first of all, you're once again implying there i'm somehow in total agreement with german abortion law, which is both dumb to assume based on my previous statements, as well as plain wrong - unsurprisingly. it's still obviously significantly less intrusive / authoritarian / bigoted than american abortion laws and practices on average.

secondly, you're ignoring the part where germany, unlike the US, has significant protections and support for mothers and actual children, so a hypothetical "pro life" argument would not just be a shallow excuse for controlling women's bodies, while obviously not giving a flying fuck about actual children.

lastly, you're clearly unfamiliar with the actual law, you just looked at some list of cut off dates and failed to realise the details, which include wide ranging exceptions from that cutoff point after medical consultation, which are free and easily available, making abortions de facto widely available until week 22 - so right to the point of earliest viability. if you don't believe me, and want to educate yourself, just translate § 218a (4) StGB

so your silly assumptions about what "the majority of germans" think about abortion (quite funny considering your law clearly DEFIES the will of the overwhelming majority of americans) couldn't be more wrong. not that it was relevant to my point in the first place because, again, people who value freedom, bodily autonomy, women's rights, and the government staying out of your private business, clearly oppose the anti-choice bigotry - no matter if they live in a country with somewhat reasonable abortion laws like germany, or in a backward theocratic shithole like the US.

I didn't imply any of those things. Rather, I'm just stating that it's the government's business because there are LAWS (which are made by the government) regarding this issue. The rest of your post is a handful of red herrings that don't really address the argument that it's the government's business. However, I'll address each one anyway because we should have a discussion.

1. Assuming your country is democratic, I have to imagine that a majority of Germans place some value on the fetus prior to it being viable. You might be in the minority (and that's fine) but do you truly believe that the majority of your country are bigots or is that only directed at Americans?
2. Pro life simply means the right to be alive. You're correct that your country has far more support for women and their families but that's not what pro-lifers (many who are women) are fighting for. It's simply the right to live and have a chance. Your chances might not be very good, but something is better than nothing. And if you decide that your life isn't worth living, we have plenty of guns for you to address that issue.
3. I'm obviously unfamiliar with the law because I don't live in your country. However, the fact that a medical consultation is required is pretty intrusive if you ask me. Why is the government getting involved in that situation? Where I live (California), one of my friends (an OB) performed an abortion on a 7.5 month old fetus. Basically, the woman wasn't in a situation where she could take care of the child and health insurance was an issue. No questions asked by the government and there's no requirement by the state to know what the abortion was for. This freedom simply doesn't exist in your country. This freedom will continue to exist in California even though Roe was overturned.

again with those simplistic (and wrong) assumptions. just because i'm pro choice does not mean i don't place ANY value on a fetus prior to viability, how often do i have to debunk this moronic take? acknowledging a woman's right to bodily autonomy does not mean i don't realise that many fetuses have the potential to become a person. why do you think i repeatedly advocate for measures that would disincentivise abortions without banning them and punishing women, if i simply see no value whatsoever in a fetus? it's a rhetoric trick anti-choicers use in order to justify their bigotry, trying to assume some kind of moral high ground, but it simply doesn't honestly reflect my actual position. it's shocking that you genuinely can't seem to make this simple distinction, even though we've been over this multiple times already.

as to american law, you might have some places (which are de facto unavailable for large parts of those most affected by this ruling, namely poor and minority women, and very young ones) that have very liberal abortion rules, but for the vast majority of red america, legal abortions are already de facto unavailable, and california and other liberal states will only be able to have those laws until republicans take over congress and outlaw it federally. notice how i specifically said "on average", because i anticipated that disingenuous spin, throwing all those who don't have access to reproductive health under the bus, and acting like some women having legal late term abortions (while still having significantly lower availability / affordability of pre natal care, screenings, reproductive health... than german women) somehow makes up for that, and magically turns american authoritarianism into "freedom", lol. it is blatantly obvious that your judicial branch and one of just two parties is strictly opposed to women's rights and privacy, and will continue to erode them in the future. you live in a theocratic shithole, lol, and no spin, no misrepresentation, no acting obtuse can change what the whole world is witnessing and shaking its head about...

