Chief Twit

[Hoonercat]

Back on track, I've found Twitter to be an excellent source of information on the Russian-Ukraine war, but only after unfollowing a number of regular posters who weren't so reliable. I'm down to 2 posters who actually seem to know what they're talking about, the rest were just regurgitating tweets from others without any filtering.
One of them is a former Russian veteran offcier who, though a patriot, is very outspoken about the Russian high command and their tactics. This appears to have made him popular with the common soldier and he regularly gets info and videos sent to him from the front lines. While he celebrates Russian victories, he's not shy about posting their failures, though he does choose his words carefully.

[Saga Lout]

...

Which brings us to our current predicament regarding abortion.

What, exactly, is your current predicament regarding abortion?

Is it that birthing people in some states won't have a handy local abortionist ready and willing to kill their babies?

As I understand it, the Supreme Court put the abortion issue back into the individual states' jurisdiction where it should have been all along.

[weeksy]

Is it that birthing people in some states won't have a handy local abortionist ready and willing to kill their babies?

Come on... really

[Yambo]

Is it that birthing people in some states won't have a handy local abortionist ready and willing to kill their babies?

Abortion doesn't necessarily kill babies.

As I understand it, the Supreme Court put the abortion issue back into the individual states' jurisdiction where it should have been all along.

There's a good argument for the abortion issue to be in the jurisdiction of women and doctors, not male politicians.

[Saga Lout]

There's a good argument for the abortion issue to be in the jurisdiction of women and doctors, not male politicians.

And the other half of the population should have no opinion about the moral and ethical issues surrounding the subject?

[Yambo]

Everybody can have an opinion.

When decisions have to be made though, a lot of those opinions should perhaps be discounted.

[Cousin Jack]

Ethical stuff around abortion is bollocks.

Abortions will happen, the real question is would you like a safe, medically supervised abortion, or a very dodgy and dangerous one in the back streets.

[Saga Lout]

Everybody can have an opinion.

When decisions have to be made though, a lot of those opinions should perhaps be discounted.

But which ones should be discounted? If you don't have a womb, your opinion doesn't count?

[Yambo]

Everybody can have an opinion.

When decisions have to be made though, a lot of those opinions should perhaps be discounted.

But which ones should be discounted? If you don't have a womb, your opinion doesn't count?

Ah, you want to go down the black or white route.

That's unusual for you SL and of course I'm not going to follow it.

Not having a womb would not necessarily negate an opinion. Having a womb would not necessarily negate an opinion. In my humble, wombless opinion, making a broad brush law that prohibits abortion is wrong and especially if it is made by men. Of course there are women who are totally against abortion just as there are men who may be in favour of abortion. It is hardly a black and white issue and your question above, making it one does not do you justice.

An opinion that abortion should never be allowed is an opinion that can and should be discounted because there may well be a time when one of the women who are currently totally against abortion might need one to perhaps save her life, her marriage, her ability to have other children in the future or some other reason.

Should men, who don't want to consider all the possible scenarios have the final say on what a woman does with or to her body?

[Cousin Jack]

Everybody can have an opinion.

When decisions have to be made though, a lot of those opinions should perhaps be discounted.

But which ones should be discounted? If you don't have a womb, your opinion doesn't count?

Perhaps it should be that if you believe in a sky fairy your judgement is suspect and your opinion is of little value.

[Saga Lout]

Perhaps it should be that if you believe in a sky fairy your judgement is suspect and your opinion is of little value.

The atheist in me would be tempted to agree with you, the libertarian in me, however, not so much

[Saga Lout]

Everybody can have an opinion.

When decisions have to be made though, a lot of those opinions should perhaps be discounted.

But which ones should be discounted? If you don't have a womb, your opinion doesn't count?

Ah, you want to go down the black or white route.

That's unusual for you SL and of course I'm not going to follow it.

...

You were the one who made it black and white,(actually, male vs female):

"There's a good argument for the abortion issue to be in the jurisdiction of women and doctors"

[Cousin Jack]

The atheist in me would be tempted to agree with you, the libertarian in me, however, not so much

I would have imagined a libertarian would allow people (ie women) a free choice over what happens to their bodies.

[Yambo]

But which ones should be discounted? If you don't have a womb, your opinion doesn't count?

Ah, you want to go down the black or white route.

That's unusual for you SL and of course I'm not going to follow it.

...

You were the one who made it black and white,(actually, male vs female):

"There's a good argument for the abortion issue to be in the jurisdiction of women and doctors"

Are there no male doctors?

[Saga Lout]

Are there no male doctors?

Compared with the number of male non doctors, it's a rounding error.

[Yambo]

I was going to comment that male and female are not black and white sides of the line any more but that would have been starting another derail.

[Bwana]

...

Which brings us to our current predicament regarding abortion.

What, exactly, is your current predicament regarding abortion?

Is it that birthing people in some states won't have a handy local abortionist ready and willing to kill their babies?

As I understand it, the Supreme Court put the abortion issue back into the individual states' jurisdiction where it should have been all along.

The Supreme Court recently took a great big ol' shit on a decision made by their body half a century ago. Note that several of the SC members were asked specifically about this at their confirmation hearings and stated it was established precedent. We went from a country where back alley abortions were the norm for poor folk and "vacations" to competent docs were for the wealthy. Once it was legal, along with oh, I dunno, programs to educate young people about squeemish concepts like doing the nasty and the consequences, the number of abortions has been in decline. That's what happens with an educated populace, the need for something like abortions drops. Fast forward to now and these same Justices have made this a state's rights issue. Immediately several states passed laws that have eliminated access to abortion either all together or at such an early date many women won't know they're pregnant until too late. There have been laws enacted to penalize the act of helping a person get an abortion in another state. The laws have no exceptions for rape or incest and no exceptions for a fetus that is going to unduly burden the mother's health. Doctors in some states are already waiting until women are quite ill with fetuses that are dead or so severely affected by abnormalities they won't survive, before aborting them. That's for fear of legal consequences due to draconian law passed by old white men.

