1. #7641
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasulis View Post
    Another issue has come to the forefront. IVF centers typically develop several embryos to increase the chances of successful IVF procedures. What do they do with the extra embryos? Keep it frozen forever? Who will pay the storage fees? Etc.
    Sell them to anyone with a freezer and the desire to claim a couple more children on their tax returns.

  2. #7642
    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ala...ivf-rcna141184

    Both chambers of the Alabama Legislature passed Republican-proposed bills intended to protect in vitro fertilization on Thursday after the state Supreme Court ruled that embryos are considered children.

    The Alabama state House and Senate still need to vote on a unified version of the legislation before sending to Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey for a signature.

    The rapid progression of the two bills came two weeks after a state Supreme Court ruling imperiled IVF care in the state and prompted a national backlash.
    This is great news.

    But it also really shines a bright spotlight on the reality that Republicans in states like Texas could take swift action to pass legislation preventing the kinds of nightmarish suffering and horror stories we keep hearing from women who suffer pregnancy complications and are basically told that the hospital needs to wait until they're literally dying before they can provide the necessary treatment.

    And that Republicans in every other state have spent years voluntarily choosing to do nothing and instead allow women who genuinely want to have children to suffer and risk their ability to become pregnant again or place them at considerably greater health risk if they get pregnant again.

    The cruelty very much seems to be the point.

  3. #7643
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    79,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ala...ivf-rcna141184



    This is great news.

    But it also really shines a bright spotlight on the reality that Republicans in states like Texas could take swift action to pass legislation preventing the kinds of nightmarish suffering and horror stories we keep hearing from women who suffer pregnancy complications and are basically told that the hospital needs to wait until they're literally dying before they can provide the necessary treatment.

    And that Republicans in every other state have spent years voluntarily choosing to do nothing and instead allow women who genuinely want to have children to suffer and risk their ability to become pregnant again or place them at considerably greater health risk if they get pregnant again.

    The cruelty very much seems to be the point.
    I mean, they're also just admitting that they know IVF embryos aren't actually children and thus we can allow IVF to continue being permitted even if it means some of those embryos will never be implanted.

    "It's a human being from conception" remains a claim that basically none of its proponents actually turn out to really believe, the moment you put it into any other context than abortion rights. It's just emotional malicious rhetoric.


  4. #7644
    Herald of the Titans D Luniz's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    The Coastal Plaguelands
    Posts
    2,949
    Quote Originally Posted by Twdft View Post
    Sell them to anyone with a freezer and the desire to claim a couple more children on their tax returns.
    Might be thinking of this the wrong way.
    Blue states can take them in. Massively raise their pop for the census and just take a bunch of red state house seats and electoral college votes.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    I mean, they're also just admitting that they know IVF embryos aren't actually children and thus we can allow IVF to continue being permitted even if it means some of those embryos will never be implanted.

    "It's a human being from conception" remains a claim that basically none of its proponents actually turn out to really believe, the moment you put it into any other context than abortion rights. It's just emotional malicious rhetoric.
    if I was a more cynical person, Id get a lawyer to see about challenging the attempt at a carve out just to force them to drop all of it, or own it for election after election.
    "Law and Order", lots of places have had that, Russia, North Korea, Saddam's Iraq.
    Laws can be made to enforce order of cruelty and brutality.
    Equality and Justice, that is how you have peace and a society that benefits all.

  5. #7645
    Cindy Hyde-Smith Takes It Upon Herself To Shut Down IVF Protections, Again

    While Hyde-Smith and other Republicans are and will surely continue to hide behind “leave it to the states” arguments in lieu of doing anything tangible to demonstrate their enthusiastic support for in-vitro, Hyde-Smith may want to edit her website first.

    Just a quick google of her abortion policy positions this afternoon turned up a page on her Senate website where she outright declares her belief in “the need for federal policies that strengthen America’s families.” To save you a click, a screen grab below:

  6. #7646
    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/con...act-rcna142285

    Rep. Michelle Steel, a two-term Republican congresswoman from a competitive Orange County-area district, announced Thursday she's withdrawing her co-sponsorship of the Life at Conception Act, saying she favors in vitro fertilization.

    “I do not support federal restrictions on IVF,” Steel said on the House floor. “I’m removing myself from the bill because it could create confusion about my support for the blessings of having children through IVF. I hereby remove my name as cosponsor.”

    The reversal comes two days after Steel won her primary to advance to the general election this fall, securing enough support from Republicans to move forward. Also on Tuesday, NBC News reported that Steel was voicing support for IVF even as she co-sponsored the bill, which could threaten the use of IVF for pregnancy, a process in which unused embryos can be discarded. At the time, her office didn't respond to queries about how she reconciles those stances.

