Overturning Roe v Wade?

[happyhoix]

Jun 26, 2022 15:44:02 GMT -5 Spellbound454 said:

Given the amount of punishment a female body goes through when carrying and birthing a child.

How can a third party force you to do it........ if you don't want to?

Excellent question. 

I think the answer you get would go back to Eve talking Adam into trying an apple in the Garden of Evil and being forever cursed to endure painful childbirth because of that sin. 

In short, women sinned so they have to endure the pain as punishment. 

I guess women should have made sure they were born men so avoid the punishment. 

I don’t know - doesn’t make sense to me. For a party dead set against being forced to be vaccinated against covid, they do seem very casual about forcing women to carry pregnancies, which has way more potential dangerous complications than vaccines. 

[daisylu]

I stumbled upon "The Booze, Bets, and Sex That Built America" on the History Channel today. The first episode, "Secrets and Sins", included a man who sold sausage casings as condoms in New York. He called them Skins, and they were wildly popular for preventing disease and pregnancy. They were also illegal at the time, because preventing pregnancy was indecent (WTF), and he ended up arrested at the end of the episode. Jump to today where most men refuse to wear condoms. After the SC ruling I hope women who are of child bearing age refuse to sex it up unless the d is covered.

Also this was in the late 1800s. How sad is it that we are headed back to the 1800s?

After soaking this info up all weekend, I am more pissed off than I have ever been in my life and have decided that I am not dealing with BS from anyone on this subject. I will be VERY vocal from here out. I will be in everyone's faces. I will be out making sure that people vote for change.

Also, I'm very proud of DD (23). She is asexual and has cut people off over this. For years she has been vocal about not wanting kids, or sex, yet she is mad as hell and is making it known.

[Tennesseer]

I'll just park this here.

YOUR DATA AND PRIVACY

Seeking an abortion? Here’s how to avoid leaving a digital trail.
Everything you should do to keep your information safe, from incognito browsing to turning off location tracking

Everything you do online is already tracked. That information is about to become even more sensitive if you’re seeking an abortion in the United States.

Friday’s Supreme Court decision overturning the landmark abortion rights ruling Roe v. Wade means 13 states could outlaw abortions within a month, and more could follow.

A Google search for a reproductive health clinic, online order for abortion pills, location ping at a doctor’s office and text message about considering ending a pregnancy could all become sources of evidence. People constantly share data about their fertility online, privacy advocates say — even if they don’t realize it. Other obvious sources of health data include period-tracking apps and digital check-in forms at hospitals.

“People should not be responsible for doing everything perfectly, when they’re in a stressful situation, to protect our own privacy,” said India McKinney, director of federal affairs for the privacy advocacy organization Electronic Frontier Foundation. “Privacy is a fundamental human right, and it should be protected in law and statutes.”

Here are the basic steps anyone can take to protect personal information when weighing an abortion.

Limit who you tell
Your biggest risk factor is other people. Many cases against people who had abortions start with people they’ve told who report them to law enforcement, according to Farah Diaz-Tello, senior counsel and legal director for If/When/How, a reproductive justice nonprofit.

“The biggest vector for criminalization is the health-care system,” Diaz-Tello said. The group has studied cases against people who’ve had abortions since 2000 and tracked how the process typically happens.

When someone goes to a health provider with medical issues related to an abortion, medical professionals can report them to the police, who can then seize their phones or computers. With a device in hand, police can just look through the browser and text messages directly.

Diaz-Tello recommends being judicious about what information you share in an emergency room or doctor’s office. A miscarriage and a self-managed abortion using pills will look identical to most health-care providers and require the same treatment, she said.

Limit who you tell in your own life as well, including friends or family. If you’re experiencing intimate partner threats, take these steps to protect your communications and devices.

Chat on a secure, encrypted messaging app
When you do discuss your situation, use private messaging apps that use encryption. Apple’s iMessage, Meta’s WhatsApp and Signal are all end-to-end encrypted by default, which means messages are obscured from everyone except the sender and receiver.

Signal may be the most secure option. Apple has the key to decrypt iMessages that are backed up using its iCloud service, and law enforcement could ask it to do so. WhatsApp, for its part, leaves room in its privacy policy to share data with Facebook parent company Meta. Depending on what data it shares, that could raise privacy problems.

