May 15, 2022

"Now, after the leak of a Supreme Court draft opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade, entrepreneurs and activists are floating ideas for an abortion-focused DAO."

"They see it as a way to provide money to women in more than two dozen states where abortion services may soon be severely restricted or banned — a kind of 'Underground Railroad for abortion,' as Reshma Saujani, the founder of Girls Who Code and a host of the 'De-Broing Crypto' podcast, put it in an interview."

I'm trying to read this (in the NYT): 

 

"DAO" means decentralized autonomous organization, and "broing" doesn't rhyme with "boing," but with "Boeing." Yes, a hyphen would help — "bro-ing" — but they wanted the prefix "de-," so the helpful hyphen would give us "de-bro-ing," so presumably that's why the decided against it. 

Anyway, I'm not enough of a fan of de-bro-i-fication to put effort into understanding crypto. I just want to say that it's silly to personify "crypto" and portray it as "joining" something called "the abortion conversation." That whole conceptualization sounds creepy to me — and I proudly own the femininity of my reaction.

Here's another feminine and completely non-bro-y reaction: I don't like the new logo-ization of the female reproductive organs. It looks like an elephant, that inclusion of the ovaries, fallopian tubes, and the vagina. Is the uterus alone too hard to recognize?

The only other thing I'd like to mention is the phrase "a kind of 'Underground Railroad for abortion.'" This isn't the first place I'm seeing the idea to be deprived of access to abortion is slavery. Is it okay — is it good — to equate present-day demands for rights to the 19th-century struggle to abolish slavery? Is it accurate? Is it moral? Is it effective political speech? I would say no to all those questions, and I have always supported a woman's sovereignty over her own body and the consequent right to access to abortion. 

ADDED: The idea of crypto participating in a conversation is a variation on the old trope "money talks."

ALSO: To state what ought to be obvious, fugitive slaves had to hide. They could not legally leave their bondage, and even if they got to a "free" state, they could be captured and, under the law, returned to their owners. If abortion becomes illegal in your state, you don't lose your right to travel. You can openly travel to another state and get an abortion. Your path is completely above ground. Yes, it's more troublesome and expensive. But don't overdramatize. It's as bad as it is but no worse than it is. You are not in the position of a slave, and you should not want to diminish the cruelty of slavery by portraying yourself in that light.

89 comments:

Wilbur said...

Will their DAO be DOA?

Thank you AA for deciphering that acronym for us.

West TX Intermediate Crude said...

It's rare that I look to Europe and believe that they have found a better way to organize things, but on abortion- they do.
Looking at Europe as an entity, with some analogy to the United States, there are varying policies on abortion. Some countries are very restrictive, some less, but no marching in the streets, no violence.
I'm starting to think that access to abortion, or the lack of it, is not a moral crusade, but, like so much else in politics, a fund raising opportunity.
Change my mind.

Temujin said...

First- their timing says much about how this was thought out. Anybody look at the world of crypto lately? There's a massive shake-out going on and the first to lose are those 'stable' coins that don't have enough capital behind them to withstand losing billions of dollars in value. There is a clean up going on and I doubt seriously those who have lost thousands or millions will be looking at a coin stamped with the female reproductive organs as the 'safe' place to put their money next. But then, I scoffed at Dogecoin.

Second- what more needs to be said about a group wanting to call itself underground anything by appearing in the New York Times? That's like saying you're a secret organization who's existence and purpose is to be known only by a small group of loyal followers, but we'll announce it to the world in one of the most widely read fishwraps known globally. Get rid of the 'underground' moniker. It makes you look even more trite than the fallopian tube decorated coin.

Lastly- Crypto didn't or doesn't have to be a 'bro' world. Women can do it too, as Reshma Saujani has shown. That men choose to do it, and math and science, in much larger numbers speaks to the differences in the genders, not 'broism'. Please. Stop the madness. Women are not shut out of STEM. And even while we spend our time and money trying to make it more appealing to women, men still tend to be attracted to it more. Just as when they are small children, boys will tend to be more attracted to toy cars and trucks- especially trucks, while girls will tend to be more attracted to other things (dare I say dolls?).

