Texas doctor who said nine-year-olds can safely give birth appointed to maternal mortality committee
Texas doctor who said nine-year-olds can safely give birth appointed to maternal mortality committee
Dr Ingrid Skop called the supreme court’s overturning of Roe v Wade ‘a victory’ and has argued in favor of abortion bans
You're viewing a single thread.
Skop serves as vice-president and director of medical affairs for the national anti-abortion research group Charlotte Lozier Institute and is a member of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists. She is also a plaintiff in a US supreme court lawsuit seeking to revoke the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the key abortion drug mifepristone, which she argues is “dangerous” despite years of evidence showing the drug is safe. She has authored a number of research papers that were ultimately retracted for misleading errors.
We can't beat far right extremism with moderate politics.
There's no compromising with people who lie and say anything to get what they want.
I’d argue that we can beat them from any position, as long as we do it in unity.
We also have to overcome gerrymandering, which SCOTUS just said is legal (as long as the GOP pretends to disenfranchise people for political reasons rather than racial ones). At the same time, we need to overwhelm voter suppression with enough genuine votes that it isn't effective. Same with the Electoral College, the illegitimate Supreme Court, and the Senate, which gives outsized influence to big, empty Red States and fight against the unlimited flow of dark money in politics...
It can all still be done, but we have to all vote, donate, and volunteer, as well as be unified as you said. My big unity wish is messaging. No one can compete with Fox News because Right Wing media is very good at staying on-message and we're a "big tent" party, but still; we have to be better at it...
None of that is going to happen. The empire would rather fall. - History.
I'm sure the slaves would "never be freed", women would "never work", black people and woman would never vote", black people would "never have equal rights", etc.
Don't let history get in the way of history.
I would argue that while you're correct you're not 100% correct and overlooking a lot of nuances in history. If you want to look at it like that the empire fractured into two, there was a war and the winning side engulfed the other. None of the things you bring up as examples were accomplished with just unity and lobbying, all of these causes involved violence or the threat of violence. Don't go over simplifying history, a lot of people died for those rights. I by no means am advocating for these liars or violence but history has proven liars like this can be very dangerous and should not be laughed off.
Did you even pay attention to the comment I was responding to? Like how am I suppose to anticipate my response being applied to a completely different argument
That's why I did it! Did you read the comment you were responding to? Being applied to a completely different argument?
I didn't say you were wrong but I was adressing the defeatist part of their argument.
Hey I'm just poking fun. That first comment was obviously a joke, you took it seriously so I ran with your logic and replied to you in the same way.
Not with that attitude.
spoiler
asdfasfasfasfas
Yes, please focus on the thing that needs a constitutional amendment to change, and not the thing that has more popular support.
spoiler
asdfasfasfasfas
gerrymandering is already illegal.
Racial gerrymandering is, but you can say you're drawing districts specifically to help your party win and that's not illegal. At least not at the federal level. Your state might have better rules.
https://www.npr.org/2023/05/17/1173469584/partisan-gerrymandering-explainer-north-carolina
And with armaments.
If moderates could check the impulse towards
bipartisan compromisescollaborating with fascists that's inherent to their ideological worldview maybe, but they've shown very little willingness to do that recently and historicallyAnd with big sticks.
Mifepristone, which we have known is safe for over 40 years, is apparently too dangerous but a 9 year old giving birth is a-okay how this quack.
That's what I mean
They 100% know it's safe.
But they do t like that it's legal for other reasons that they know don't have plausible deniability.
So they claim (against all science) it's dangerous, and count on extremists judges to pretend they believe it and outlaw it on that premise.
No amount of factual evidence about the safety of the drug will change any of their actions, because they don't give a single fuck if it's safe or not.
Moderates always fall for the trap and take them at their word. Which is insane, and at this point it seems safe to say the reason is they have a lot of the same donors, and part of the strings to that money is going along with the dog and pony show even tho everyone involved already knows what the result will be.
They do know that. However, a woman (a fucking doctor nonetheless) who thinks it's safe for a 9 year old yo give birth is not playing with a full deck of cards. She honestly should have her license revoked. That is straight batshit.
Other things they try to lure moderates with:
"European countries ban it after 12 weeks!"
They of course fail to mention that their 12 weeks is closer to our 14/15 weeks, that you can get one at any hospital, you don't have to pay for it, and exceptions for that ban are not hard to come by.
"Babies can survive after 21 weeks!"
One. One child made it at 21 weeks. At 22 weeks it's a bit better but still extremely unlikely. At 23 weeks there is a 25% chance and at 24 weeks there is a 50% chance. But the percentage of fetuses aborted after 20 weeks is 1%. The vast majority of those are due to issues with the fetus like it will die an excruciating death shortly after birth or the woman will die which is absolutely now a thing in states with restrictive abortion laws. The few where that isn't the case likely could not get one earlier due to expenses or lack of availability in the area or restrictive laws requiring multiple visits.
"Fetuses have a heart beat at four weeks."
A rhythmic electrical pulse is not a heart beat.
"Women use abortion as contraception!"
Abortion is no walk in the park and not cheap. Much easier to simply use birth control which is what the vast majority of women do.
Most Americans do not want unrestricted abortion!
Yeah. Most people ones do not want unrestricted surgery. Not surprising. The vast majority (~85%) were fine with Roe v Wade staying in place and states only being able to pass laws after the point of viability.
"Jesus hates abortion!"
First, his name is Yeshua. Second, an abortifacient is prescribed for a suspected cheating woman in the Bible. Southern Baptists dios Not even hice a shit about abortion until the late 70s.
The overall goal is obvious to all of us who recognize that access to abortion is necessary. But be on the lookout for anti abortion advocates who try to seem moderate. They are not.
This message is not directed directly at you but if you happen to come across these arguments, these are some easy responses to point out their bullshit. Also mention that since the end of Roe there have been about 65k pregnancies from rape in the 14 states with near total bans on abortion. Super great. /s