for the original assertions.  It's possible that the numbers benefit from a coincidence of timing and other policies, norms, etc... but it's hard to completely ignore a very high correlation using decades of data.  

R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Jul 12, 2022 - 10:58am

 westslope wrote:
John R. Lott Jr. was one who did not see a correlation.  From what I recall, some of his work debunked later on.  Was it bad data or bad modelling, I do not recall off hand.  

In passing, Lott, Jr. was a highly polarizing figure in the economics profession.

He has been touted in the Guns thread in the past...

westslope

westslope Avatar

Location: BC sage brush steppe


Posted: Jul 12, 2022 - 10:49am

 R_P wrote:
John R. Lott Jr. was one who did not see a correlation.  From what I recall, some of his work was debunked later on.  Was it bad data or bad modelling, I do not recall off hand.  

In passing, Lott, Jr. was a highly polarizing figure in the economics profession. 


westslope

westslope Avatar

Location: BC sage brush steppe


Posted: Jul 12, 2022 - 10:47am

 rgio wrote:

.....  
As an aside: I worked on a project in a prior life with Levitt and their work was ridiculously priced, and ultimately delivered no value.  Good work if you can get it.

Yeah, celebrity can be a bad criteria for hiring economic consultants.  Or engaging anybody.

In my discussions with those who consult,  often the clients have absolutely no clue and don't even know what questions to ask.  

Not surprising.  47% of American voters voted for Marxist-Keynesian fiscal policy in the last presidential election.  Most financial pundits have no idea as to what demand and supply actually means in economics. Most use those terms as if they were synonyms for consumption and production.  

Annual 'balanced budgets' are what 'real people' want.  Macroeconomists never recommend annual balanced budgets.   

Here in Canada, our previous economics-educated prime minister Stephan Harper was popular with the people because he did the exact opposite of what the professional economic policy consensus would have prescribed on a number of issues.

I often run into private sector entrepreneurs who delude themselves into thinking they know a lot about economics.  They do not. 

R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Jul 11, 2022 - 6:50pm

 westslope wrote:

Is everybody here familiar with the literature that examines the effect of legalized abortion on crime?   

Steven Levitt at University of Chicago is one of the better known proponents.  He co-authored the book Freakonomics.  


Some see a correlation, some don't.

rgio

rgio Avatar

Location: West Jersey
Gender: Male


Posted: Jul 11, 2022 - 4:48pm

 westslope wrote:

Is everybody here familiar with the literature that examines the effect of legalized abortion on crime?   

Steven Levitt at University of Chicago is one of the better known proponents.  He co-authored the book Freakonomics.  


Smerconish has been talking about it again since the SCOTUS leak...

The link didn't work correctly...but he starts at about 2:50 on it.  
As an aside: I worked on a project in a prior life with Levitt and their work was ridiculously priced, and ultimately delivered no value.  Good work if you can get it.
westslope

westslope Avatar

Location: BC sage brush steppe


Posted: Jul 11, 2022 - 4:14pm

Is everybody here familiar with the literature that examines the effect of legalized abortion on crime?   

Steven Levitt at University of Chicago is one of the better known proponents.  He co-authored the book Freakonomics.  
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Jul 11, 2022 - 3:58pm

U.S. Health Department Says Doctors Must Offer Abortion If Mother's Life Is At Risk
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Jun 30, 2022 - 11:31am

Privacy in the Wake of Dobbs: How Safe Are Your Medical Records and Digital Data If Prosecutors or Bounty Hunters from No-Choice States Come Knocking?
(...) Per the NYT, which discusses the Texas bounty statute; the basic concept applies to similar initiatives now being mulled by other no-choice states:
The new law in Texas effectively banning most abortions has ignited widespread controversy and debate, in part because of the mechanism it uses to enforce the restrictions: deputizing ordinary people to sue those involved in performing abortions and giving them a financial incentive to do so.

The law establishes a kind of bounty system. If these vigilante plaintiffs are successful, the law allows them to collect cash judgments of $10,000 — and their legal fees — from those they sue. If they lose, they do not have to pay the defendants’ legal costs.

…

The enforcement provision has generated backing from those seeking to limit abortion rights but confusion and criticism among supporters of abortion rights.

“When the law first came out and I was reading it, I thought I was missing something,” said Mary Ziegler, a professor at the Florida State University College of Law who specializes in the history of reproductive law. “It almost seemed like anyone could sue anyone — and that didn’t seem right. But it was. It really is that extraordinary.”
Now, the incentives the Texas law and the model legislation establish is based on the same concept behind class action suits, which incentivize attorneys to pursue certain cases. But it’s not altogether unusual in other contexts. IIRC, California has a consumer protection that allows for similar third party suits. These provisions that incentivize third parties to purse legal claims produce an in terrorem effect. A state may pass a statute but doesn’t have to expend resources on enforcement; it relies on third parties to produce results. that accord with the policy preferences of state legislators.

What is unusual is that these state abortion statutes essentially incentivize stalking.

Isabeau

Isabeau Avatar

Location: sou' tex
Gender: Female


Posted: Jun 29, 2022 - 3:02pm

 islander wrote:


Finally, you've figured his fiendish plan, foiling his future desire for any fun.


Spidey sense picking up on those men who tend to word-salad justify forced birth, with zero science and biology to back them up, tend to be those 

                  who aren't getting any action and want women punished for having sex. Because its not with them.

 
Men with game and Live partners understand full well the repercussions of sex. Donnie's Dingleberries think they oughta just be able to 'grab' genitalia when they want it without consequences. It's the clitoral-friendly crowd that will win this one.




Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 16, 17, 18  Next