General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAmy Coney Barrett - What a sick, sick, sick mind.
Vanity Fair:
?1638450295
HAB911
(8,887 posts)Sort of like the draft
pnwmom
(108,976 posts)Forced pregnancy has no such purpose.
Ray Bruns
(4,093 posts)pnwmom
(108,976 posts)Forced pregnancy is not comparable to a military draft.
Marcuse
(7,479 posts)pnwmom
(108,976 posts)Wealthier women, mostly white, can travel for abortions.
Marcuse
(7,479 posts)Racists count on our health, education and criminal justice systems to continue the marginalization of non whites until more efficient mechanisms are feasible. We are the Weimar Republic
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/anti-abortion-white-supremacy
https://theconversation.com/the-100-year-old-rallying-cry-of-white-genocide-98378/
CrackityJones75
(2,403 posts)But the object of white supremacy is to anchor whites in their station in life believing that they are better than the other. In reality they are limiting their own selves as well.
If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.
Lyndon B. Johnson
pro-forced birth people should have to register for the adoption draft, that's all
radius777
(3,635 posts)has little to do with 'defending the country'. Therefore the draft historically has been mostly about using certain classes of men as cannon fodder.
dem4decades
(11,282 posts)Or babies whose mothers died during childbirth?
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,996 posts)The kind that go buy babies in Romania and Haiti.
But your point is good. Despite all that, there are more children needing parenting than there are willing capable parents.
https://adoption.org/what-is-the-adoption-rate
olegramps
(8,200 posts)DENVERPOPS
(8,810 posts)"crack babies" and "meth babies". And don't forget all the "fetal alcohol syndrome babies""""
Marcuse
(7,479 posts)haele
(12,647 posts)They also encourage adoption to get members tax breaks and to "starve the beast" by signing up for every social service they can qualify for while fellow cult -err - church "volunteers" take care of things like under the table housekeeping, home schooling, babysitting, and cooking for the family who brings in the most government money while adopting the most kids.
It's a scam. And it makes for some serious domestic abuse, the "pater familia" running the house, women (wife and any single sisters) as brood mares and housekeepers without autonomy, and miserable, ignorant kids who can't leave home fast enough if daddy isn't able to (or won't, if they're adopted) hook them up to get out of drone status and become an elder in on the grift.
Haele
Lots of little minds to meld into "Little Christian Soldiers"
They have to replenish somehow. Lots of people leaving all Church's.
A lot of these families adopt as many as they can so they can raise them all in their religion, sort of like the Quiverfull movement. They're trying to build an army of RW religious nuts to take over the country. Also, as you pointed out, they use these adopted kids as literal servants to their cause. Those child-selling adoption agencies run by these churches should be shut down. They show preference toward these religious people as parents and often discriminate against gay couples who want to adopt. But even with all of this activity, there are still a lot of kids up for adoption who can't find permanent homes. Yet some want to make it illegal to terminate a pregnancy.
LynnTTT
(362 posts)One. Feels a little like The Handmaids Tale. Forced to give birth and then give the baby up.
Two. Abortion is a private matter and unless the woman wants to tell anyone, no one needs to know. Picture this: a mpther of two or a career woman or a teenager has to stay pregnent, carry to term, wear maternity clothers until she delivers. Then has to tell everyone she's giving the baby up. The social stigna is huge. The shame of it will force the woman to keep the baby. Which she never wanted. And believe me, the child will know it.
s
2naSalit
(86,542 posts)One: All those babies supply the child porn/sex trade, if nobody wants them, well, who'll notice?
Two: She sure had a bunch of kids, wonder who is actually raising them for her, or who did she give them to?
StClone
(11,683 posts)shrike3
(3,572 posts)If a woman chooses to give up her baby, she's either told, "Now, it's time to move on," or, "how could you do such a horrible thing, giving up your own baby."
Where I will, a young girl had three children before she turned eighteen, thanks to her much older boyfriend. She decided to give the third one up for adoption. Everyone, including her own mother, told her she was the worst person in the world for doing so. The boyfriend eventually married her. Too late she found that he was molesting the two children she'd kept. She said if she'd known then what she now knew, she would relinquish all three.
There's also the fact that a woman who keeps her child is shamed for any public services she avails herself of, is considered "a burden," etc., etc. She's in for it either way.
Diamond_Dog
(31,979 posts)But it seems no one is ever concerned with the health of the mother.
Childbirth is not a walk in the park. I was in labor for 36 hours with my first one. Its a trauma to your body and dont let anyone tell you differently.
Most employers offer zero parental leave from a job because they arent required by law to offer it.
Child care is prohibitively expensive and unaffordable to many.
Right wing zealots do not take these things into consideration.
Freddie
(9,259 posts)This issue hits home as my daughter nearly died in childbirth 3 years ago, with a wanted and planned for baby (theyre both fine now). What if she didnt want to be pregnant? Should a woman be forced to risk her life against her will? Thats what this all comes down to.
WHITT
(2,868 posts)giving birth is SEVENTY-FIVE times more dangerous than an abortion.
Diamond_Dog
(31,979 posts)patphil
(6,169 posts)The trauma of childbirth is of no concern to them.
The physical problems of a woman forced to have a difficult birth; a process that can kill the mother, and/or damage the child is of no concern to them.
Forcing the mother to give birth to a child that is known to have serious health problems, and probably won't have much, if any, chance of a normal life is of no concern to them.
The struggle to make ends meet financially after birth is of no concern to them.
The stigma of being an unwed mother is of no concern to them, except as a means of condemning the mother for having sex outside of wedlock.
The emotional struggle of the child who often feels unloved as a result of being given up for adoption is of no concern to them.
Their only concern is being able to force the woman to bend to their will.