    The attempts at clarifying her position sparked further confusion after Steel published an opinion piece in the Orange County Register saying she’s “an ardent supporter of IVF” while adding: “I believe life begins at conception.”

    Her office didn’t respond when asked if Steel believes that destroying embryos amounts to ending a life.
    Reminder that Republicans "moderate" their views when it comes time to the general election. Are they moderates on the topic like they now claim? Or are they the same extremists they campaigned as during the primary? Who know, but it's a great reason why you shouldn't trust Republicans.

    Because if she truly believes life begins at conception, then is de-facto supporting the murder of people when IVF facilities discard fertilized eggs. This, again, highlights the rhetorical and logical pickle that Republicans find themselves in as they try to square extremist beliefs with more moderate rhetoric.

  7. #7647
    The Undying Cthulhu 2020's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rigging your election
    Posts
    36,843
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain N View Post
    The fact that we're at the point where folks who want and can afford to have children now can't because of Alabama but the poor people who can't afford children are being forced to have them is pretty much telling me the United States, namely one of its political parties, is a failed experiment.
    One of these days the birth rate is going to plummet thanks to all of the anti woman, antri reproductive rights policies and history will look back on how Republicans of the 2000's were wrong about everything.
    2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
    2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"

  8. #7648
    Herald of the Titans
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhu 2020 View Post
    One of these days the birth rate is going to plummet thanks to all of the anti woman, antri reproductive rights policies and history will look back on how Republicans of the 2000's were wrong about everything.
    Look at how men are reacting in South Korea to women doing just that.

    It isn't pretty.
    - Lars

  9. #7649
    Quote Originally Posted by Cthulhu 2020 View Post
    Alt-left, socialists, a few alt right trolls and fence sitting centrists "THE DEMOCRATS NEVER DO ANYTHING FOR ME, WHY SHOULD I VOTE FOR THEM? THEY HAVE TO EARN MY VOTE! BOTH PARTIES ARE THE SAAAAAAAAAAAAME"
    Yeah I don't get people that won't vote or vote on a pointless 3rd party candidate because the democrats doesn't do enough, it's just stupid.

    Even if they aren't doing enough they are clearly the best pick.

    I mean I'm a socialist and if I lived in the US I would vote for the Democrats while trying to pick a better candidate.

  10. #7650
    Sen. Katie Britt (R-AL) says in the GOP response to the State of the Union that Republicans "strongly support continued nationwide access to in vitro fertilization."

    Gawd I LOVE Republicans! They are some shameless mofo's.

    In the State of the Union response: newly crowned star, State Senator of Alabama, lied that Republicans support IVF when her own state outlawed it and are no scrambling to make it legal again. Remember it is being blocked in the Senate as nationwide protection. But hey eff it, just keep lying.

    Also Britt's stance is at best shady. When asked several times by reporters if embryos are children and did she agree with the state's decision, she refused to answer.. If you can bare to watch her whole rebuttal and who she claims, its a shocker! She is an extreme Christian Fundamentalist, who wants to force her beliefs on everyone else.
    Democrats are the best! I will never ever question a Democrat again. I LOVE the Democrats!

  11. #7651
    Herald of the Titans
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,836
    Quote Originally Posted by diller View Post
    Yeah I don't get people that won't vote or vote on a pointless 3rd party candidate because the democrats doesn't do enough, it's just stupid.

    Even if they aren't doing enough they are clearly the best pick.

    I mean I'm a socialist and if I lived in the US I would vote for the Democrats while trying to pick a better candidate.
    Same as lots of them also don't seem to be otherwise politically active.

    If someone is struggling just to survive it's one thing.
    Those who aren't and just whine?

    They should shut the fuck up. Hold their nose and vote Dem on a national/federal level.

    Then go get active locally.
    - Lars

  12. #7652
    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/iow...are-rcna142458

    Iowa state House Republicans on Thursday night passed a personhood bill that would make it a felony offense to “cause the death” of an “unborn person,” putting the conservative midwestern state directly into the national battle over protections for in-vitro fertilization.

    The bill, in its current form, does not provide any protections for embryos created via IVF — which, according to Democrats in the state and reproductive rights advocates, means the measure could easily be interpreted as criminalizing IVF care and services.

    Passage of the bill by the GOP-controlled state House makes Iowa the latest state where lawmakers have taken steps that could threaten IVF. The procedure involves the creation of embryos outside the body, and many are often discarded if not used.

    The vote in Iowa came just hours after Republican lawmakers in Alabama — trying to curtail the fallout over a state Supreme Court ruling that said embryos are children — enacted a bill intended to protect IVF. The Alabama court's ruling had prompted broader concerns that conservative measures targeting abortion elsewhere would also go after the medical procedure.

