|
|
Post by Merge on Feb 28, 2024 1:41:19 GMT
Love this! From the Democratic governor of PA What is he saying/singing? It’s the first line of Beyoncé’s new country song, Texas Hold’em. |
|
dawnnikol
Prolific Pea
'A life without books is a life not lived.' Jay Kristoff
Posts: 8,555
Sept 21, 2015 18:39:25 GMT
|
Post by dawnnikol on Feb 28, 2024 11:54:33 GMT
So, they declare that embryos are "children" and we MuST pRoTeCT tHe ChILdrEN, but after they see the consequences of their actions, they file to postpone it until April 2025. I guess the embryos prior to an election don't count? Fucking liars.
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Feb 28, 2024 19:00:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Feb 28, 2024 23:37:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Feb 29, 2024 23:53:08 GMT
Maybe there's something even more sinister than controlling womens' bodies at play in the abortion & IVF debate slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/02/alabama-ivf-who-gets-to-parent.htmlAll of that is demonstrably correct—Dobbs was the indicator that they would be coming for all the other reproductive freedoms, sure. But the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision highlights another strain of revanchist Christian nationalist thinking. It’s one that is embodied in policies like family separation at the border (which will be put back in place in a second Trump administration), and last year’s challenge at the Supreme Court to the Indian Child Welfare Act, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s cheerful dismissal of five decades of abortion protections in favor of the drop-your-baby-at-the-fire-station alternative to reproductive autonomy. This line of thinking is about more than reproductive autonomy; it is a claim about who owns your babies and your children, and who gets to raise them.
When Republican Rep. Byron Donalds of Florida announced on NBC’s Meet the Press last Sunday that he fully supports IVF because it is necessary to “create great families, which is what our country desperately needs,” and that IVF “helps them breed great families,” he gave away this darker game. This isn’t just about forcing pregnant people to carry babies; it’s also about the “domestic supply of infants” problem that the 14th Amendment was expressly crafted to redress: a sordid history of power and money and ownership of children, still baked so deeply into adoption and foster care that you almost don’t notice when the state coolly lays claim to the entire contents of a “cryogenic nursery.”
Nothing about this should shock you, at least not if you’ve been reading Dorothy Roberts. This is the two-step wherein the state forces women to have babies they cannot raise, does nothing to help support them, then swoops in to seize the babies when their parents are seen as endangering them—a phenomenon that of course predominantly hurts poor women and women of color. The state also ensures that adoptions flow in the direction of more “worthy” parents, which means heterosexual and Christian parents, a regime also built into the legal framework. The list of people who cannot assert autonomy and control over their potential children has, in the course of a few weeks, now expanded from LGBTQ+ parents, single parents, poor parents, and parents of color to anyone who has started the process of IVF in Alabama.
When Republicans insist that life begins at conception, and also that seven cell clusters constitute “life,” what they are saying—what they were always saying—is that we as a society need babies so badly that somebody should always be entitled to take control and custody over somebody else’s baby, and indeed of every potential baby. Because, at the end of the day, your babies don’t belong to you; they belong, variously, to God, to the GOP, to the state, and to those who want to raise them in your stead. That isn’t just about controlling women, then, or about fertility and the power to make economic and health decisions about one’s own life. This is about the government endlessly making determinations about who is fit to take your children away from you and raise them as their own. This is the Handmaid’s Tale version of religion, as Dorothy Roberts has long warned, and it’s embodied deeply in U.S. history and in long-standing policies. It is why women can be left to die of sepsis outside the ER, then be blamed by the government for having made bad choices. Their babies never really belonged to them in the first instance. And what Alabama established two weeks ago is that doctors and patients will have to make choices in the IVF context that privilege potential lives over their own family autonomy.
Think for a moment about those families separated at the border under Donald Trump and Jeff Sessions’ truly sociopathic deterrence policy. Some of the children who were ripped away from their parents were placed with good religious families long before their own families were given any kind of opportunity to claim them back. Consider also that some of the groups challenging ICWA in Brackeen, the case heard last term at the Supreme Court, were making a similar claim, rooted in their religious preferences: a claim that they were somehow entitled to adopt and raise the Native American babies whose families could not care for them. Consider Barrett’s chipper assertion at oral argument in Dobbs that there’s no hardship on a woman forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term because “safe haven laws take care of that problem” by letting women dump babies, without risk of prosecution, to be raised by others.