Nature doesn't care what cause you think you're a part of today.

gilbar said...

Just To BE Clear..
If/when these people travel across state lines to express the freedom to do as they want with their bodies;
They'll have their Vaccine Passports with them, right? I mean, Right?
Because a person in This country can't just do what they Want with their bodies, they HAVE TO
....OBEY THE GOVERNMENT DICTATES...
right?

gilbar said...

"a kind of 'Underground Railroad for abortion.'"

Sounds like, what we Really NEED; is a kind of Underground Railroad for fetuses
You know, a way for innocent people to get OUT of States that consider them Property

rhhardin said...

I proudly own the femininity of my reaction

So men and women do think differently. One might be more dysfunctional than the other, say in national politics.

Gahrie said...

I have always supported a woman's sovereignty over her own body

But it's perfectly fine to draft men and send them to die in war...right? Yet the pearls come out whenever anyone suggests that women should have to register for the draft.

I guess you're fine with prostitution and drug use too?

rhhardin said...

It looks like a bad Judy Chicago dish.

Howard said...

It might be silly, but they putting their money behind their mouth. Don't worry your pretty big professor head about crypto. That requires too much mansplaining.

farmgirl said...

Unfreakingbelievable.
No hyphen. Piss on them.

Our Bishop said Mass at the Knights of Columbus Mass at our annual convention yesterday afternoon. He said- it starts a conversation on what to do? Catholics have always been talking of the wonder of life, how to assist women(re: WOMEN) when they have unplanned and unwanted pregnancies. They fundraise to help the communities they live in to better assist those in need.

Can these smart people differentiate between Underground Railroad for escaping slaves vs abortion??

Bring up sordid past sins of the Church? Go ahead- tar all Catholics w/the same brush. Fallibility is a human trait. Gather your stones! Can you imagine if the amount of $$ NARAL has in its coffers was used to lift the minds, souls, bodies of these women and their children that so need the Sacrament of abortion out of their poverty (of life and thought)(yes- malnourished minds <3abortion)… all that $$$ to the people who need it instead of eggheads. Oh!!! How wonderful.

ps I am a sinner
pps for viewing of malnourished minds. Eat up! Mmmm

https://www.priestsforlife.org/images/abortion-images-galleries.aspx





Jamie said...

If representations of penises are off limits, why do uteri get a pass? Or to use a more apropos comparison, representations of the vulva like pussy hats (yes, I know, they often try to get cute with cat ears, but they're very clear about their intent - and I have seen the hilarious full-body vulva suits and even as an owner of the body part in question, I don't think it's improved by being enlarged to human size)?

No. Lack of unlimited access to abortion is NOT akin to slavery, and I would think black Americans who are descended from slaves - or enslaved people, one of the few trendy constructions I can get behind - would be justified in taking offense.

Have any of these people even READ The Handmaid's Tale? It's astonishing to me how they whip it out at every opportunity as if ANYTHING about it is relevant.

(Sorry for the use of so many all-caps - I did that because of wanting to put the book name in italics.)

mezzrow said...

All hail the "save the baby okapi" coin.

Who let the doge out?

Kevin said...

Slave = highest moral authority in today’s culture.

Critter said...

Leaves the impression that abortion is a religious ritual that satisfies those who don’t even know the pregnant woman. Creepy.

Ambrose said...

If people support accessible abortion (and I believe they do), it will be accessible regardless of the outcome on Roe.

dbp said...

It all seems LARPy to me. Nobody cares if a woman travels to another state for an abortion. The secrecy is an attempt to bring mystique to the mundane.

Eleanor said...

The pro-abortion folks should be careful with the slavery analogies. The abolitionists were the good guys.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

The left are terrific at monetizing rage. Is this a ploy to get the angry green-haired tattooed pierced Maddow grrls to part with their money for.. the cause? Perhaps the cryto-abortion leaders can build a mansion next to the BLM gals?

Sebastian said...

"Is it accurate?"

Slaves wanted to be free of oppression. Women seeking abortion want to be free of the life within. So, pretty much the same.

Rollo said...

Girls Who Code always seemed a little suspect, like they had some secret agenda. It's nice to finally have a clue as to what it might be.