    To be enacted, the Iowa bill would still have to be passed by the state Senate and be signed by Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds.
    Iowa Republicans apparently saw the mess in Alabama and decided they wanted in on that action, actually. Without apparently actually seeing what happened and how Alabama had to quickly pass a law to protect the entire IVF industry in the state.

  13. #7653
    Quote Originally Posted by diller View Post
    Yeah I don't get people that won't vote or vote on a pointless 3rd party candidate because the democrats doesn't do enough, it's just stupid.
    not to whip up yet another derail in a different thread (i won't indulge in this extensively) but i feel like you kind of asked, and while i can't speak for all people who don't vote i can speak for a person who is highly politically interested but doesn't vote:
    because voting democrats implicitly endorses the system, and the system is completely and utterly fucked to its core and is on its face immoral, on top of the fact that it represents zero of my core values.

    i can (and do) recognize that democrats are a fine and good conservative party (as of right now i'd say they're my favorite conservative party of any western democratic country) and that republicans are a disgusting fascist and theocratic death cult, but the entire US political system is a farce and it has been since the moment this country was founded and i want nothing to do with it whatsoever.

    now obviously there's logistic and pragmatic considerations for the fact that i live here and so i'm in it regardless, but... US politics will do what it does with or without 100% participation.
    also, research shows that non-voters are split at about the same ratio as voters in terms of left/right, so if voting was compulsory in the US there wouldn't actually be a change in the political outcome - more voting doesn't equal progressive utopia.
    also also, of the 22 countries on earth right now that have compulsory voting like half of them have gone partially or full blown fascist in the last 10 years, so again... more people voting does not give the outcome you think it does.

    what you want is not "more voting" what you want is "politics not being fucked" - which well you should want, we all want that. but "more people voting" isn't how you get there.

  14. #7654
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    79,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Malkiah View Post
    not to whip up yet another derail in a different thread (i won't indulge in this extensively) but i feel like you kind of asked, and while i can't speak for all people who don't vote i can speak for a person who is highly politically interested but doesn't vote:
    because voting democrats implicitly endorses the system, and the system is completely and utterly fucked to its core and is on its face immoral, on top of the fact that it represents zero of my core values.

    i can (and do) recognize that democrats are a fine and good conservative party (as of right now i'd say they're my favorite conservative party of any western democratic country) and that republicans are a disgusting fascist and theocratic death cult, but the entire US political system is a farce and it has been since the moment this country was founded and i want nothing to do with it whatsoever.

    now obviously there's logistic and pragmatic considerations for the fact that i live here and so i'm in it regardless, but... US politics will do what it does with or without 100% participation.
    also, research shows that non-voters are split at about the same ratio as voters in terms of left/right, so if voting was compulsory in the US there wouldn't actually be a change in the political outcome - more voting doesn't equal progressive utopia.
    also also, of the 22 countries on earth right now that have compulsory voting like half of them have gone partially or full blown fascist in the last 10 years, so again... more people voting does not give the outcome you think it does.

    what you want is not "more voting" what you want is "politics not being fucked" - which well you should want, we all want that. but "more people voting" isn't how you get there.
    "I've done absolutely nothing to make anything better, and I demand you consider my position as a moral stance."

    Your entire position is no different than those who offer their "thoughts and prayers" for victims of a school shooting. It's performative indolence, so you can feel justified in looking down on others who actually make an effort to make things better.

    More people getting involved is the only way to "fix politics".
    Last edited by Endus; 2024-03-08 at 06:37 PM.


  15. #7655
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    "I've done absolutely nothing to make anything better, and I demand you consider my position as a moral stance."
    yes endus, we all know that is your philosophy - you shout it in every thread you post in, and grunt it like a howler monkey over and over whenever i try to address other people with questions on a subject that i have some knowledge of.

    you do nothing to make anything better, and you and everyone like you is actively trying to make everything continue to be shitty, and you are SO PROUD of yourself for that. we get it.

    More people getting involved is the only way to "fix politics".
    you've made this claim repeatedly, ad nauseam, and without evidence many times over the last couple of years and i'm not being drawn into another derail on the subject.

    if you can come up with one single shred of scientific or even anecdotal evidence that more voting = liberal outcomes, by all means post it in the thread about whether voting matters as i would love to see that research.
    Last edited by Malkiah; 2024-03-08 at 07:19 PM.

  16. #7656
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    79,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Malkiah View Post
    cool beans, have fun with your unfounded delusions about reality, you've made your claims repeatedly, ad nauseam, and without evidence many times over the last couple of years and i'm not being drawn into another derail on the subject.
    What "delusions"? You're the one claiming that doing nothing is better than doing something.

    if you can come up with one single shred of scientific or even anecdotal evidence that more voting = liberal outcomes, by all means post it in the thread about whether voting matters as i would love to see that research.
    I never said it defaulted to "more liberal".