Every one of these examples suggests that the Alabama IVF decision is as much about family separation as reproductive freedom. If your babies are not yours, which under the current abortion regime they are not, it stands to reason that your fertilized embryos are not yours either. If you have unused embryos after treatment, you cannot dispose of them as you wish, because that could be murder; instead, the Alabama Supreme Court’s reasoning implies, the state may force you to adopt them out to strangers. It’s part of a long-standing tradition of denying autonomy and support to parents and caregivers, blaming them for being unable to raise children, and making alternate plans for their babies.
Put most starkly: What we witnessed in Alabama wasn’t simply a continuation of a decadeslong fundamentalist religious project to conscript women into having babies, whether they wish to or not. Our imaginations must expand to see this as of a piece with an older and more pernicious American tradition in which the state decides who gets to raise your children, regardless of your preferences—because your own family is not actually in your control, but subject to the state’s seizure and redistribution to those who might raise them better than you will. The 14th Amendment was drafted in part to redress precisely this scenario; it’s being warped to encourage it instead.
|
|
dawnnikol
Prolific Pea
'A life without books is a life not lived.' Jay Kristoff
Posts: 8,555
Sept 21, 2015 18:39:25 GMT
|
Post by dawnnikol on Mar 1, 2024 0:10:48 GMT
Put most starkly: What we witnessed in Alabama wasn’t simply a continuation of a decadeslong fundamentalist religious project to conscript women into having babies, whether they wish to or not. Our imaginations must expand to see this as of a piece with an older and more pernicious American tradition in which the state decides who gets to raise your children, regardless of your preferences—because your own family is not actually in your control, but subject to the state’s seizure and redistribution to those who might raise them better than you will. The 14th Amendment was drafted in part to redress precisely this scenario; it’s being warped to encourage it instead. I know people have issues with the comparison to "The Handmaid's Tale", but what happened at the beginning of that is eerily similar to what is happening now. |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 1, 2024 1:54:28 GMT
Put most starkly: What we witnessed in Alabama wasn’t simply a continuation of a decadeslong fundamentalist religious project to conscript women into having babies, whether they wish to or not. Our imaginations must expand to see this as of a piece with an older and more pernicious American tradition in which the state decides who gets to raise your children, regardless of your preferences—because your own family is not actually in your control, but subject to the state’s seizure and redistribution to those who might raise them better than you will. The 14th Amendment was drafted in part to redress precisely this scenario; it’s being warped to encourage it instead. I know people have issues with the comparison to "The Handmaid's Tale", but what happened at the beginning of that is eerily similar to what is happening now. On the VP list Byron Donalds who, BTW is black, said that IVF "breeds great families". Sound familiar? Plantations owners did exactly that!!!!!! His statement is why we need to know our history and why there are dog whistles that should NOT be used!! *** Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) was slammed online by numerous political onlookers after he said in vitro fertilization "breeds great families."Donalds was confronted on NBC on Sunday over his defense of Donald Trump's "racist" speech, with NBC host Kristen Welker actually disagreeing with him over some comments the former president provided to a group of Black conservatives. In that same interview, he said something else that struck a nerve on social media. |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 1, 2024 2:56:26 GMT
Maybe there's something even more sinister than controlling womens' bodies at play in the abortion & IVF debate slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/02/alabama-ivf-who-gets-to-parent.htmlAll of that is demonstrably correct—Dobbs was the indicator that they would be coming for all the other reproductive freedoms, sure. But the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision highlights another strain of revanchist Christian nationalist thinking. It’s one that is embodied in policies like family separation at the border (which will be put back in place in a second Trump administration), and last year’s challenge at the Supreme Court to the Indian Child Welfare Act, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s cheerful dismissal of five decades of abortion protections in favor of the drop-your-baby-at-the-fire-station alternative to reproductive autonomy. This line of thinking is about more than reproductive autonomy; it is a claim about who owns your babies and your children, and who gets to raise them.
When Republican Rep. Byron Donalds of Florida announced on NBC’s Meet the Press last Sunday that he fully supports IVF because it is necessary to “create great families, which is what our country desperately needs,” and that IVF “helps them breed great families,” he gave away this darker game. This isn’t just about forcing pregnant people to carry babies; it’s also about the “domestic supply of infants” problem that the 14th Amendment was expressly crafted to redress: a sordid history of power and money and ownership of children, still baked so deeply into adoption and foster care that you almost don’t notice when the state coolly lays claim to the entire contents of a “cryogenic nursery.”