Static Ping said...

Yes, slavery is an appropriate analogy for abortion. Abortion treats the human being in the womb as property. Do note that all analogies are wrong but some are useful.

As for the organization, it sounds like another get rich scheme exploiting leftist politics. I'm sure there are true believers involved, but in a couple of years a couple of the founding members will have a real estate empire and everyone else will wonder where all the money went.

Sebastian said...

"I have always supported a woman's sovereignty over her own body and the consequent right to access to abortion."

I have always supported a woman's sovereignty over her own body and the consequent responsibility for the consequences of her choices.

I have always supported a woman's sovereignty over her own body, to be balanced against the care to which the dependent baby is entitled.

Amadeus 48 said...

"The idea of crypto participating in a conversation is a variation on the old trope 'money talks.'"

Of course, the other half of the folk aphorism is "...and bullshit walks."

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

I friend of mine who is very pro-abortion likes to press me and try to engage me ... ugh. My least favorite topic.

As she was protesting and screaming at me... I tried to remind her that abortion will not go away. It will be restricted or banned in some states, while other states will expand access to abortion and allow unpopular up-to-birth abortions - like in CO.
Where abortion is banned or severely restricted, charities will up-start to help fund transfer and care for abortion seekers.

(or not ) leftists are usually cheap - they expect the government/tax payer to fund it all. See: big tax payer money flowing to CA to fund out-of-state abortion seekers.

Mary Beth said...

I have a small (very small) amount invested in some cryptos and I've been buying the dip (didn't know that made me a bro), but I'm not going to invest in a new coin now. Perhaps they have enough of a base that they can get a lot of investors, but I'd be afraid of a pump and dump by the creators.

Ann Althouse said...

"It looks like a bad Judy Chicago dish."

LOL

Ann Althouse said...

"If representations of penises are off limits, why do uteri get a pass? Or to use a more apropos comparison, representations of the vulva like pussy hats (yes, I know, they often try to get cute with cat ears, but they're very clear about their intent - and I have seen the hilarious full-body vulva suits and even as an owner of the body part in question, I don't think it's improved by being enlarged to human size)?"

It should be offensive to women, to separate out our body parts and not to see the whole person. Yet we're fussy about *not* calling a person a "pussy," even as we go right ahead and call people "dicks" and "pricks." And we don't put graphic images of penises on signs and crypto coins and NYT articles.

Ostensibly, this is to show support and sensitivity toward women, but anyone who believes there is systemic sexism should be skeptical and hypothesize that the reverse is true, that what we are seeing is the patriarchy.

robother said...

If we have a dogecoin, it makes perfect sense that we need a bitchcoin. Let them mate in the cryptic space of your wallet, and engender litters of pupcoins. It'll be tubular, man.

Craig Howard said...

Yes, the logo is unfortunate.

I predict it will be changed pretty quickly once everyone associates it with the GOP.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

All based on a leak and an unbelievable rumor about “no opinions” circulating that were authored by a liberal in the high court. Thus this is more misdirection and chaff thrown up by the media to distract from the actual bad news streaming out of Washington.

The Vault Dweller said...

Why would a crypto-currency be necessary or even reasonable to fund an underground railroad for abortion? Why not just set up a charity that is funded by old fashioned dollars, and then use it to provide financial support to women seeking abortions that need help for travel or medical expenses? If anything having the funds in any sort of crypto-currency makes their value much more volatile and you could get a situation where you give money to a woman to travel only to find out the next day you don't have enough money to pay for the medical services or to get her back home afterwards. My guess is someone is trying to glom onto a very emotionally salient moment for many to boost their crypto coin.

Also I'm not sure how wise it is to compare it to the underground railroad. Overall among African Americans abortion isn't as popular as it is among white progressives. More than a few people are not going to like the comparison. Granted those who dislike the comparison probably already weren't in favor of many instances of abortion, but my understanding of the current lefty hierarchy of grievances is that racism beats sexism. Well, some racism that is. But that racism would probably include a white person culturally appropriating an important part of Black American history for their current political agenda.

I wonder how effective it would be to start comparing the January 6th capitol riot to the Stonewall riot?

