Every Republican Accusation is a confession.
Why do they even need a database of pregnant women? I get that GOP is trying to take away a woman’s autonomy and all that, but what’s the official public reason they’re giving?
Prego but no live baby ? Jail!
Still birth? Jail!
Miscarriage? Jail!
Crossing state lines while prego? Jail! (You might be trying to get an abortion)
I also want to know their reasoning too, but what I REALLY want to know is if they are aware that pregnancy isn’t permanent? The more I think about this the more questions I have.
Who is gonna update that database? How many tax dollars are they willing to spend paying people to deal with implementing this? I know the purpose is to convict women for abortions and miscarriages, which is fucking horrific…but then I think about how people keep cars for far longer than a person is pregnant and how the DMV is not the model for efficiency.
Holy shit this whole thing is equal parts horrifying and laughably stupid.
Sorry about my weird tangent… your question got my brain asking questions and I don’t think the actual answers will be much help.
“why has this woman been pregnant for 27 years? … HOW has this woman been pregnant for 27 years?!”
The problem is you thought about it. Republicans don’t generally go that far with an idea.
Per this, she didn’t attempt to create a database and it’s a false statement going around.
Thank you. I should’ve known better and looked it up. I appreciate you posting this for me and others.
Click bait lemmy for sure
Thank you for posting this link. Good to know. The text includes this:
The bill prohibits information from organizations, including any affiliates, subsidiaries, successors and clinics, that “perform, induce, refer for, or counsel in favor of abortions, or provide financial support to any other organization that conducts such activities.”
Q: Does the bill also prohibit organizations that are against abortions?
You can’t expect decency from trash. Trash like this will always ignore how trashy they are. If there were a way to compel them to tell the truth I bet there isn’t a single real maga in the country who really believes in their god.
I’m not sure about that. In my experience, it’s how they justify everything. The ones I’ve known personally seem to genuinely believe their god wants them to inflict pain on others as part of some sort of divine warfare. They also tend to prefer the old testament, unsurprisingly
Now the question remains.
Would they be in favour or against using guns to perform an abortion?
I think they’d want to arm the zygote
The gun shoots a intense spray of abortion medication.
Checkmate!
The Governor of South Dakota has entered the chat
Кoптexт?
Late term puppy abortion with a gun
Wait yeah, if a doc is using guns to provide abortions do you take away his guns or let him keep giving abortions?
The abortions are in self defense of course.
I wonder what’s next, conceal carry permits for pregnant women to go out in public?
The only thing that can stop an abortion is an abortion with a gun
Give the fetuses guns? With that work?
BigPharma should get in on this. Every American made fetus gets a free Armalite rifle seed that grows with the fetus. Name it too! /s
If it was possible Texas would have made it mandatory by now
This is the cognitive dissonance politicians need to have in order to be a good tool as a techno fascist for the exploitation-class.
What is a techno-fascist? What did I mis?
W40K
It’s the collaboration of the state and private contractors in documenting everything to computers. The process started around the 1970s - mostly with police departments using crimes of the past to, er, “predict” where future crimes will happen (ie, they put the number of incidents in a calculator and did an extrapolation).
Half a century latter, there’s a lot of documentation. So much. In private databases, federal databases – plus everything that’s accessible online. It’s impossible for a person to actually sort through, so we automate the sorting. It’s like extrapolating from incidents, but also adding in keyword sorting and evolutionary trial-&-error algorithms.
The specific kind of American Libertarian pseudo-fascists who look to technology to save us from everything.
Basically, the Managed Democracy of Super Earth from Helldivers. That sums it up pretty well. Fascism in its corporate-friendly, AI-run form where CEOs of tech-related companies have most of the real power outside the State.
Fascists that enjoy techno music of course!
If the
robotsRepublicans win, we’ll have to listen to techno.That does it! I was beginning to get a bit tired of all the murder, oppression, fraud and general fascism but I draw the line at bad music!
https://newrepublic.com/article/180487/balaji-srinivasan-network-state-plutocrat
I think this is the same article I saw on Lemmy a few weeks ago, it very thoroughly explains the topic. In very simple words though, I have bad news about what all those tech billionaires in Silicon Valley are planning to do with their money.
Cognitive dissonance
My dude got that cognitive distance
Keep it at least 6 feet (2 meters for non-freedom folk) at least, fam
English is my second language, used spell check, without thinking too much about it! Sorry 😁
While I am strongly against a database of pregnant women, especially in regards of the obvious purpose of it.
