this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2023
92 points (100.0% liked)
Politics
10178 readers
134 users here now
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
6 weeks is effectively a ban. That's not even enough time to know you're pregnant.
Like I can comprehend their being upper limits to abortion if the mother's life isnt at risk when the fetus is viable. There dont seem to be many people protesting states with a 24+ week to third trimester abortion bans that do exist in a lot of northern states. This is so far and away from that.
6 weeks is hardly even pregnant. The fetus is the size of a lentil, and with aid of a microscope you can see it resembles a what you'd see inside of a fish egg more than a human. That's barely enough time to really know a person is late for their first period especially if there is spotting from the placenta attaching or a hematoma
I know that's their intent, but I don't understand why they aren't just going for an all-out ban. That would really rile up their rabid idiot supporters, and their strategy is clearly to motivate the base rather than to reach across the aisle. Why not go whole hog? They just got clearance from SCotUS to do it.
A primary strategy the right uses is to feign responsibility and pretending to be reasonable. It usually doesnt pass scrutiny but it allows them to seem reasonable, and responsible.
It's like fiscal republicans talking about reducing inefficient government spending, and reducing the deficit to balance the books. On the surface this sounds responsible like a household balancing their own budget. In practice some deficit is useful, and they forget all about it when they are funding military spending and giving tax cuts to the wealthy.
It's the same as this. They arent going to outright ban abortion(yet) its a free country! But they will give a "reasonable" time frame based on an old man's limited knowledge of female anatomy. They can then pretend that if a woman needs or wants an abortion after the deadline it's the woman's fault for first not using protection, and then not knowing her own body.
Never mind that these same people also limit sex ed and healthcare that would provide birth control.
because 6 week bans are already unpopular, and total bans even moreso. even most anti-abortion advocates are not in favor of a total ban.
if they were concerned about popularity it would make sense to sponsor popular bills. and let's be honest, most anti-abortion advocates are in favor of abortion when they want one.
the difference between a 6 week ban and a total ban electorally is substantial enough that it's not worth the optical tradeoff for them, particularly when a 6 week ban is functionally the same thing. keep in mind: Republicans have already suffered Roe backlash in 2022; they would basically guarantee a sustained backlash in pursuing total bans.