Joe Smith said...

If whiny white women are so intent on killing babies, then this is the right idea.

Fund it your goddamn self. Raise money to pay for it; the operation, transportation, lodging, etc.

Even get a mani-pedi while you're there at the baby death spa.

It could be a whole new thing.

Women will get pregnant just for the time off and the bragging rights.

Lem said...

Didn't the justification for slavery amount to the dehumanization of a people based on arbitrary categories like skin color, wrong size skull, not as intelligent as people born somewhere else? etc.

In order to dismember an embryo, there is a need to categorize an embryo as subhuman. The fetus is not conscious, it doesn't feel pain, it can't survive outside the womb. etc.

I can't help but see the parallels.

Mark said...

Let's not pretend that the plantation owners are the abolitionists here.

n.n said...

"a kind of 'Underground Railroad for abortion.'"

The underground railroad was used to abort high value fetuses... babies... burdens, or to save viable human lives from her first heartbeat, coherent nervous system function, to granny's last heartbeat, and disordered conclusion. Planned parent/hood (e.g. Sanger the diversitist, Cecile the cannibal, Gosnell the abortionist) is neither a good nor exclusive choice, in all but the most progressive liberal (i.e. monotonically divergent) societies and anthropogenic conflicts (e.g. war, self-defense).


Imagine there is no wicked solution
It's easy if you try
No abortion chambers
In front of us only time
Imagine all the babies
Living for today

n.n said...

If people support accessible abortion (and I believe they do), it will be accessible regardless of the outcome on Roe.

Demos-cracy is aborted in darkness, in privacy, at the Twilight fringe, if you can get away with it. The Pro-Choice "ethical" religion denies women and men's dignity and agency, and reduces human life to negotiable commodities. The wicked solution to a purportedly hard problem: keep women appointed, available, and taxable, was normalized for social, redistributive, clinical, and fair weather causes.

Jason said...


I have always supported a woman's sovereignty over her own body and the consequent right to access to abortion

It's not "her own body."

If it were *her own body," it would be *her own limbs* getting hacked off and tossed into the bright red trash bags.

Jamie said...

All hail the "save the baby okapi" coin.

Nice!

A few years ago, some artist did an exhibit of sculptures? I think it was sculptures - of the full structure of the clitoris. Apparently if you count all the nerve "tentacles" and such, it covers a lot of space in the pelvis. (Lived experience suggests that this is correct. Ahem.) The artist seemed to be trying to make a point about not focusing on just what you can see, using the subject of women's pleasure as a thematic analogy, if that's not too much multisyllabic gobbledygook...

As I recall, they kind of looked like squid. But I'm waiting for church to start, so I'm not going to look up the exhibit.

JaimeRoberto said...

The quantity of Bitcoin in circulation is limited by forcing Bitcoin miners to solve ever more complicated equations in order to prevent currency devaluation. A currency backed by aborted fetuses will be subject to devaluation unless abortion is restricted.

Jamie said...

anyone who believes there is systemic sexism should be skeptical and hypothesize that the reverse is true, that what we are seeing is the patriarchy.

Which, because it's uniformly women making these language and representation rules, means that "anyone who believes there is systemic sexism" is mistaken, either about the existence of the systemic sexism or about its emanating from a "patriarchy."

Unless all the women making the rules actually identify as patriarchal men?

Nancy said...

Gilbar touches on a point that I wish would get more play. Abortion rights activists are like defenders of slavery rather than like abolitionists. Eg the bumper sticker: if you're against do abortion don't have one is parallel to: if you're against slavery, don't own one. If a fetus obtains rights as a person in say Texas it should not be legal to deprive that fetus of personhood by transporting it to NY. Wasn't that the question in the wrongly decided Dred Scott decision?

Gahrie said...

what we are seeing is the patriarchy.

If society truly was a Patriarchy:

1) Abortion would be illegal
2) No fault divorce would not exist
3) Men would win in divorce court and family court, instead of constantly losing
4) Affirmative Action would not exist for women
5) Prostitution would be legal
6)The #metoo movement would not exist
7) Althouse would have never been a Constitutional law professor

The actually truth is that American women have the highest standard of living, more sexual and social freedom, and more political and social power, than any other women in human history.