I am not sure if I would call it cognitive dissonance… Fascistic? Sure.
The idea behind the tracking of pregnancy is the protection of the individual “Child” and “future member of the society” against “overreaching authoritarian forces” which could lead to the death of said “member”. And the threat to the “child” is not the government but rather the mother and the supporting force would be the government. So placing the information to control into the hands of the government is an obvious choice.
In the case of gun ownership, the government is the threat for which the guns exist. The government is the “overreaching authoritarian force” and the gun owner is the “member”. The government isn’t the ally and therefore can’t be trusted with such a list.
Again I am not agreeing them these people. I just don’t think that is cognitive dissonance. I think a better example would the desire for a small government and a database of pregnant women to spy on.
Again imo idiots but not hypocrites for that (specifically… Because they are, just not for that)
The idea behind the tracking of pregnancy is the protection of the individual “Child” and “future member of the society” against “overreaching authoritarian forces” which could lead to the death of said “member”. And the threat to the “child” is not the government but rather the mother and the supporting force would be the government. So placing the information to control into the hands of the government is an obvious choice.
I,m not sure I follow here, but I don’t think the government is trustworthy with holding this information, wether it was given by the mother “freely” or not. The government has proven over and over it is not to be trusted with such personal data. If a complication or a situation change arises and the mother has to end her pregnancy. It will be used for punishment.
Oh I agree but I am strictly talking from the perspective of the idiots who would want such a list.
They want the government to police those poor women in order to “protect” the “child”, so the government can be “trusted” from their pov. And they want the government to police the women because from their pov, the mother is a danger to the “child”.
In the case of the guns, their opinion is that the guns will protect them against the government and so you don’t want them to have that list.
Well, every birth inevitably leads to a death, whilst guns might but they’re not guaranteed to.
So obviously, you need to keep track of the most deadly kind of people, pregnant women, more so than a not quite as deadly kind like gun owners.
True, the case can be made than a single gun can result in multiple deaths whilst a birth will only ever result in a single death, but none the less the statistics don’t lie and they show that a lot more deaths can be traced back to a birth than they can to gun ownership.
A single birth can result in multiple deaths in the situation of murderer being born, so you might actually be right.
Yeah, but without all those other births those deaths would not have happenned, so ultimatelly it’s all the fault of pregnant women.
Being born is always a death sentence!!!
Hitler was born, if I remember correctly.
Someone birthed Putin
Many people who are born go on to have children of their own. So a single pregnancy can lead to generations and generations of deaths!
I read a study recently saying that 100% of murderers were born. So that’s another vector for births leading to multiple deaths.
I once watched a woman walk into a supermarket just openly being pregnant. Fortunately she behaved, because some of the other folks were concealed pregnant.
Next introduces a bill to ban women from politics
Maybe she is jealous because noone wants to impregnate her?
Why the fuck would you need to track pregnant people? Only to find and punish them when they go through an abortion huh?
I thought voting Dem in state/federal and voting with the heart for local was supposed to fix everything though.
Can someone who is good with politics explain to me why Dems are not fighting back against the slide into fascism?
Why are these states still receiving federal funding and welfare subsidies?
Why is the compromised and illegitimate Supreme Court still in power?
Why are blue states not sanctioning fascist states? (Yes I know feds prohibit commerce tariffs. Why are blue states just giving up instead of getting creative? Isn’t legislation their job?)
They might fight harder if excuse spamming leftwashed centrists like you didn’t practice the “vote once ever then hibernate as if everything should be fixed” activism you accuse liberals of doing
Can someone who is good with politics explain to me why Dems are not fighting back against the slide into fascism?
They are.
Why are these states still receiving federal funding and welfare subsidies?
Because they’ve complied with the legal requirements to receive that funding, and so it would be illegal for them to be denied that funding due to an unrelated matter.
Why is the compromised and illegitimate Supreme Court still in power?
Because impeaching a member of the Supreme Court requires a charge be brought by the US House of Representatives, and the Senate needs to vote to convict (2/3 majority, I believe). Y’know, because of the US constitution.
Why are blue states not sanctioning fascist states?
Because they don’t have the legal authority to do so.
they could and should pack the court but I suspect until there is a firmer majority in the senate there will be a couple democrats that will happily accept republican donor money to stop it.
They should not, because when Republicans win in the future–and they will–Republicans will do the same thing.
OTOH, if they take the house and retain the senate, I think that impeaching Thomas is perfectly reasonable, and you could make a pretty solid claim for impeaching Kavanaugh for lying as well.
Impeaching thomas takes a far larger majority and, guess what republicans already run the supreme court so if they pack it later we just end up back in the current situation. It only requires a simple majority in the senate to pack the court.
Can someone who is good with politics explain to me why Dems are not fighting back against the slide into fascism?
Because the neoliberals in charge of the party don’t really mind fascism as long as they can make deals with the fascists to preserve their own power.
Just like the Italian liberals sat out the battle between the original fascists, the also quite far right monarchists and the anarchists, socialists and other ridiculously outnumbered and outgunned left wing groups.
Until it became clear who was going to win. Then they allied with the fascists.
Today’s neoliberals talk a big game about a women’s right to bodily autonomy when there’s donations and votes in it, but the ones in charge don’t ACTUALLY care. At least not enough to actually DO something to codify Roe v Wade into law during the almost 30 years that it was being threatened.
They DEFINITELY care a LOT more about “bipartisanship”, which is de facto negotiating with fascists so that their owner donors won’t be inconvenienced by what they pretend to be trying to do.
I’d say it’s all bread and circuses, but there’s not even much bread left for regular people to survive on.
Bingo!
now now, let’s be fair
it’s also so that evangelicals can ban recreational sex
They’re just trying super hard to make America a worse place to live for some reason.
They worship money so they think life should be terrible for everyone (even themselves) except the owner class. Its the same reason Christians, family values types, and fiscal types still support people like Trump and other kid diddlin’ Republicans - You’re inherently “good” if you have the money to get out of it, so clearly it can’t be a sin.
Worst speedrun ever
…While masturbating furiously to incest porn on the internet.
It’s okay as long as their son is their masturbation buddy, like Mike Johnson’s son.
Dont forget transfem porn.
just wait until they find transmasc porn
they don’t know that trans men exist
I’m sure they do, in an academic sense.
But it doesn’t fit the mental structure they’ve built to justify anti-trans bigotry, which is assembled on an scaffold of nominally trying to protect women from perverts.
Current right wing anti-trans sentiment is built on much of the same underlying ideas as the anti-trans part of 2nd wave trans-exclusive radical feminism:
- All men are dangerous, likely sexual predators.
- Sexual predators will do whatever they have to to pursue their prey.
- You cannot change your sex, and wanting to is either mental illness or a ploy.
- Women have a right to spaces that exclude men.
- Women in such spaces are likely to be in a more vulnerable position than elsewhere.
Therefore, sexually predatory men will play dress up and pretend to be women to get access to women’s spaces as a means to pursue prey.
If you accept all five of those points, then their view makes total sense (but at least half of those points are wrong, which is why it doesn’t make sense in reality).
Or a misscarriage.
Same deal with gun owning political opposition really. I’m against any tools the rich can use to target and disenfranchise their political opponents with.
Precisely. They aren’t even trying to hide it. The writing is on the tin.
And considering abortion isn’t illegal in every state, this is even more of an overreach than if it were.
I would expect a database of gunowner with serial numbers and for each weapon a ballistics profile.
Makes sense. There is a database of people with permits to operate and all ownerships including VIN of vehicles… that’s not weird either.
The NRA specifically lobbied to prohibit digital databasing of guns, gun owners, and gun sales. All gun traces are done by filing through paper copies of form 4473.
Wow, that’s not needlessly inefficient and prone to undetectable human “error” at all! 🤦
correct, it’s needfully inefficient because people are opposed to an easily searchable database of gunowners
No, gun owners are opposed to gun owner databases because then they might be held accountable for their reckless and/or antisocial attitude towards their weapons.
I’m an outspoken liberal. I have lots of guns. Lots. I do not want a Trump administration putting those two things together.
And for you unarmed libs, you really want to be tagged “harmless” in a federal database? You’ll be the first on the trains.
b-b-b-b-but what if I need to overthrow the oppressive gubmint that happens to not agree with all of my crazy values?
like abortion rights?
Things don’t have to be tracked to be targeted. Schools, concerts, and clubs are targeted all the time.
Well, you see, the logic here is simple; gun ownership is a constitutionally protected right, and women don’t have rights.
That’s what you get when a bunch of white slave-owning men write the constitution
I hate that you are right. I wish that we could say that the existence of the 9th counts just as much for the right to bodily autonomy but that’s not what these shit heads will agree to.
And the irony is that this is coming from a woman
She their useful idiot. Find someone willing to sell out their entire group for clout. She is young enough that if republicans gain full power she will still be around when they start to talk about how women shouldn’t hold office.
