Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
I solemnly swear if you take away any more of my daughters' rights I'll take a jack hammer to the I-10 every morning.
What? And improve it? How will that punish anyone?
Maybe just take the jackhammer to a billionaire.
If 750 of us do it in the US we'll finally see some trickle down economics for the first time ever!
Jack hammer a billionaire. Trending.
Republicans try to increase birth rates, but end up blocking IVF instead:
"It hurt itself in its ~~confusion~~ stupidity!"
Because conservatives don’t consider it the correct way. A child must be conceived when a mommy, a daddy, and an Abrahamic god love each other very much and sleep together. The child can only be born vaginally or the mom isn’t a real mommy.
This is not a joke, they believe this.
You forgot they have to also be married in a proper church or both parents and the kid will be shunned
This is not a joke, they believe this.
Except for the 78% of Conservatives in support of IVF. This article is literally about Republican lawmakers scrambling because everyone is in favor of IVF.
78% of Conservatives in support of IVF
Yet here we are. These people voted in the idiots who would make a court who would rule this way.
If only they had some way to know that the Leopards were going to eat people's faces...
Back in 2001, Right To Life President George W, Bush ruled that fetal stem cell research, which involves aborted humans, was fine and dandy. This came after Right To Life former First Lady Nancy Reagan discovered that stem cell technology might help Ronnie's dementia.
They have no problem playing both sides of the issue.
This is incorrect. Bush banned new lines of fetal stem cells from being used. This was a step backwards for research.
Read more here:
On August 9, 2001, U.S. President George W. Bush introduced a ban on federal funding for research on newly created human embryonic stem (ES) cell lines. The policy was intended as a compromise and specified that research on lines created prior to that date would still be eligible for funding. Seventy-one lines from 14 laboratories [1] across the globe met Bush’s eligibility criteria, and scientists who wished to investigate these lines could still receive grants through the National Institutes of Health (NIH). In practice, however, only 21 lines proved to be of any use to investigators [2].
It was a compromise that siad that some aborted corpses were okay.
It was a compromise that siad that some aborted corpses were okay.
They stopped any further lines from being created. What do you not understand about this? It was already ongoing research, and they put a stop to it for political purposes. Even if this calls it a “compromise” it meant that no further lines (no new fetal tissue) could be used.
Portraying GWB as someone who was fighting for stem cell research rather than against it is flat out false.
Where did I say he was fighting for it? I said that he didn't ban it completely because there were other people in the GOP who wanted the research to continue.
If he'd really believed that the soul begins at conception, there would have no cell research at all. That's the point I was trying to make.
What they wanted was no cell research at all. But that wasn’t politically possible, and it wasn’t because other members of the GOP didn’t want it. So he “compromised” by saying they could still use the existing lines but no future lines could be created. You’re acting like the GOP was okay with this, they were not. This was a compromise because it’s was the best they could do at the time, and it still got some of the research banned.
Sure Nancy Reagan was outspoken about it but it was not the GOP.
The GOP hates IVF because a man doesn't get sexual gratification from the process... Well, not in the way they want anyways. And to think, a woman could get pregnant without a man. Or even worse, two gays could have a kid. The GOP is a sad organization that literally wants the elimination or subjugation of all nonwhite-nonmale-nonchristian-nonstraight people.
Its the Amerikkkan way
If a fetus is a person then I expect that pregnant women will be able to claim them on taxes, ride in the family lane, all that kind of stuff
Most likely not and the child will have less rights as soon as its born. Its always been about forced birth to maintain a population of poor folk that they can exploit as a cheap labor source.
Republicans TOTALLY would SUPPORT IVF but those DAMN Democrats had to Block it!
-Fox News. Probably.
This was all about how Alabama lawmakers sincerely thought you could make human/animal hybrids using IVF right?
Fucking complete gong show. Why don't Americans do something about the gross mismanagement of their country at every single level?