Douglas B. Levene said...

I don’t disagree that the comparison of anti-abortion laws to slavery obfuscates more than clarifies. But in one limited sense the analogy may yet prove to be appropriate. I refer to the question of whether free-abortion states can be required under the Full Faith and Credit Clause to extradite to anti-abortion states persons who violate the anti-abortion laws and then flee to a free-abortion state. Generally I believe states can refuse to extradite if doing so would violate a fundamental public policy of the state. My understanding is that Congress can overrule this by statute and declare what state laws must be respected by other states. That’s what the Fugitive Slave Act did when it required states to return fleeing slaves to the state from which they fled. So the analogy would be between a federal law requiring free-abortion states to honor extradition requests from anti-abortion states, and the Fugitive Slave Act. No congressman has proposed such a law yet but give it time.

veni vidi vici said...

I thought "DeBroing" was some Dutch person who might've founded the thing.

"Ms. Phillips, you have Barbara DeBroing on line 3."

And I insist the pronunciation be rhymed with "boing" since it matches the silliness of the endeavor. Onomatopoeia is seriously underrated.

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

I don't like the new logo-ization of the female reproductive organs. It looks like an elephant...

An omen perhaps?

n.n said...

The patriarchy: masculinists and feminists.

n.n said...

Why are people defending Roe, Roe, Roe your baby... fetus's (if you are, or would like to be socially distant) restrictions and undue burdens (other than the baby... fetus... person of primitive evolution) for women and girl's reproductive rites? Both classes... ages of females, and their male cohorts, lack the dignity and agency assumed with her, their, four choices: abstention, prevention, adoption, and compassion, and self-defense through reconciliation. We need a serial climate change. Rebel for extinction!

Michael K said...

This stuff is going on mostly in very pro-abortion states. Much ado about nothing.

Saint Croix said...

anyone who believes there is systemic sexism should be skeptical and hypothesize that the reverse is true, that what we are seeing is the patriarchy

Speaking for fathers and patriarchs everywhere, it was not our idea for women to go out in public wearing pussies on their heads.

I'm not sure how we got you to burn bras, but I'm willing to listen to conspiracy theories about how men pulled that one off.

But the pussy hats, that's on feminism. That's who you are now.

(And, ha ha ha, the feminists who complain about the pussy hats -- aside from Althouse -- are not complaining because they are rude, or crude, or stupid, but because there are plenty of women who don't have pussies, or so I've been told).

Personally, I would be highly suspicious of any man wearing a pussy hat on his head. He literally has to wait for a feminist parade to do that because it's so fucking stupid in real life. And the beards just make it worse. Dude.

Saint Croix said...

Since the Supreme Court defined a woman's uterus as a dehumanization vehicle, every unborn child is a slave trying to make their way via the underground railroad (the birth canal) to freedom and citizenship.

MikeR said...

"Yes, it's more troublesome and expensive. But don't overdramatize. It's as bad as it is but no worse than it is." Someone else will pay for the expense. If you don't want it to be troublesome, fly them first class.
As you said, it's a little different from a slave hiding in dungeons and afraid for their life. The hard part is seeing the similarity.

Jamie said...

If society truly was a Patriarchy:

1) Abortion would be illegal


I'm going to suggest one alteration to Gahrie's list of Rules of the Patriarchy. This one should read:

1) Abortion would be either illegal or mandatory, at the involved man's option. And in the case of an unmarried, unattached woman or girl, the "involved" man would be her closest make relative.

I suppose in the case of an unmarried but attached woman or girl (if such were allowed to exist), the "involved" man would be the one who claimed the fetus was his doing.

Also, geez, I'm so embarrassed to have missed the obvious flip of the slavery analogy! Well done, all!

Owen said...

"I don't like the new logo-ization of the female reproductive organs. It looks like an elephant, that inclusion of the ovaries, fallopian tubes, and the vagina. Is the uterus alone too hard to recognize?"

I too found it creepy but not for its resemblance to an elephant. More like a bug-eyed platypus.

Whatever: it's not a good look, very distracting. And objectifying in a perverse way that points toward the dehumanized nature of the whole campaign by these Marxist hysterics.