Protect your devices
Keep in mind that someone with access to your physical device could view your messages, whether or not they’re encrypted. Don’t turn your phone or laptop over to law enforcement without a warrant, privacy experts advise, and turn off biometric authentication such as Face or Touch ID if you’re worried about someone pressuring or forcing you to unlock them. Make sure your phone, tablet and computers all require a passcode or password to use them. Avoid wearing any health-tracking wearables while managing your health.

Browse the internet securely
There are two ways your browsing activity could put you at risk: someone seeing it on your device, and someone obtaining it from tech or ad-tech companies, said Eric Rescorla, chief technology officer at Firefox.

Always use incognito or private browsing mode on your browser to avoid leaving a trail on your own devices. When choosing a browser, go with Safari, Firefox or Brave, which all have robust privacy features. Make sure any options to prevent cross-site tracking are turned on, and instead of Google, use a search engine such as DuckDuckGo or Brave.

To minimize what is recorded about your browsing, use a VPN or Apple’s iCloud Private Relay, which acts like a more secure VPN. Avoid using third-party apps for searches. If you want an extra layer of protection, use Tor Browser, a tool for anonymous internet use that cloaks both your identity and your location, Rescorla said.

If you do use Google, make sure you are logged out of your account and that you have turned up the dials on all your privacy settings. Confirm any results for abortion clinics are real and not fake “pregnancy crisis” centers. If it’s a Google ad, there should be a small line above the site name that says “Provides abortions” or “Does not provide abortions.” The National Abortion Federation has a list of vetted providers on its site.

Turn off location sharing, or leave your phone behind
Some apps collect your location throughout the day and night and share it with third parties including data brokers, who sell that data to whoever wants to pay. To turn off location sharing on an Apple device, go to Settings → Privacy → Location Services and toggle the slider so that it shows gray. (Note that this will make apps that depend on location, such as Uber or maps, stop working.) On an Android device, go to Settings → Location and toggle the switch to “off.”

Unfortunately, turning off location sharing won’t stop your cell carrier from collecting your location. Jennifer Granick, surveillance and cybersecurity counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union, said a Faraday bag, which blocks electromagnetic fields, could help in cases when a person wants to keep their phone on them but prevent location tracking from service providers.

To truly obscure your location, the best thing to do is leave your phone at home or turn it off completely, McKinney said. You can also use a temporary “burner” phone. Don’t add any of your accounts, connect to your home WiFi or turn on Bluetooth, she added.

Maximize your privacy settings
To make sure your phone or social media sites are collecting as little data as possible, lock down your privacy settings. You can find a list of the biggest app and device’s options in our Privacy Reset Guide.

Avoid period tracking apps
Trusting any app with sensitive medical information is a risk, especially if it’s not covered by HIPAA requirements. Each period-tracking app has different privacy practices, and understanding the nuances can be tricky. A password-protected spreadsheet or paper calendar will serve you better.

If you decide to delete your period-tracking app, consider sending a data-deletion request as well, said Alan Butler, executive director and president of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. Some companies only honor these requests from people in California because of the state’s privacy law, but others accept requests from anywhere.

“The state and federal government’s power to get data right now is incredibly broad,” Butler said. “We haven’t seen new limits on access to data from government in decades, which means laws … have gotten weaker as tech has evolved.”

Limit where you share health information
Your dentist and even your workout instructor may hand out forms asking whether you’re pregnant. If you’re not comfortable sharing, say so, and save that conversation for a doctor you trust.

Check-in software at your doctor’s office may have privacy holes, The Washington Post has reported. A consent form from check-in software maker Phreesia, for example, gives it permission to use your data for marketing. Select “no” on any data-sharing prompts you see.

Push your health-care and insurance providers on what they do with your information, such as the date of last period or pregnancy status. Where is it recorded and stored, is it encrypted, and how long do they keep it? Look over every document you sign to see whether you’re giving up any rights to your information, or whether you’re giving permission to share it with other parties.

Be cognizant of physical surveillance technology
In some cases, law enforcement may pull data from license plate readers or facial recognition software systems that have been strategically set up along state borders, said Granick of the ACLU. If you’re in need of reproductive services, you may want to consider taking alternate modes of transportation vs. driving your own car, for example.

​​ “People should not give up, even though this is hard and may seem like a lot,” Granick said. “People should take advantage of what they can do while pushing the powers that be to do more.”

Seeking an abortion? Here’s how to avoid leaving a digital trail.

[djAdvocate]

mark my words, it will ACCELERATE the "problem" (that i don't see as a problem).

