“the right to make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions.”
It is absolutely amazing (and incredibly depressing) that this is even up for debate.
this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2023
229 points (99.6% liked)
News
23051 readers
2970 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Indirectly, this is also a vote for OBGYN access. Doctors aren’t required to evenly distribute themselves across the states, they choose.
If they know they can’t follow through on the best care for their patients, whatever that looks like, that doesn’t incentivize an OBGYN to choose Cleveland over other places.
If you have a good doctor in a city dubbed the mitsake on the lake, it's probably best to not vote them out of state.
Unironically Cleveland has some of the best health care in the world.
The silver lining here is that because the Republican supreme Court so vastly overplayed their hand here, they might inadvertantly have saved the nation from a fascist takeover.
Hear me out:
Joe Biden was previously doomed to be a 1-term president. The last election was an anti-Trump referendum, and it was a squeaker! Very little abundant base was actually excited be voting for Biden.
Heading into the next election we were ALWAYS going to have a mediocre Biden presidency, where none of our major crisis was solved, because Biden never aimed that high to begin with. It was never going to be enough to excite the base on the left.
And worse, with Republicans controlling the House, the second half of Biden's term was doomed to be a do-little presidency. Going into the election we were going to be asked to vote for a man who hadn't done much for the last two years, and who never even talked a good game about the radical change we need (universal healthcare, universal basic income, removing ALL student debt, etc).
Trump being back in the ballot helps a bit, but I'm not sure people are still feeling the immediacy and the urgency to keep him out of the oval office as they did at the end of this last term.
It was going to be another squeaker, and my money was on the Republicans because of their ability to ratfuck the vote with gerrymandering and voter suppression.
But NOW we have the supreme Court lighting a fire under the left. They struck down roe, and they struck down student loan forgiveness.
That may be enough to put us over the edge.
Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights, the yes campaign, emphasizes the measure’s ability to keep Ohio’s ban on most abortions after fetal cardiac activity is detected from taking effect.
Can anyone explain why fetal cardiac activity is an appropriate delimiter?
It's not. It's a disingenuous way to enact early abortion bans that targets people's emotions, but is meaningless from a healthcare perspective. We don't treat heartbeat as the ultimate arbiter of "life" in fully grown adults; we use brain function.
If we want to apply a similar standard for determining the cutoff for elective abortions, it's more complicated because the fetal brain assembles itself slowly. Hearing starts to become intact some time in the late second trimester, but the capacity to experience pain doesn't develop until after viability (the point in development when a fetus can be sustained medically outside the womb.)
https://www.acog.org/advocacy/facts-are-important/gestational-development-capacity-for-pain
Even using those potential physiological markers can't be relied on to enact a full permanent ban without exceptions because a fetus can develop defects that are incompatible with life, such as severe hydrocephalus or anencephaly, which complicate the process of gestation and birth in such a way that a late term abortion may be medically appropriate considering the fetus will not develop the ability to live independently outside the womb anyway.
And the real kicker here: Doctors are already very good at making these kinds of nuanced distinctions and making decisions in consultation with their pregnant patients and their families. We do not need legal regulation to do what medical ethics regulations already do very well.
Amazingly well-said and reasoned
Also, determining viability isn't so cut and dry.
It’s only a good delimiter if you want to prevent women from exercising their bodily autonomy.
No.
Not without waving at a book written by guys who thought bronze tools were high-tech.
(A book that says first breath, not first heartbeat, means someone is alive. But it's not like they read it.)
Oh man, cedar point is gonna be a lot more fun if this passes
Sure, you've fed handfuls of nutrient pellets to carp fish, but have you fed handfuls of nutrient pellets to carp fish, onnn weeeeed?
That light up tunnel on Maverick would be dope