Nothing about this should shock you, at least not if you’ve been reading Dorothy Roberts. This is the two-step wherein the state forces women to have babies they cannot raise, does nothing to help support them, then swoops in to seize the babies when their parents are seen as endangering them—a phenomenon that of course predominantly hurts poor women and women of color. The state also ensures that adoptions flow in the direction of more “worthy” parents, which means heterosexual and Christian parents, a regime also built into the legal framework. The list of people who cannot assert autonomy and control over their potential children has, in the course of a few weeks, now expanded from LGBTQ+ parents, single parents, poor parents, and parents of color to anyone who has started the process of IVF in Alabama.
When Republicans insist that life begins at conception, and also that seven cell clusters constitute “life,” what they are saying—what they were always saying—is that we as a society need babies so badly that somebody should always be entitled to take control and custody over somebody else’s baby, and indeed of every potential baby. Because, at the end of the day, your babies don’t belong to you; they belong, variously, to God, to the GOP, to the state, and to those who want to raise them in your stead. That isn’t just about controlling women, then, or about fertility and the power to make economic and health decisions about one’s own life. This is about the government endlessly making determinations about who is fit to take your children away from you and raise them as their own. This is the Handmaid’s Tale version of religion, as Dorothy Roberts has long warned, and it’s embodied deeply in U.S. history and in long-standing policies. It is why women can be left to die of sepsis outside the ER, then be blamed by the government for having made bad choices. Their babies never really belonged to them in the first instance. And what Alabama established two weeks ago is that doctors and patients will have to make choices in the IVF context that privilege potential lives over their own family autonomy.
Think for a moment about those families separated at the border under Donald Trump and Jeff Sessions’ truly sociopathic deterrence policy. Some of the children who were ripped away from their parents were placed with good religious families long before their own families were given any kind of opportunity to claim them back. Consider also that some of the groups challenging ICWA in Brackeen, the case heard last term at the Supreme Court, were making a similar claim, rooted in their religious preferences: a claim that they were somehow entitled to adopt and raise the Native American babies whose families could not care for them. Consider Barrett’s chipper assertion at oral argument in Dobbs that there’s no hardship on a woman forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term because “safe haven laws take care of that problem” by letting women dump babies, without risk of prosecution, to be raised by others.
Every one of these examples suggests that the Alabama IVF decision is as much about family separation as reproductive freedom. If your babies are not yours, which under the current abortion regime they are not, it stands to reason that your fertilized embryos are not yours either. If you have unused embryos after treatment, you cannot dispose of them as you wish, because that could be murder; instead, the Alabama Supreme Court’s reasoning implies, the state may force you to adopt them out to strangers. It’s part of a long-standing tradition of denying autonomy and support to parents and caregivers, blaming them for being unable to raise children, and making alternate plans for their babies.
Put most starkly: What we witnessed in Alabama wasn’t simply a continuation of a decadeslong fundamentalist religious project to conscript women into having babies, whether they wish to or not. Our imaginations must expand to see this as of a piece with an older and more pernicious American tradition in which the state decides who gets to raise your children, regardless of your preferences—because your own family is not actually in your control, but subject to the state’s seizure and redistribution to those who might raise them better than you will. The 14th Amendment was drafted in part to redress precisely this scenario; it’s being warped to encourage it instead.
But by all means, don’t vote for Biden because his dogs are spicy! |
|
dawnnikol
Prolific Pea
'A life without books is a life not lived.' Jay Kristoff
Posts: 8,555
Sept 21, 2015 18:39:25 GMT
|
Post by dawnnikol on Mar 1, 2024 12:08:16 GMT
But by all means, don’t vote for Biden because his dogs are spicy! And he eats ice cream. >.< |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 1, 2024 18:46:15 GMT
Bringing this over from the other thread. aj2hallGreat perspective on immigration - "We need representatives who actually want to do the job, not have the job." |
|
jayfab
Drama Llama
procastinating
Posts: 5,615 
|
Post by jayfab on Mar 1, 2024 20:09:29 GMT
I know people have issues with the comparison to "The Handmaid's Tale", but what happened at the beginning of that is eerily similar to what is happening now. On the VP list Byron Donalds who, BTW is black, said that IVF "breeds great families". Sound familiar? Plantations owners did exactly that!!!!!! His statement is why we need to know our history and why there are dog whistles that should NOT be used!! *** Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) was slammed online by numerous political onlookers after he said in vitro fertilization "breeds great families."Donalds was confronted on NBC on Sunday over his defense of Donald Trump's "racist" speech, with NBC host Kristen Welker actually disagreeing with him over some comments the former president provided to a group of Black conservatives. In that same interview, he said something else that struck a nerve on social media. I watched that and my mouth dropped open. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 2, 2024 0:07:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 2, 2024 0:11:34 GMT
Bringing this over from the other thread. aj2hall Great perspective on immigration - "We need representatives who actually want to do the job, not have the job." "The party that wants to close the border is also the party that wants to force women to give birth. Because we need workers one way or another. They would just prefer those workers were white than brown. |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 2, 2024 1:36:33 GMT
And they only have to wait 10-12 years for preferred child labor, since their overturning the laws. Some states already are allowing serving alcohol. #1 Arkansas wonderful Sarah Huckabee Sanders!! Kansas or Missouri or at least in that area.