[tbop77]

As Huckabee Sanders celebrated the Supreme Court ruling of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade case from 1973, she said, “We will make sure that when a kid is in the womb, they’re as safe as they are in a classroom, the workplace, a nursing home.”

www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/who-s-gonna-tell-her-sarah-huckabee-sanders-untimely-abortion-metaphor-ignites-social-media/ar-AAYTDpp?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=e9eeea3bf008451693d7d693bc3ce835


Today's America!  You would think they would have a hard time making statements like this with a straight face, but nope!  

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

Jun 27, 2022 5:45:00 GMT -5 tbop77 said:

As Huckabee Sanders celebrated the Supreme Court ruling of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade case from 1973, she said, “We will make sure that when a kid is in the womb, they’re as safe as they are in a classroom, the workplace, a nursing home.”

www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/who-s-gonna-tell-her-sarah-huckabee-sanders-untimely-abortion-metaphor-ignites-social-media/ar-AAYTDpp?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=e9eeea3bf008451693d7d693bc3ce835


Today's America!  You would think they would have a hard time making statements like this with a straight face, but nope!  

As a mother and someone who is dealing with nursing homes at the same time I don't think she'd like what I have to say about the matter.

[Tennesseer]

Jun 27, 2022 5:45:00 GMT -5 tbop77 said:

As Huckabee Sanders celebrated the Supreme Court ruling of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned the landmark Roe v. Wade case from 1973, she said, “We will make sure that when a kid is in the womb, they’re as safe as they are in a classroom, the workplace, a nursing home.”

www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/who-s-gonna-tell-her-sarah-huckabee-sanders-untimely-abortion-metaphor-ignites-social-media/ar-AAYTDpp?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=e9eeea3bf008451693d7d693bc3ce835


Today's America!  You would think they would have a hard time making statements like this with a straight face, but nope!  

Not the best examples, were they.

[thyme4change]

Jun 26, 2022 16:35:20 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jun 26, 2022 12:51:29 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i don't think this helps whites.  at all.

A GOPer accidentally said that part out loud: 

www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gop-rep-draws-backlash-after-praising-overturn-of-roe-as-victory-of-white-life/ar-AAYSKnx?ocid=EMMX&cvid=6550d7b4f14b4195b91b955a63adebe1

The far right seems to think forcing white women to have more babies will prevent whites from becoming a minority. Based on what happened in Texas after they made it much harder to get an abortion, the number of women getting an abortion remained the same - they just traveled across state lines to get one. 

Since many states have stated they will continue to allow abortions, and will even gear up to provide more abortions in anticipation of women traveling to them to get the abortions, only the poor white women who can’t afford to travel will be impacted by this new ruling. I don’t think there will be a surge of white babies for the racists to adopt. 

I was wondering if anyone did the math. 60% of America is white. 30% of abortions are on white women. Given the distribution of wealth, white women are most likely to have the funds to travel. They are also the most likely to get aggressive on double up on birth control. The rate of white babies being born may not move at all. This decision might actually accelerate the "browning of America" (Or whatever they call it.) Fine by me.

[djAdvocate]

Jun 27, 2022 20:35:39 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Jun 26, 2022 16:35:20 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

A GOPer accidentally said that part out loud: 

www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gop-rep-draws-backlash-after-praising-overturn-of-roe-as-victory-of-white-life/ar-AAYSKnx?ocid=EMMX&cvid=6550d7b4f14b4195b91b955a63adebe1

The far right seems to think forcing white women to have more babies will prevent whites from becoming a minority. Based on what happened in Texas after they made it much harder to get an abortion, the number of women getting an abortion remained the same - they just traveled across state lines to get one. 

Since many states have stated they will continue to allow abortions, and will even gear up to provide more abortions in anticipation of women traveling to them to get the abortions, only the poor white women who can’t afford to travel will be impacted by this new ruling. I don’t think there will be a surge of white babies for the racists to adopt. 

I was wondering if anyone did the math. 60% of America is white. 30% of abortions are on white women. Given the distribution of wealth, white women are most likely to have the funds to travel. They are also the most likely to get aggressive on double up on birth control. The rate of white babies being born may not move at all. This decision might actually accelerate the "browning of America" (Or whatever they call it.) Fine by me.

precisely.  the math is actually not that difficult.

i think that most of these eugenics types ASSUME that the reason whites have low birth rates is because of abortion.  but that is not true.  they have low birth rates because there is a higher degree of two income families, upwardly mobile women, delaying family for career, etc.  higher birth rates tend to follow poverty, to put it bluntly.  so the MOST impoverished sections of our society will generally have the highest birthrates- and these are mostly minorities.

so, yeah, this idea that elimination of birth control will lead to a whiter society is completely wrong.  the only way to make whites have more babies, to be blunt, is to remove their economic opportunities- which is, of course, never going to happen.