    But the reality is, elections are decided by those who vote, and who get more involved than simple voting. Choosing not to vote is not a statement of protect, it's a statement of apathy or indifference. It changes nothing other than allowing the current system to continue without you making any effort whatsoever to improve upon it, however limited your capacity to effect change may be. You're doing nothing to make anything better.


  17. #7657
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    What "delusions"? You're the one claiming that doing nothing is better than doing something.
    no actually, i'm not.

    I never said it defaulted to "more liberal".
    yes actually, you have.

    But the reality is, elections are decided by those who vote, and who get more involved than simple voting. Choosing not to vote is not a statement of protect, it's a statement of apathy or indifference. It changes nothing other than allowing the current system to continue without you making any effort whatsoever to improve upon it, however limited your capacity to effect change may be. You're doing nothing to make anything better.
    voting* does nothing but allow the current system to continue without making any effort whatsoever to improve on it, not voting is at least morally defensible as having not participated int it.

    you're making things worse by actively perpetuating the system, i am a part of it but have never lifted a finger to support it.

    *in a corrupt and morally bankrupt governmental system.
    i don't advocate a condemnation of voting in concept, nor do i encourage others to not vote - i have no argument about the morality of voting on general principle.

  18. #7658
    Quote Originally Posted by Malkiah View Post
    voting* does nothing but allow the current system to continue without making any effort whatsoever to improve on it, not voting is at least morally defensible as having not participated int it.
    On this specifically...it absolutely does not, in either case.

    Voting is, often, how the current system is changed. It can be how it's reinforced as well, but "voting" inherently doesn't have one outcome or the other.

    Not voting is absolutely not morally defensible in any capacity and is, arguably, the immoral action that can only be taken by someone with no personal stake/risk for not voting, ignoring the risk to others. This topic being a pretty great example of the kinds of risks and consequences that happen when people don't want to participate and don't vote - their decision not to vote is not only morally indefensible on this topic, but we have a demonstrably harmful outcome in part as a result of their decision not to vote.

    This is trivially untrue.

  19. #7659
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    On this specifically...it absolutely does not, in either case.
    i mean ok... prove it? i'll accept verified research or principled arguments based on history.
    when has voting, in and of itself, ever changed anything for the better?

    advocacy changes things, shifting culture changes things, sometimes organized violence changes things.
    the only things that 'voting' ever did was give hitler power and establish 200 years of brutal oppression of africans in america.

    Voting is, often, how the current system is changed. It can be how it's reinforced as well, but "voting" inherently doesn't have one outcome or the other.
    well two things:
    1. it really isn't, at least not in the way you're suggesting, and in the way everyone always screams at me about it when this subject comes up.
    voting doesn't ever make anything better, the only things you can really track as having improved in any given society based on voting is to make things worse.

    2. changing culture is how things get better, and exerting that cultural pressure to order how a given society operates is how things get better.
    sometimes, in some countries and in some circumstances, voting is a part of that process... but voting in-and-of-itself has never done anything for anyone.

    Not voting is absolutely not morally defensible in any capacity and is, arguably, the immoral action that can only be taken by someone with no personal stake/risk for not voting, ignoring the risk to others.
    not voting (in the US at least) is the only morally defensible choice, as voting is outwardly immoral philosophically and mechanically evil pragmatically.
    your argument is akin to saying that being a conscientious objector is immoral because you're making us lose the vietnam war by not participating.

    This topic being a pretty great example of the kinds of risks and consequences that happen when people don't want to participate and don't vote - their decision not to vote is not only morally indefensible on this topic, but we have a demonstrably harmful outcome in part as a result of their decision not to vote.
    this topic is a great example of how some people are utterly blinded by their feefees and have a sadly limited capacity to rationally discuss the practical and material conditions of the world.
    your argument is utterly without scientific merit, and i would argue it's without philosophical merit either.

    btw, i just posted in response to someone commenting on the mindset of non-voters, i'm not wanting to derail this thread with this conversation.
    i tried to make a thread on this topic once due to my interest in it, if you want to continue this feel free to revive that thread... i'm done with clogging up the roe v. wade thread with this convo.

  20. #7660
    Merely a Setback Sunseeker's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In the state of Denial.
    Posts
    27,121
    Why do we continue to entertain discussion with someone who is clearly more concerned about their own moral high ground, than doing fuck all about anything?

    The beginning and end of this for me is: for a guy who wont participate and doesnt give a fuck, he sure has a lot to say.
    Human progress isn't measured by industry. It's measured by the value you place on a life.

    Just, be kind.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •