Draft Alito opinion leaked overturning Roe

Ahhh, I missed that. Good point, except that is going to require amnio DNA testing (sorry, I think like a lawyer - 30 years). But I like the point. Of course, if we are just talking about retroactive awards, that makes perfect sense

 

There's been a lot of talk about the vote in Ireland (and Argentina) as a result of this interview in which a political messenger talked about what was successful in both of those campaigns. Both were from countries that had completely outlawed abortion and now allow it, albeit with significant limits.

Why Abortion Activists Need to Stop Using the Word Choice

A lot of the discussion is like that of Matt Yglesias here. I usually find him pretty insightful even if I disagree

Words aren't magic


Under the terms of the Regulation of Termination of Pregnancy Act of 2018, abortion is legal in the Republic of Ireland under the following conditions:

• When the pregnancy is less than 12-weeks old.
• When two doctors certify in good faith that the fetus is likely to die either before or within 28 days of birth.
• When two doctors certify that continuing the pregnancy poses a serious risk to the life or health of the mother.
• When one doctor certifies that there is an emergency threat to the life or health of the mother requiring immediate action.

That is a big change from the historical abortion policy situation in Ireland, and it is very much at odds with the policy goals of the pro-life movement in the United States of America. But it is also a much more moderate policy than the one advocated for by the pro-choice movement in the United States of America.

A lot of people keep making the point that the successful political campaigns in Argentina and Ireland (both went to popular vote and there was significant support for ending prohibitions) should be distinguished from the US because they adopted policies that are much more limiting then current policies here.

I agree they should be distinguished, but not for that reason. I thought the relevant distinctions were in these parts of the interview

Ireland
Correct. It’s basically growing that choir by saying to people, “Hey, this thing that you think has nothing to do with you? You’re going to need this thing because your daughter is going to need it, or your neighbor is going to need it, or your cousin is going to need it, or your colleagues are going to need it. And then what’s going to happen?” This issue that you think has not been your issue, it’s your issue.

Argentina

And essentially it translates to a call for sex education so that we have knowledge over our bodies, contraception so that we don’t need to have abortions, and abortions so that we don’t die.

They understood, because they had done their research, that the people most likely to need to be persuaded didn’t live in Buenos Aires. They lived in the provinces. And so what they did is they used as their messengers medical providers from the provinces. And the message that they utilized was “salvemos miles de vidas”— we will save thousands of lives. That was deployed by making short social media digital ads of these medical care providers.

In both Argentina and Ireland, the message is reaching populations that had lived with complete prohibitions. So all of them were specifically aware of instances where that had resulted in injustices. They were merely highlighting what everyone knew and asking them to consider that in their vote. We don't have that history here, at least recently. I think it's going to take some horror stories before the issue will be reconsidered. Just my opinion

 

All good stuff.

The thing I heard that gave me pause is whether the "left" wing of the Democratic party would permit bringing a bill to the floor with limited goals to get the Republicans on record in an uncomfortable vote. The thought was to try to pass a nationwide bill codifying a rape and incest exception and permitting travel across state lines without criminal liability. Those issues poll very well and would make Republicans extremely uncomfortable.

 

I think they will and they will define the “crime” as the aiding and abetting or conspiring to travel to commit the “crime”, which happened in their state. Already thought pieces on it.

Meanwhile, Matt Schlapp ties in Great Replacement Theory and confirms that white women are just vessels to be bred. It’s just a matter of time until incels are given breeding stock. That will also address JD Vance’s concerns about young white male unemployment by taking competition from women out of the workforce. It’s a veritable unified field theory of solution to all problems from their perspective.

And yet, when CPAC leader Matt Schlapp met U.S. journalists outside, he said that ending abortion rights would address the great replacement myth: “If you say there is a population problem in a country, but you’re killing millions of your own people through legalized abortion every year, if that were to be reduced, some of that problem is solved,” Schlapp said. “You have millions of people who can take many of these jobs. How come no one brings that up? If you’re worried about this quote-unquote replacement, why don’t we start there? Start with allowing our own people to live.”
May 19, 2022