That's okay though, they've awakened a sleeping giant just prior to an election. We'll soon see the outcome. Of course some MAGA politicians lose, they will follow in Trump's footsteps and claim the elections were littered with fraud and that they actually won. I suspect that by next weekend, if Democrats maintain control of one or both Houses of the legislative branch, there will be an endless onslaught of claims and lawsuits. And just like Trump, there will be a notable absence of any proof of their claims.

[Bwana]

Is it that birthing people in some states won't have a handy local abortionist ready and willing to kill their babies?

Come on... really

Yes, really. That is a common refrain on this side of the pond. I suspect Saga may just be on a wind-up mission though.

[weeksy]

Is it that birthing people in some states won't have a handy local abortionist ready and willing to kill their babies?

Come on... really

Yes, really. That is a common refrain on this side of the pond. I suspect Saga may just be on a wind-up mission though.

I'm hoping so... although i don't think anyone really rose to the very smelly bait. It's not a discussion i won't allow of course, but it is a discussion that's a dangerous can of worms.

[Noggin]

...

Which brings us to our current predicament regarding abortion.

What, exactly, is your current predicament regarding abortion?

Is it that birthing people in some states won't have a handy local abortionist ready and willing to kill their babies?

As I understand it, the Supreme Court put the abortion issue back into the individual states' jurisdiction where it should have been all along.

I do hope that is stinky bait, if not, I am at a loss. I may not agree with some people on here, but that is a shocking comment

Whilst I can (mostly) understand why some people are anti (I may not agree with their reason, but in some ways I can understand some reasons), to ban it completely for ANY reason is just short-sighted, cruel and bloody horrible. I'm glad I don't live there

This was posted by a friend of mine the other day. She's American and still had family out there, so there is a good chance that the changes in the law could well affect some of them. She is angry and upset at the changes - yes, still.

For the story below, the law in her state required that she carried a child that would be unable to survive to full term (or until it died inside her), regardless the pain that child might be in or the mental and physical damage it might do the her. Shocking that in this modern era, lawmakers have taken such huge steps backwards

Georgia Pellegrini

Today, I would be 4 months pregnant. Yesterday, we said goodbye to our baby boy. I am inherently private about my family life on social media, but there were two things that kept burning in my mind as the nurse held my hand and tried to distract me. She asked me what I was going to eat as my first meal when I woke up, I said without hesitation what I had been thinking all day: a New York bagel with lox and cream cheese. I also kept thinking: I can’t believe women and their partners go through this silently.

We turned over every rock with a remarkable team of doctors in my home state of Texas to find a path forward for our son. He had a rare condition that occurs 1 in 275,000. The very best case scenario would have meant the first three years of his life would require daily dialysis for his badly damaged or non-functioning kidneys until he was big enough to receive one of our adult kidneys, as well as a painful catheter inserted daily to help his bladder empty. But even that door closed to us when it became clear that wasn’t the only thing that was wrong. He was surrounded by a halo of fluid between his skeleton and skin that told us he had multiple other fatal conditions that meant he was slowly dying inside of me. Seeing his condition develop on the ultrasounds as the days and weeks progressed was almost too much to bare. The details of what he was facing are too hard and gruesome to write here.

As the doctors mapped out on a white board the overwhelming number of things that he was experiencing, it became clear to us that the most loving and merciful thing we could do for our baby was give him into the arms of Jesus. All of our doctors, including our Catholic doctor, our Sikh doctor, and our Jewish doctor, said that if this was their baby that is what they would do.

Amidst our unimaginable grief in this impossible situation, we were also told that we have no options in Texas. That it was illegal for them to even write our options down on a piece of paper. Or provide us with any kind of referral. But as far as they knew, no one had yet been criminalized for leaving the state to end a pregnancy. NO ONE HAD YET BEEN CRIMINALIZED FOR LEAVING THE STATE TO END A PREGNANCY.

I think I left my body after that. And I have a number of friends and family to thank for taking over and carrying us in our darkest hours. Family that got on planes and in cars to watch June so we could have the space we needed to grieve and get care, family that drove 10 hours to pick up our dog, friends that brought us flowers and food, friends that booked flights and drivers and had doctors in New York call me and text me so I would know they were there to catch me and we weren’t alone, doctors who helped us financially to get the care we needed because it was illegal for my Texas insurance to cover a dime, and the friend who had a box from Zabar's waiting at my mom’s doorstep when I got home from the hospital last night. The contents? New York Bagels, cream cheese, and lox. Somehow from far away she just knew. A reminder that God is good, the universe is for me.

My body has been through so much in the last four years in pursuit of life, I am for living. I am also against suffering. There are countless women and their partners in the U.S. and around the world who are falling into these unimaginable cracks and don’t have people who will move mountains to ease their pain. This is not a political issue, this is a humanitarian issue. We have to do better for our sisters, our daughters, our wives, our friends, and their partners who grieve alongside them.

I hope that by writing my own story, other women are encouraged to write their own, so that we don’t let others write our stories for us. In the meantime, I’m sending love to everyone who is trying their best to heal from things they don’t discuss.

No, I haven't fact checked this because, really? Even if this is made up, it will be happening to someone somewhere in the USA