[happyhoix]

Jun 27, 2022 20:45:38 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Jun 27, 2022 20:35:39 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

I was wondering if anyone did the math. 60% of America is white. 30% of abortions are on white women. Given the distribution of wealth, white women are most likely to have the funds to travel. They are also the most likely to get aggressive on double up on birth control. The rate of white babies being born may not move at all. This decision might actually accelerate the "browning of America" (Or whatever they call it.) Fine by me.

precisely.  the math is actually not that difficult.

i think that most of these eugenics types ASSUME that the reason whites have low birth rates is because of abortion.  but that is not true.  they have low birth rates because there is a higher degree of two income families, upwardly mobile women, delaying family for career, etc.  higher birth rates tend to follow poverty, to put it bluntly.  so the MOST impoverished sections of our society will generally have the highest birthrates- and these are mostly minorities.

so, yeah, this idea that elimination of birth control will lead to a whiter society is completely wrong.  the only way to make whites have more babies, to be blunt, is to remove their economic opportunities- which is, of course, never going to happen.

Well, we could over more affordable high quality day care, more opportunities for flex work, and quarantined 12 months parental leave . I certainly would have had a second baby if I’d had more than six week unpaid maternity leave, and if day care wasn’t so hard to find and didn’t cost so much. 

But no, let’s not use the carrot, let’s use the stick and try to trap women into birthing more white babies. That’s sure to work. 

[djAdvocate]

Jun 27, 2022 21:02:31 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jun 27, 2022 20:45:38 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

precisely.  the math is actually not that difficult.

i think that most of these eugenics types ASSUME that the reason whites have low birth rates is because of abortion.  but that is not true.  they have low birth rates because there is a higher degree of two income families, upwardly mobile women, delaying family for career, etc.  higher birth rates tend to follow poverty, to put it bluntly.  so the MOST impoverished sections of our society will generally have the highest birthrates- and these are mostly minorities.

so, yeah, this idea that elimination of birth control will lead to a whiter society is completely wrong.  the only way to make whites have more babies, to be blunt, is to remove their economic opportunities- which is, of course, never going to happen.

Well, we could over more affordable high quality day care, more opportunities for flex work, and quarantined 12 months parental leave . I certainly would have had a second baby if I’d had more than six week unpaid maternity leave, and if day care wasn’t so hard to find and didn’t cost so much. 

But no, let’s not use the carrot, let’s use the stick and try to trap women into birthing more white babies. That’s sure to work. 

the first thing that popped into my mind was raising FMW to living wages required for single parent income, but i know it will never happen here, so i didn't mention it.

not that you shouldn't try, understand.

[thyme4change]

Jun 27, 2022 21:02:31 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jun 27, 2022 20:45:38 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

precisely.  the math is actually not that difficult.

i think that most of these eugenics types ASSUME that the reason whites have low birth rates is because of abortion.  but that is not true.  they have low birth rates because there is a higher degree of two income families, upwardly mobile women, delaying family for career, etc.  higher birth rates tend to follow poverty, to put it bluntly.  so the MOST impoverished sections of our society will generally have the highest birthrates- and these are mostly minorities.

so, yeah, this idea that elimination of birth control will lead to a whiter society is completely wrong.  the only way to make whites have more babies, to be blunt, is to remove their economic opportunities- which is, of course, never going to happen.

Well, we could over more affordable high quality day care, more opportunities for flex work, and quarantined 12 months parental leave . I certainly would have had a second baby if I’d had more than six week unpaid maternity leave, and if day care wasn’t so hard to find and didn’t cost so much. 

But no, let’s not use the carrot, let’s use the stick and try to trap women into birthing more white babies. That’s sure to work. 

The initial cost of the stick is way cheaper than the carrot.

[djAdvocate]

Jun 28, 2022 12:25:14 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Jun 27, 2022 21:02:31 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Well, we could over more affordable high quality day care, more opportunities for flex work, and quarantined 12 months parental leave . I certainly would have had a second baby if I’d had more than six week unpaid maternity leave, and if day care wasn’t so hard to find and didn’t cost so much. 