And I use "hysterics" with full awareness of the etymology.

madAsHell said...

So, when she crawled into bed, and became pregnant, wasn't that a choice?? Asking for a friend.

Owen said...

Douglas B Levene @ 10:45: "...Fugitive Slave Act..." I admire your analogy and, being no historian, I need to study the logic but on first impression it seems to merit our consideration. Of course exactly nobody is going to pursue this in practice but it looks to be a good way to torment them.

...I also note a strange reversal in your analogy. If fetus = enslaved person, then a person violating the laws of an anti-abortion state would be "freeing" the fetus by...killing it? And then fleeing from the anti-abortion state to a pro-abortion state, from which they faced extradition to face charges of murder? Whereas under the original FSA the effort was aimed at extraditing from free states those who had rescued slaves those from slave states; thus bringing them from civic death into a new life?

n.n said...

A currency backed by aborted fetuses will be subject to devaluation unless abortion is restricted.

Or liberalized from planned parenthood to planned parent/hood to increase supply. There are diverse precedents for social progress in clinics, in chambers, in old folks homes, globally, and historically.

farmgirl said...

“It should be offensive to women, to separate out our body parts and not to see the whole person.”

Did you phrase this as such, purposefully?
That’s the entirety of this discussion in a nutshell.

The separation of body parts w/out seeing the whole person.

A crying shame, too.

Stephen said...

"If abortion becomes legal in your state"- don't you mean illegal, in order to make sense of your point?

Further to Static Ping's comment: pro-choicers should be wary about using slavery references. The "arc of history", which leftists are fond of referring to, is bending towards expanding full or partial rights to all living entities who were once considered the property of men, African slaves and women being the most prominent historical examples.

Roe stopped the arc from bending because any acknowledgment that the fetus is not property but has rights may lead to its right to existence. So here's where we are: the fetus is Schrödinger's cat, just property if a woman wants to dispose of it, and a human being if she wants to keep it (laws against fetal homicide).

Can we handle the lack of an objective truth in this one area? The answer is way above my pay grade, but I will say that those who want to continue treating animals as property will have an easier time of it, philosophically, if Roe continues in some form.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

“You can openly travel to another state and get an abortion.”

Can you be sure that will be law? There is the issue of traveling back to the state where you reside and whether that state will assert its jurisdiction over your abortion in the other state based on your state residency.

Jupiter said...

"the founder of Girls Who Code".

But not, I imagine, a member of Men Who Get pregnant.

Jupiter said...

"I would say no to all those questions, and I have always supported a woman's sovereignty over her own body and the consequent right to access to abortion."

You are an Aunt Matilda.

cfkane1701 said...

Whether I disagree or not, it is nice to see some abortion supporters who understand overturning Roe v. Wade is not an abortion ban, as has been purported by many in and out of the media.

By all means, set up your crypto, set up your slush funds, set up your 501(c)(3) and put the money together so that all these women who never really considered the idea that sex might engender consequences can dodge those consequences a little longer.

You can even call yourself an underground railroad if you want. Reach for the stars. But if Roe v. Wade is overturned, I already have what I want. Abortions are more difficult for some women to get, and the states and the people decide how difficult, and in order to make it less difficult, abortion supporters have to actually convince people their side is right.

With ultrasounds and even more modern technology, good luck with that.

GrapeApe said...

Here’s a question on which I get stuck. A woman decides to abort her child for whatever reason, it’s all good. Yet were the same woman to die in a car crash, the offending driver is charged with not one, but two counts of vehicular manslaughter. Guess it’s not just a clump of cell.

farmgirl said...

I did not realize that was uterine $$$.
Let’s just reduce all women to their LCD: reproductive organs to verify their worth in imaginary money.

Brilliant.

I thought it was a condom.

Mikey NTH said...

The Overdramatization is what these people want. They want the thrill of rebelling against the galactic empire. Like thrill-seekers and pleasure-seekers they are, only the rush comes from the righteousness of their cause.

Lots of people like that, perpetually marchong in their imaginations across the Pettis Bridge of their cause.

walter said...

