There is virtually no logic, or consistency, from the so-called conservative side of America anymore. Certainly the left is far from perfect, but at least they aren't quite so busy telling others how to live as "pro-lifers" who can concurrently opposed gun laws and public health care or education. It is ALL about control of women and the "other" while wrapped in the flag and holding a bible.
I tire of how the abortion debate has been characterized by many who engage in it. The IVF debacle is one more example. To be blunt those who are anti-abortion are snobs, elitist who believe women are incompetent, unable, and too ignorant to exercise control over their own lives. Women may be able to drive school buses full of squirmy children on a field trip, perform delicate surgical procedures, try cases in front of the Supreme Court, head up Fortune 500 companies or government agencies that affect everyone’s lives and raise the next generation, but they are not capable according to these “saviors of mankind” of assessing and deciding for themselves the material, economic, emotional, physical, and spiritual consequences of having or not having an abortion. Of course, given the obvious intellectual and spiritual superiority of those who oppose abortion, they need to take away the agonizing decision many face because those who would abort an unviable fetus or remove the necessary support for a mass of undifferentiated cells will obviously make the wrong decision. No doubt none of these snobs and elitists would warrant any “liberal” intervening in their lives in matters important to them because after all they will always make the right decision.
Excuse me, but an embryo (and fetuses, for that matter, up to a certain stage of development that was generally widely accepted not so long ago) is no more a human being than an egg is a chicken or a seed is a flower.
I eagerly anticipate attorneys ad litem (for the embryos) carving up estates in Alabama. What does it cost for frozen storage in perpetuity? Should the portion of estate assigned to a specific embryo pay for a surrogate? Is the surrogate financially liable if the pregnancy goes awry? To whom? Who inherits from a benighted blastocyst? The still-frozen sibs? A brother or sister from a successful implantation? Eventually, it could be a three-year-old great-great-great-great-great-granduncle that gets a piece of the original estate, if any money is left unclaimed by the attorneys.
It's amazing to me as a woman, that these Christo-fascist men & their brainwashed women have the audacity to think that they should have any say into what women choose to do with their bodies. My daughters live in 2 states, Idaho & Alabama, where they've been relegated to second class citizens with no control of their own uterus'. Both sons-in-law have had vasectomies & we all pray that those vas deferens staples hold. This churchy, (certainly not Christ-following) group has had this in the works for decades. The irony & hypocrisy that a rapist of more than just Jean Carroll & the biggest wife cheater & swinging dik in NYC appointed the lying religious nuts to the SC is not lost on me. Boy, those guys really hate it when told, "if you don't have a uterus, your opinion doesn't matter", including this guy with the sign who my friend & I approached. What a crude, rude thing he is with a mouth from the gutter. So Khrist-like.
You write that "A morally consistent person would oppose IUDs (which stop implantation of a fertilized egg); abortion pills that cause an early miscarriage; and any abortion of a pregnancy resulting from rape." You are confusing morality with ideology, specifically the morality of care for each other with the ideology of rights. So, also, do a large number of "Right to Lifers," especially the Roman Catholic hierarchy, whose personal experience is so remote from childbearing and childrearing that it can only deal with the subject through logic. But by no means are all of Right to Lifers stuck in ideology. Otherwise, every abortion ban would ban abortion from the moment of conception, which almost none of the post-Dobbs laws that have been passed do. So while many of the views you express in the post are congenial to me, the basic argument--that those who favor abortion but back-pedaled furiously from the Alabama decision re IVF are hypocrites--isn't a sound argument. At the risk of flattering myself, I think the column I published on the subject in today's (Friday March 1) Ashland.news is a much sounder evaluation: https://ashland.news/relocations-alabama-high-court-gives-birth-to-humans-without-mothers/
There is virtually no logic, or consistency, from the so-called conservative side of America anymore. Certainly the left is far from perfect, but at least they aren't quite so busy telling others how to live as "pro-lifers" who can concurrently opposed gun laws and public health care or education. It is ALL about control of women and the "other" while wrapped in the flag and holding a bible.
I tire of how the abortion debate has been characterized by many who engage in it. The IVF debacle is one more example. To be blunt those who are anti-abortion are snobs, elitist who believe women are incompetent, unable, and too ignorant to exercise control over their own lives. Women may be able to drive school buses full of squirmy children on a field trip, perform delicate surgical procedures, try cases in front of the Supreme Court, head up Fortune 500 companies or government agencies that affect everyone’s lives and raise the next generation, but they are not capable according to these “saviors of mankind” of assessing and deciding for themselves the material, economic, emotional, physical, and spiritual consequences of having or not having an abortion. Of course, given the obvious intellectual and spiritual superiority of those who oppose abortion, they need to take away the agonizing decision many face because those who would abort an unviable fetus or remove the necessary support for a mass of undifferentiated cells will obviously make the wrong decision. No doubt none of these snobs and elitists would warrant any “liberal” intervening in their lives in matters important to them because after all they will always make the right decision.
Excuse me, but an embryo (and fetuses, for that matter, up to a certain stage of development that was generally widely accepted not so long ago) is no more a human being than an egg is a chicken or a seed is a flower.
I eagerly anticipate attorneys ad litem (for the embryos) carving up estates in Alabama. What does it cost for frozen storage in perpetuity? Should the portion of estate assigned to a specific embryo pay for a surrogate? Is the surrogate financially liable if the pregnancy goes awry? To whom? Who inherits from a benighted blastocyst? The still-frozen sibs? A brother or sister from a successful implantation? Eventually, it could be a three-year-old great-great-great-great-great-granduncle that gets a piece of the original estate, if any money is left unclaimed by the attorneys.
Speaking of attorneys: looks like the legal beagles baying after Musk's pay want 6B for themselves. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/mar/02/lawyers-who-had-elon-musks-pay-dismissed-as-excessive-seek-6bn-in-tesla-shares
It's amazing to me as a woman, that these Christo-fascist men & their brainwashed women have the audacity to think that they should have any say into what women choose to do with their bodies. My daughters live in 2 states, Idaho & Alabama, where they've been relegated to second class citizens with no control of their own uterus'. Both sons-in-law have had vasectomies & we all pray that those vas deferens staples hold. This churchy, (certainly not Christ-following) group has had this in the works for decades. The irony & hypocrisy that a rapist of more than just Jean Carroll & the biggest wife cheater & swinging dik in NYC appointed the lying religious nuts to the SC is not lost on me. Boy, those guys really hate it when told, "if you don't have a uterus, your opinion doesn't matter", including this guy with the sign who my friend & I approached. What a crude, rude thing he is with a mouth from the gutter. So Khrist-like.
You write that "A morally consistent person would oppose IUDs (which stop implantation of a fertilized egg); abortion pills that cause an early miscarriage; and any abortion of a pregnancy resulting from rape." You are confusing morality with ideology, specifically the morality of care for each other with the ideology of rights. So, also, do a large number of "Right to Lifers," especially the Roman Catholic hierarchy, whose personal experience is so remote from childbearing and childrearing that it can only deal with the subject through logic. But by no means are all of Right to Lifers stuck in ideology. Otherwise, every abortion ban would ban abortion from the moment of conception, which almost none of the post-Dobbs laws that have been passed do. So while many of the views you express in the post are congenial to me, the basic argument--that those who favor abortion but back-pedaled furiously from the Alabama decision re IVF are hypocrites--isn't a sound argument. At the risk of flattering myself, I think the column I published on the subject in today's (Friday March 1) Ashland.news is a much sounder evaluation: https://ashland.news/relocations-alabama-high-court-gives-birth-to-humans-without-mothers/