A Dark Fourth of July

Texts, web searches about abortion have been used to prosecute women

https://archive.ph/WYkGL

In my state, Wisconsin, once Roe was overturned we went back to the laws that were previously on the books. Those laws were written prior to 1900. Our governor (a liberal) has tried to get the state legislature to protect women's right to choose, but our state legislature is heavily conservative and refuses to budge. The consequence in my state is that no abortion can take place unless the pregnancy itself presents a direct and imminent threat to the life of the mother. I don't believe that there is any exception for victims of rape or incest.

But when the law is written this way, it leads to more death. Ectopic pregnancies present a threat of death to the mother -- but our doctors are being told that they can't remove the pregnancy until life-threatening, imminent danger already has begun. That means that a woman can get an ectopic pregnancy removed, but only after it has presented her with serious complications that can (even with treatment!) lead to death and infertility. What's more, our doctors are being told not to treat cancer in pregnant women because treating cancer can threaten the life of the child -- and because it's the cancer, not the pregnancy, which is threatening the life of the mother, this doesn't count as something that qualifies a woman for an abortion.

Personally, I find these positions to be quite disgusting. We live in a world where a significant percentage of underage girls are sexually assaulted every year. In some states, they are being forced to carry pregnancy from these assaults to term -- something which, for a very young girl, can certainly threaten the life of both the mother and the child anyway.

For those of you who are pro-life, I'm not going to judge you for your position, but do keep in mind that legislating a pro-life position in some cases looks very much like a pro-death position, as in the cases I've written of in this post.

I just want to point out, regarding Br. John's post about texts- that's vastly different than a Period Tracker. You don't know how a period tracker is being used, but you can tell what someone's intent is if they are text messaging. Those are their real thoughts. Same is true of google searches.

Yes, but it is information on their condition at the time. And that's literally all prosecution cares about. The more information they can get that makes you LOOK guilty. The more they can make it look like a trial would go badly for you. The more likely people are to plea and not risk heavier sentencing. Especially the poorer segments of the population who can't afford an attorney. This stuff would still get subpoenaed 100% of the time.

What peecentage of abortions are actually for víctims of sexual abuse and/or women/unborn child in legitimate danger?

I feel that there is some sort of middle ground to be found. For example, I found it bizare when female activists in Argentina were essentially chanting "kill the fetus!". I believe this sort of trivialization of abortions is what most conservatives actually oppose.

I see no middle ground. Either a woman has the right to her own body and health decisions or she does not. The forced birth movement has never been about compromise and they don't care whether anyone thinks abortion is serious or trivial.

THE RADICAL THEOLOGY THAT COULD MAKE RELIGIOUS FREEDOM A THING OF THE PAST

Even devout Christians should fear these influential leaders' refusal to separate church and state.

https://www.texasobserver.org/dominion-theology/ OR https://archive.ph/e7fwZ

John is right. Its become like most other issues. Very us vrs them. We’re over here, they are over there. This whole country needs a lesson on balance. Both sides of all of these big political topics are so filled with hate, and ego, that we’re just about at the point of everyone losing sight of what the original topic was.

Personally I’m still at a loss that we even have this as a topic. Everyone has a right to their own body, and to make there own medical decisions. That’s probably the most common sense sentence I have ever wrote. How we’ve arrived at a point where that’s the hot topic in the U.S. and how there are people on the other side of it just dosnt make sense to me.

Zero wrote: John is right. Its become like most other issues. Very us vrs them. We’re over here, they are over there. This whole country needs a lesson on balance.

And your plan for balance involves doubling down on your position?

As a republican who’s pro choice, I’d say I got the meet in the middle (or balance) of this topic figured out.

I’m willing to cross party lines based on my personal beliefs. A lot of people arnt. Do I think women should be getting 5 abortions a year and using it as birth control….no. But am I for a woman choosing what happens to her own body…yes. Am I for a woman correcting a mistake made during a one night thing….yes. Am I for an assault victim NOT having to look at what happened to her every day for the rest of her life…yes.

Br. John wrote: I see no middle ground. Either a woman has the right to her own body and health decisions or she does not.

You must admit the argument is more nuanced than that. You cannot simply dismiss the fact that there may be some merit to the argument of the unborn child having the right to live, and then expect the "other side" to see your point.