Maybe an image of a fetus with butcher syle segmentation lines.
or..
A view of a couple tree trunk legs spread wide with a big X in the middle and Whoopi's screaming head in back.

Mark said...

It's too late to argue a woman's sovereignty over her own body and the consequent right to access to abortion.

The abortion advocates grounded and defended Roe on the dehumanization of the prenatal child. You all could have argued on the basis of justifiable homicide, but no. That would have meant admitting to the undeniable - that what is involved in "abortion" is the killing of a separate and distinct human being, however small and nascent.

You are stuck with your Dred Scott position. And the abhorrence and contempt that goes along with it.

Lem said...

It's a Pokémon.

Pokémon Go is an "augmented reality" mobile game.

farmgirl said...

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/05/austin-mom-tells-son-tried-abort-laughs-pro-abortion-rally-austin-owen-shroyer-films-video/

A woman calling a man a pussy. I think it happens more than you think it happens.

Ann Althouse said...

The state can’t bind its residents not to travel or to not take advantage of freedoms available in other states when they are traveling.

Ann Althouse said...

“ The abortion advocates grounded and defended Roe on the dehumanization of the prenatal child.”

No they didn’t. The Roe court found it impossible to resolve the question of the personhood of the unborn. It’s left to the woman’s understanding and individual beliefs.

Saint Croix said...

If Thomas or Gorsuch or Barrett wanted to do Alito a solid, they should write a concurrence to the right of his opinion.

Specifically, they should join his opinion, but also write a concurrence to say...

1) The word "person" as used in the equal protection clause, is broad enough to cover all human beings, and it was an awful mistake to classify some human beings as non-persons, sub-human, or property. Your vulnerability or your size is not enough to negate your humanity.

2) States have laws in place in regard to when human begins die. The Constitution says nothing about this. It's up to the states to define when people die. But your rules must apply to all human beings. The Constitution forbids taking a class of human beings and putting them outside the law.

3) Currently, in all 50 states, the legal standard for human death is total brain death. (This is why doctors are not charged with murder for taking a beating heart out of a brain dead patient). Thus the relevant criterion for life, according to our death statutes, is whether you have any brain activity at all.

4) The baby's brain starts to have electrical activity approximately 6 weeks after conception, or 8 weeks after the mom's last menstrual period.

5) If your state death statute defines human death as loss of any brain activity, then you cannot allow innocent people to be killed who have brain activity. Equal protection forbids it. You can, of course, change your death statutes, as reasonable and moral people can disagree when death happens. But the point of equal protection is that our laws apply to all of us. That's the way to make sure our laws are as fair as possible.

Saint Croix said...

The Roe court found it impossible to resolve the question of the personhood of the unborn.

The Roe court specifically said an unborn child is a legal non-person.

Saint Croix said...

Direct quote from Roe v. Wade:

"...the word 'person,' as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn."

Seven unelected men said an unborn baby is a legal non-person, thus sub-human, thus property. I understand why you want to rewrite this, and make it more feminist, and nicer, like Casey tried to do.

But you know and I know and everybody knows that the Supreme Court has never applied the equal protection clause to unborn (or partially-born) children. That's because these unelected men classified little babies as non-persons back in 1973.

farmgirl said...

“No they didn’t.”….

Wasn’t that b/c scientifically, they didn’t know when life began?
Isn’t that resolved, now?

Then again, the newest member of the SC cannot define “woman” b/c she’s not a biologist.

n.n said...

“ The abortion advocates grounded and defended Roe on the dehumanization of the prenatal child.”

Yes, they denied the viability of human life from six weeks, from baby's first heartbeat to granny's last, from the development of coherent nervous system function to granny's disordered conclusion. A belief that set the precedent for planned parenthood and planned parent/hood alike. That said, there is no mystery in sex and conception, the Pro-Choice "ethical" religion denies women and men's dignity and agency, and reduces human life to negotiable commodities. A woman and man have four choices and self-defense through reconciliation. The wicked solution and rites exercised for social, redistributive, clinical, and fair weather causes, is neither a good nor exclusive choice, and with the indulgence of emanations from penumbras ("Twilight Amendment", fringe/faith) has been the source of diverse acts of civil and criminal mischief in civil, public, and transnational affairs.

n.n said...