Keep in mind, Americans will not do stoop labor.
I will say that our farmers and their families do work in the fields!!
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 3, 2024 18:07:29 GMT
Trump, who is partly responsible for Roe being overturned and women losing reproductive rights, is outright lying and inventing stories.
|
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 3, 2024 18:12:24 GMT
Trump, who is partly responsible for Roe being overturned and women losing reproductive rights, is outright lying and inventing stories. And no one fact checks him! Nor can he even explain what he is saying!! |
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Mar 3, 2024 18:14:12 GMT
On the VP list Byron Donalds who, BTW is black, said that IVF "breeds great families". Sound familiar? Plantations owners did exactly that!!!!!! His statement is why we need to know our history and why there are dog whistles that should NOT be used!! *** Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) was slammed online by numerous political onlookers after he said in vitro fertilization "breeds great families."Donalds was confronted on NBC on Sunday over his defense of Donald Trump's "racist" speech, with NBC host Kristen Welker actually disagreeing with him over some comments the former president provided to a group of Black conservatives. In that same interview, he said something else that struck a nerve on social media. I watched that and my mouth dropped open. Every time I think of this I literally start shaking! He is a displaced monster!! |
|
|
|
Post by hop2 on Mar 5, 2024 1:19:45 GMT
Ok, so embryos are children. Thats what Alabama has decided. Ok
IVF clinics are going to have a rough time business wise going forward.
Even if they all stopped making embryos the minute the ruling came out there’s still probably thousands of embryos hanging around the freezers.
The restrictions run IVF clinics out of business, out of business clinics can’t pay for freezer electricity.
The “parents” of the embryos aren’t capable of implanting and birthing them all at once even if they do want them. And the clinics are going out of business anyway so possibly can’t implant them.
Who gets ‘custody’ of all the embryos that are about to be defrosted due to the business failure?
Does the state just take them over? Child protective services comes in and keeps the freezers going? Do they spend taxpayer money to do it? Some of the ‘parents’ might be deceased. Does child protective services just start selling the embryos on the open market? But if they are children then that’s human trafficking…and thus illegal.
Like where do they expect to go with this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scrapper100 on Mar 5, 2024 6:10:54 GMT
Ok, so embryos are children. Thats what Alabama has decided. Ok IVF clinics are going to have a rough time business wise going forward. Even if they all stopped making embryos the minute the ruling came out there’s still probably thousands of embryos hanging around the freezers. The restrictions run IVF clinics out of business, out of business clinics can’t pay for freezer electricity. The “parents” of the embryos aren’t capable of implanting and birthing them all at once even if they do want them. And the clinics are going out of business anyway so possibly can’t implant them. Who gets ‘custody’ of all the embryos that are about to be defrosted due to the business failure? Does the state just take them over? Child protective services comes in and keeps the freezers going? Do they spend taxpayer money to do it? Some of the ‘parents’ might be deceased. Does child protective services just start selling the embryos on the open market? But if they are children then that’s human trafficking…and thus illegal. Like where do they expect to go with this. Along with this thinking what about those that are transferred but don’t implant or miscarry will they then try and go after the poor woman? Who wouldn’t have seen this coming along with birth control. |
|
dawnnikol
Prolific Pea
'A life without books is a life not lived.' Jay Kristoff
Posts: 8,555
Sept 21, 2015 18:39:25 GMT
|
Post by dawnnikol on Mar 15, 2024 13:33:07 GMT
The party of "small government" sures likes to control women:
|
|
dawnnikol
Prolific Pea
'A life without books is a life not lived.' Jay Kristoff
Posts: 8,555
Sept 21, 2015 18:39:25 GMT
|
Post by dawnnikol on Apr 5, 2024 11:32:07 GMT
Explain this:
|
|
