Is this what the “pro-life” movement wanted?
Does this demonize and oppress a large chunk of the population? If so, then yes, that's what they wanted.
this post was submitted on 27 May 2024
65 points (100.0% liked)
Socialism
2844 readers
33 users here now
Beehaw's community for socialists, communists, anarchists, and non-authoritarian leftists (this means anti-capitalists) of all stripes. A place for all leftist and labor news and discussion, as long as you're nice about it.
Non-socialists are welcome to come to learn, though it's hard to get to in-depth discussions if the community is constantly fighting over the basics. We ask that non-socialists please be respectful and try not to turn this into a "left vs right" debate forum by asking leading questions or by trying to draw others into a fight.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It's exactly what they wanted.
This is about control and punishing perceived undesirables. Cruelty is a feature, not an unfortunate byproduct.
When the medical (Hippocratic) oath directly opposes the law, what's a medical professional to do?
It's a moral, personal, and individual dilemma.
It's insane and tragic that we have to see this development, against professional expertise and statistical and scientific knowledge. At the evident and predictable cost of people and their well being.
The same conservatives that crow about abortion in one breath will echo Great Replacement rhetoric in the next, and talk about 'baby mommas' on welfare being paid by George Soros to 'churn out demon-rat voters' in the third.
The "pro-life" movement has been thoroughly coopted into the service of white supremacy (whether or not Christianity has always been that is a discussion for another time).
🤖 I'm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
Online services like PlanC, Aid Access, and Abuzz disseminate the information; shield laws protect blue-state providers from red-state prosecution if they prescribe pills via telehealth and mail them to patients living under the bans.
A few days later, the same slim majority decided that Wheaton College, a Christian school already exempt from using its insurance policy to pay for birth control, was unduly burdened by having to fill out a form so that a third party could cover the cost.
Almost immediately after the June 2022 ruling, stories started emerging of pregnant people forced to drive hours out of state while miscarrying, carrying dead fetuses, feverish and in pain; of women going into sepsis or losing their fertility — all because doctors feared breaking the law by practicing good medicine.
While emergency rooms around the country turn away pregnant patients in distress — one Oregon OB-GYN called the situation “absolutely shocking,” “appalling,” and “inconceivable —providers and advocates are holding their breaths for the first preventable death due to compulsory medical malpractice.
The narrative is well documented: A violent intimate partner, sensing the impending loss of control over his wife’s or girlfriend’s body and the arrival of a competitor for her time and attention — even if he wanted the baby at first — grows increasingly possessive, volatile, and assaultive.
An analysis by researchers at several Philadelphia medical institutions and published in JAMA Psychiatry in 2022 compared suicide data from 1974, just after Roe, through 2016, by which time restrictions in some states had created what were, for some, insurmountable obstacles to ending a pregnancy.
Saved 83% of original text.
My hope is that a notewothy percentage of health care providers will move out of red states. There are shortages everywhere. They'd be welcomed in the more civilized blue states.