But no, let’s not use the carrot, let’s use the stick and try to trap women into birthing more white babies. That’s sure to work. 

The initial cost of the stick is way cheaper than the carrot.

genius observation, actually.  well done, thyme.

[daisylu]

Are they trying to sound dumber? link   

Karianne Lisonbee, a Utah Republican who serves in the state's House of Representatives, was criticized after she claimed people can control the "intake of semen" into their bodies to avoid pregnancy.
Lisonbee said:

"I got a text message today saying I should seek to control men's ejaculations and not women's pregnancies, [suggesting] that I clearly don't trust women enough to make choices to control their own body."
And my response is I do trust women enough to control when they allow a man to ejaculate inside of them and to control that intake of semen."

"I think that may be inflammatory but I think as a legislature we have the responsibility to create a legal framework that is friendly and supporting rights."

[zibazinski]

I never thought this day would come.

[scgal]

Jun 27, 2022 21:02:31 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jun 27, 2022 20:45:38 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

precisely.  the math is actually not that difficult.

i think that most of these eugenics types ASSUME that the reason whites have low birth rates is because of abortion.  but that is not true.  they have low birth rates because there is a higher degree of two income families, upwardly mobile women, delaying family for career, etc.  higher birth rates tend to follow poverty, to put it bluntly.  so the MOST impoverished sections of our society will generally have the highest birthrates- and these are mostly minorities.

so, yeah, this idea that elimination of birth control will lead to a whiter society is completely wrong.  the only way to make whites have more babies, to be blunt, is to remove their economic opportunities- which is, of course, never going to happen.

Well, we could over more affordable high quality day care, more opportunities for flex work, and quarantined 12 months parental leave . I certainly would have had a second baby if I’d had more than six week unpaid maternity leave, and if day care wasn’t so hard to find and didn’t cost so much. 

But no, let’s not use the carrot, let’s use the stick and try to trap women into birthing more white babies. That’s sure to work. 

Where would the money come from for all that?

[pulmonarymd]

And here we go. We can’t help all these people who are pregnant, it costs too much. Oh, I’m sorry that your fetus has these terrible genetic abnormalities. We can’t help you get the care you need after birth. You all should have planned better. If you do not want to be pregnant, don’t have sex.

That sums up the conservative position in this. We care up until birth. Maybe, just maybe, we should have thought about how we would deal with all these additional births before we threw this grenade. But no, we just don’t care

[Opti]

Jun 30, 2022 6:35:43 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

And here we go. We can’t help all these people who are pregnant, it costs too much. Oh, I’m sorry that your fetus has these terrible genetic abnormalities. We can’t help you get the care you need after birth. You all should have planned better. If you do not want to be pregnant, don’t have sex.

That sums up the conservative position in this. We care up until birth. Maybe, just maybe, we should have thought about how we would deal with all these additional births before we threw this grenade. But no, we just don’t care

This is why I am prochoice. If society is not going to fund recipients of forced birth, they shouldn't be allowed that kind of force. They aren't saving babies. They certainly aren't going to increase the number of white babies because the abortion rate of non-white babies is much higher. So they will make the divide greater with white and nonwhite infants if they get their way, not less. But they are myopic and will forget to pat themselves on the back for the increase of infanticide, child abuse, and toddler deaths that will come along with this decision.

More suffering for others and pretend halos for them; just how they like it.

[happyhoix]

Jun 30, 2022 6:30:32 GMT -5 scgal said:

Jun 27, 2022 21:02:31 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Well, we could over more affordable high quality day care, more opportunities for flex work, and quarantined 12 months parental leave . I certainly would have had a second baby if I’d had more than six week unpaid maternity leave, and if day care wasn’t so hard to find and didn’t cost so much. 

But no, let’s not use the carrot, let’s use the stick and try to trap women into birthing more white babies. That’s sure to work. 

Where would the money come from for all that?

If you look at the long term costs of unwanted kids born to women who are too poor to support them - for housing, and food stamps, and welfare, and healthcare, and the higher chance that child will end up in drug rehab and/or prison, providing easy access to low cost first and second term abortions is way, way more cost effective.

If the cost to society is all you’re worried about.

Think about what our society would be like if every child was born from a healthy, well fed mom, raised in a loving household, went to quality daycare and schools, and had access to good healthcare and college/trade schools. Can we really afford not to raise all our kids that way?