The abortion advocates grounded and defended Roe on the dehumanization of the prenatal child.

As, there is no mystery in sex and conception. They identified and labeled "our Posterity" as a fetus, a technical term of art, used by technicians, abortionists, and consumers for social distance. And the diverse judgments, labels, and empathetic appeals of mother, father, child, and abolitionists of the wicked solution, a rite exercised with unprecedented diversity (number, not color) for social, redistributive, clinical, and fair weather causes.

stephen cooper said...

Everybody knows that the disproportionate number of young women who will be given money by these bad people to kill their innocent children will be African-American.

EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT.

I think that is terrible, I think that is racist.

Narayanan said...

suppose abortion robots/machines are developed and ["woman" + robot] in one location and "doctor/operator" are in different states >>> what would be legal framework for this?

Bunkypotatohead said...

They can recoup some of the expenses by auctioning off the baby parts. Same as insurance companies do when they total your car after an accident.
All aboard the death train.

Narayanan said...

throwing this out >>>
can disparate impact be brought into play ?
between womb occupants to term and less than term?

veni vidi vici said...

Fugitive slaves had to hide?

Then how come everyone knew what they were doing, to the point of it being like a stage routine? I mean, who hasn't heard of the Fugitive Slave Act?


[yes, excessively bad taste, i know... but what the hell; yolo]

Joe Smith said...

'The state can’t bind its residents not to travel or to not take advantage of freedoms available in other states when they are traveling.'

But they can force you to take an experimental vaccine or lose your job.

Funny how that works.

Jason said...

No they didn’t. The Roe court found it impossible to resolve the question of the personhood of the unborn. It’s left to the woman’s understanding and individual beliefs.

Ok, this is one of the most contemptably obtuse things I’ve ever seen on this blog.

Mark said...

Wasn’t that b/c scientifically, they didn’t know when life began?

Humanity has known when life begins for thousands of years. They have known how babies are made for thousands of years.

When Harry Blackmun feigned ignorance in the Court's dehumanization of an entire class of human beings, refusing to acknowledge that inconvenient truth as if it were not only unknown, but permanently unknowable, it was to give DOCTORS the license to kill what everyone knew to be human life. Again -- Roe is about the right of DOCTORS, not so much women.

Even if you accept AA's specious insistence that Roe did not dehumanize prenatal children, but simply left it to women to decide -- even that is dehumanization. No other class of human beings has recognition of their humanity dependent upon others. Such a system takes away from them their inherent humanity. AA's argument is no better than the one that once entitled some people to legally treat other human beings like property.

Yes, people do have rights of bodily autonomy. Pregnant women do have an interest in their own bodies. But even Roe -- even while insisting that the unborn were for purposes of law neither human nor alive -- even Roe stated that a woman "cannot be isolated in her pregnancy." There is someone else involved. Someone who is inside that woman's body. Someone who is KILLED when she is chopped up and sucked out.

It's a tough situation. Any clash of asserted freedoms is. But the pro-abortionists REFUSAL to even acknowledge that there is another life involved, another human being involved -- wholly aside from whether that human being is a legal "person" for 14th Amendment purposes -- cannot be countenanced.

Like I said, you could have made a justifiable homicide argument. You chose not to. Now you are stuck with your abhorrent decision.

Mark said...

The Roe court found it impossible to resolve the question of the personhood of the unborn. It’s left to the woman’s understanding and individual beliefs.

Of course, that argument justifies abortion right up until labor, until the mother is dilating, until the moment of birth. And if an abortion is the intent, by current practice, then even AFTER birth.

No limits. EVER.

That's what you are advocating.

Not a question. An observation.

Gravel said...

The image looks like a waffle with a blob of Karo syrup on it.

farmgirl said...

I agree wholeheartedly, Mark.
As far as humanity has come- to be so morally behind the 8ball is a mystery, to me.

TheOne Who Is Not Obeyed said...

Yet we're fussy about *not* calling a person a "pussy,"

We are? That's news to me and the rather uncouth men I know from various walks of life.

And one particular woman who likes to taunt certain types of men.