This post was edited by fender on Jun 24 2022 11:12pm

If a fetus has value, you can understand why some people might value it more than the woman's right to bodily autonomy then! It seems to me that you're struggling with this concept...

Some places? Between California, New York, New Jersey, and Illinois you have about a quarter of the population. Then you have to consider that purple states like Minnesota exist and have reasonable abortion laws and many people live in proximity to reasonable states (Texas being an obvious exception). Then you have to take into consideration that people will be able to buy abortion pills legally and illegally. If you can't stop meth and heroin, you're not going to stop something that people actually need. Ultimately, the states that are most restrictive have had draconian laws for a long time so I don't think anything changes from a pragmatic standpoint. We'll have to see though.

You keep calling America a "theocratic shithole." Is that supposed to make us feel bad or something? We get the government that we deserve. I mean, we're about to vote the GOP into the House and Senate because gas is "expensive" even though the GOP supports sedition, draconian laws, etc. At some point, you just need to accept that this is who we ARE. When have we EVER treated minorities and poor with the respect that they deserve? You can bitch and moan all day that we should care and that we're horrible people but it's falling on deaf ears. We DON'T care and our history proves that.

it's not an insult, it's merely a description. the shithole part has long been established (murders, mass shootings, infant mortality, life expectancy, worker exploitation, healthcare, mass incarceration, inequality, systemic racism, voter disenfranchisement...), while the theocracy part (previously manifested in strange but admittedly less severe characteristics like widely spread acceptance and even teaching of creationism, a uniquely american prudeness) has gained significant traction in recent years with your judiciary and one of two parties openly pandering to religious zealots and their ideas. not that that's entirely new per se, it's just that any semblance of secularism has now vanished. they aren't even trying to hide their religious bigotry anymore.
so comparing that with taliban values is hardly an exaggeration at this point. the methods may still somewhat differ, but the underlying ideas don't: the open hatred for the lgbtq+ community, women as second class citizens, censorship and anti-scientific religious bullshit being pushed in schools, hate of other religions and minorities... it's really the same, just by another name...

and no, i don't struggle at all to understand where religious bigots come from with their weird fetus worship, i'm just saying that a rational human being who values freedom and privacy would never come to the conclusion that a women's / girl's bodily autonomy is worth less than their own religious morals and personal opinions about the value of a fetus. i fully support your right to think of a fetus as something worth protecting at all cost - the mother's mental and physical health, her safety, her future - then simply don't get an abortion, find someone who shares those values, and never take any action that could possibly put a woman in that situation (as in mistresses of republican anti-choice zealots being forced to have abortions by their hypocrite lovers). all i'm asking is don't impose YOUR values onto others. don't use the government to force strangers to live according to your religious delusions. that's the distinction that YOU still struggle to make.

This post was edited by fender on Jun 25 2022 12:26am

I laughed at the "many black people will die at the hands of police officer"

That's literally what democracy is though...

Next they will go after contraception.

continued-



A federal law would take a simple majority of the house, 60 senators and the president.
It could also be done by just 50 senators and the vp + president by using a legislative nuclear option, which would completely destroy the fabric of congress in the process and send our nation into a political death spiral
Even with a law passed, it might not necessarily pass constitutional muster, since it still leaves open the question for scotus to decide whether the federal government has jurisdiction to override states on the legality of abortion, which is both legally a losing argument and politically a winning argument, so its not easy to predict.
To get a full amendment which would end the question completely, it requires 67% of the house and 67 senators or 34 states just to bring it to a constitutional convention, at which point it passes to state legislatures and must be supported by 38 states to pass

https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=95557918&f=119

I don't even like the OP there, but that was a legitimate discussion thread, mods. Why would you close that?