[scgal]

Jun 30, 2022 7:01:20 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Jun 30, 2022 6:30:32 GMT -5 scgal said:

Where would the money come from for all that?

If you look at the long term costs of unwanted kids born to women who are too poor to support them - for housing, and food stamps, and welfare, and healthcare, and the higher chance that child will end up in drug rehab and/or prison, providing easy access to low cost first and second term abortions is way, way more cost effective.

If the cost to society is all you’re worried about.

Think about what our society would be like if every child was born from a healthy, well fed mom, raised in a loving household, went to quality daycare and schools, and had access to good healthcare and college/trade schools. Can we really afford not to raise all our kids that way?

I wasn't thinking of it on the govt dime (our cost). I was thinking of it on the small businesses. Having a person paid for 12 mos is a huge expense not just in money but in labor. You cannot always get people to cover. There are other aspects to consider than just the individual

[pulmonarymd]

Other countries are able to do it. I guess it is just too hard for Americans

[teen persuasion]

Jun 30, 2022 7:23:19 GMT -5 scgal said:

Jun 30, 2022 7:01:20 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

If you look at the long term costs of unwanted kids born to women who are too poor to support them - for housing, and food stamps, and welfare, and healthcare, and the higher chance that child will end up in drug rehab and/or prison, providing easy access to low cost first and second term abortions is way, way more cost effective.

If the cost to society is all you’re worried about.

Think about what our society would be like if every child was born from a healthy, well fed mom, raised in a loving household, went to quality daycare and schools, and had access to good healthcare and college/trade schools. Can we really afford not to raise all our kids that way?

I wasn't thinking of it on the govt dime (our cost). I was thinking of it on the small businesses. Having a person paid for 12 mos is a huge expense not just in money but in labor. You cannot always get people to cover. There are other aspects to consider than just the individual

Well, NY has a Paid Family Medical Leave policy.  The terms are different for different issues (medical, caretaking, etc), but for bonding time with new children it is currently up to 12 weeks at 67% of pay.  The employer doesn't pay it, employees pay into the insurance fund (just like unemployment insurance) thru payroll, sliding scale based on pay.  Mine is a few $ / paycheck.

This isn't optional, it's a state mandate, just like unemployment insurance.  It's fairly new, and slowly expanding as it phases in.  But it levels the playing field for small employers who wouldn't/couldn't offer this benefit - now everyone is entitled to it.

NY Paid Family Leave

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

Jun 30, 2022 6:35:43 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

And here we go. We can’t help all these people who are pregnant, it costs too much. Oh, I’m sorry that your fetus has these terrible genetic abnormalities. We can’t help you get the care you need after birth. You all should have planned better. If you do not want to be pregnant, don’t have sex.

That sums up the conservative position in this. We care up until birth. Maybe, just maybe, we should have thought about how we would deal with all these additional births before we threw this grenade. But no, we just don’t care

I have been told if they were stupid enough to have sex then they should just adopt the baby out to a couple who wants a child.

Because there are enough couples to adopt all these babies.  And people totally rush as it is right now to adopt non-white children and/or disabled children. 

And let's not forget that conservatives are trying to make sure that agencies can refuse to adopt a child to anyone that they do not view as acceptable.  It's been ruled if it violates the agencies "religious views" they can not adopt to LBGTQ+ couples.  They can refuse to adopt to single parents.  There was a case already where a Jewish couple was denied.  There was another one recently where an interracial couple was not allowed to adopt.

The argument there is "Oh just go to another agency then!"  yes because there are a pletheora of agencies all over the country just like Wal-mart and Starbucks.  If you don't like one go to the one on the other end of the street. 

It disgusts me that the argument seems to lead to the idea that a subset of women are on this Earth solely to be breeders for upper/middle class white straight Christian couples to be able to get babies.

If God "blessed" her with a child that she must be forced to carry to term and either take care of herself or give to you did you stop to think the reason you can't have kid is God is telling your self righteous ass you have no grounds to be a parent? 

I mean if this is all "God's will" there must be a reason you can't reproduce the old fashioned way.*

*I mean nothing against infertility and know it can be painful.  My beef is specifically with certain conservative people I know who flippiantly say the problem is solved because they can just give the babies they don't want "to a good home" and try to bring God into the equation as to why this is justified.   JFC kids aren't puppies!

[scgal]

Jun 30, 2022 8:10:44 GMT -5 teen persuasion said:

Jun 30, 2022 7:23:19 GMT -5 scgal said:

I wasn't thinking of it on the govt dime (our cost). I was thinking of it on the small businesses. Having a person paid for 12 mos is a huge expense not just in money but in labor. You cannot always get people to cover. There are other aspects to consider than just the individual

Well, NY has a Paid Family Medical Leave policy.  The terms are different for different issues (medical, caretaking, etc), but for bonding time with new children it is currently up to 12 weeks at 67% of pay.  The employer doesn't pay it, employees pay into the insurance fund (just like unemployment insurance) thru payroll, sliding scale based on pay.  Mine is a few $ / paycheck.

This isn't optional, it's a state mandate, just like unemployment insurance.  It's fairly new, and slowly expanding as it phases in.  But it levels the playing field for small employers who wouldn't/couldn't offer this benefit - now everyone is entitled to it.

NY Paid Family Leave

I would be open to this

[Tennesseer]

Could Biden pull this off? 

Biden calls for filibuster carveout to protect abortion rights

President Biden on Thursday said the Senate should carve out an exception to the 60-vote filibuster to codify abortion rights after the Supreme Court overturned the precedent set by Roe v. Wade.

“The most important thing to be clear about is I believe we have to codify Roe v. Wade in the law, and the way to do that is to make sure the Congress votes to do that,” Biden said at a press conference at the NATO summit in Spain.

“And if the filibuster gets in the way, it’s like voting rights, it should be we provide an exception for this, requiring an exception to the filibuster for this action to deal with the Supreme Court decision,” Biden added.

There are not 50 senators who support changing the rules around the filibuster, however, making Biden’s suggestion unlikely to go anywhere.

Biden calls for filibuster carveout to protect abortion rights

[dondub]

Jun 30, 2022 6:30:32 GMT -5 scgal said:

Jun 27, 2022 21:02:31 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Well, we could over more affordable high quality day care, more opportunities for flex work, and quarantined 12 months parental leave . I certainly would have had a second baby if I’d had more than six week unpaid maternity leave, and if day care wasn’t so hard to find and didn’t cost so much. 

But no, let’s not use the carrot, let’s use the stick and try to trap women into birthing more white babies. That’s sure to work. 

Where would the money come from for all that?

The bloated defense budget. Or would rather put armaments ahead of children?

[Tennesseer]

Jun 30, 2022 9:31:00 GMT -5 dondub said:

Jun 30, 2022 6:30:32 GMT -5 scgal said:

Where would the money come from for all that?

The bloated defense budget. Or would rather put armaments ahead of children?

[scgal]

Jun 30, 2022 9:31:00 GMT -5 dondub said:

Jun 30, 2022 6:30:32 GMT -5 scgal said:

Where would the money come from for all that?

The bloated defense budget. Or would rather put armaments ahead of children?

why don't we keep doing what the past 2 admins do kick the can (scarcasm). I think it should be the states not the fed

[thyme4change]

I listened to a podcast about adopting Native American children. They said that when the initial information about children and babies goes out, not only do they specify the child's race, but they rate their skin tone from light to dark. Children that can "pass" as white are second only to children that are racially designated as white. I don’t know if that is common practice or just the state in the story or just this agency, or maybe just related to indigenous adoptions. But, I doubt there will be a huge increase in the domestic supply of white or near white babies for adoption.

[teen persuasion]

Jun 30, 2022 8:29:13 GMT -5 scgal said:

Jun 30, 2022 8:10:44 GMT -5 teen persuasion said:

Well, NY has a Paid Family Medical Leave policy.  The terms are different for different issues (medical, caretaking, etc), but for bonding time with new children it is currently up to 12 weeks at 67% of pay.  The employer doesn't pay it, employees pay into the insurance fund (just like unemployment insurance) thru payroll, sliding scale based on pay.  Mine is a few $ / paycheck.

This isn't optional, it's a state mandate, just like unemployment insurance.  It's fairly new, and slowly expanding as it phases in.  But it levels the playing field for small employers who wouldn't/couldn't offer this benefit - now everyone is entitled to it.

NY Paid Family Leave

I would be open to this

Yeah, we love the idea (haven't had reason to make use of it myself, so far)!

So why can't govt at the federal level implement this so ALL Americans have access? NY is the blueprint, the proof of concept - expand it nationwide.