It's a simple case of "good Christians" engaging in non-christian behavior to satisfy their need, not the needs of the woman or her child. No love here.
I know many of you may not believe this, but I believe the spirit of the child doesn't connect to the body of the child until it is separated from the mother and takes it's first in-breath. Up to the point where the fetus can be successfully separated from the mother, and take that first breath to connect the spirit with the body, it's the mother's choice of whether or not to continue the pregnancy.
evolves
(5,400 posts)Women with children they can barely afford to support will never be able to rise out of poverty, dooming them forever to second- (or third- or fourth-) class status. People in poverty pose little threat to the establishment, because they don't have the luxury of developing their minds and abilities while being forced to work two and three menial jobs merely to survive.
panader0
(25,816 posts)that I wouldn't want any child to be raised by her.
pnwmom
(108,976 posts)JohnSJ
(92,138 posts)things to criticize her on
lark
(23,091 posts)She is the Handmaiden and a fucking traitor to our country and to her sex.
rurallib
(62,406 posts)Free markets, Invisible hand of the marketplace and all that.
That should be the Republican solution
Butterflylady
(3,542 posts)And then she will know how heart wretching that is to carry a child for 9 months and then be forced to give that baby up. I have had 2 cases in my family where that has happened and it tears women apart.
LakeArenal
(28,817 posts)But those are the choices for pregnancy solutions.
ShazzieB
(16,370 posts)When I was a pregnant, unmarried college student, that set of "choices" was why I knew I was going to choose an abortion as soon as I realized my period was late. Carrying the pregnancy to term would have meant either having to drop out of college and move back in with the emotionally abusive parents I'd fought like hell to get away from or giving up the baby for adoption. I knew either of those things would destroy me, and I chose not to be destroyed.
LakeArenal
(28,817 posts)move back in with the emotionally abusive parents I'd fought like hell to get away from. Possibly I knew pregnancy would pop that emotional zit I lived in.
Gawd that is exactly how it was.
But I did go to college and the boy gave up a full scholarship to a great university because of the pressure on HIM
Life was certainly a mess.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)It amazes me that people so casually demand that women and girls give their children up for adoption like it is no big deal.
Republicans aren't just against abortion. They are also against parenting in many cases. They want there to be absolutely no sex outside of heterosexual marriage and for EVERY SINGLE CHILD born out of wedlock to be given up for adoption.
RANDYWILDMAN
(2,668 posts)Amy can adopt all unwanted kids, right ???
StClone
(11,683 posts)Put a wacko in a robe and it does not improve the outcome. Barrett is a loon.
Farmer-Rick
(10,154 posts)Did she get her husband's permission first? Did she confess her sin of self control for speaking out? Really, I think her master husband should reign her in. Maybe it's time for her to have another baby. Her master husband should see to that.
is an extremely dangerous fascist that shouldn't be sitting on any court, even a municipal court, let alone the SCOTUS.
Texin
(2,594 posts)Oh, well, I guess if their daddy's or spouse's (or boyfriends) are rich enough, they can arrange for pregnancy termination wherever that's possible going forward. And for those who don't have deep pockets or even the luxury of an actual male who gives a shit enough about them to help them in this circumstance, they'll have run the risks of pregnancy and birth and all the attendant expenses that will land at their feet thereafter.
Javaman
(62,517 posts)And know so very little about pregnancies.
It is truly a fucking wonder
AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)Ultraconservative. Roman. Catholic.
No disrespect intended to any Catholics in the audience. But it is what it is. Sees the world strictly in black and white, with no allowance for any shade of gray.
The naivete would be laughable if it werent so damn dangerous.
Javaman
(62,517 posts)justice living in a state of cognitive dissonance
And majorly of them to boot
AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)Stench is correct.
SCOTUS is effectively politicized beyond all recognition for generations, if not permanently.
The slow-rolling coup has effectively occurred by corrupting this branch of government. In the past, I could be fairly confident that justices would rule nonpartially and according to law and precedent, regardless of who appointed them.
As of yesterday, I no longer have that confidence, because of morons and stooges like Coney Barrett and Kavanaugh, who should have NEVER gotten past the vetting stage.
The only difference between you and me is that I lost all faith in SCOTUS after the 2000 election.
llmart
(15,536 posts)Brainwashing by the Catholic church.
Deminpenn
(15,278 posts)A good read from the New Yorker about how one woman scammed potential adopters.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/10/25/how-an-adoption-broker-cashed-in-on-prospective-parents-dreams
Deminpenn
(15,278 posts)especially ones with physical or developmental disabilities. Then what?
DURHAM D
(32,609 posts)AngryOldDem
(14,061 posts)But given the environment theyre being raised in, Im not holding my breath.
drmeow
(5,017 posts)Of course, when one of them needs an abortion it will be different and rich mommy will find a way to get one for her precious baby without any change in attitude or recognition of the hypocrisy
vlyons
(10,252 posts)Ya know -- out of sight, out of mind
slightlv
(2,787 posts)the world can deal with the sociopaths and psychopaths the institutionalized orphanages have made of them. For without the personalized touch and care... especially the touch, overseas studies of orphanages during the Cecescu (sp) dictatorship, the brain did not develop normally for feelings of empathy, sympathy, compassion or any of the other emotions that we regard as necessary for a normal "humane" individual. However, these individuals DID score high on scales of sociopathy and psychopathy. Just what the Fascists want... right?!
jaxexpat
(6,818 posts)Seven, count em, seven blessings.
Eyeball_Kid
(7,430 posts)for sophomoric arguments and a clear display of her naiveté. Listening to her via audio, she appears to be competent. But parsing her words for analysis exposes her as just another Christian goober. "Safe Haven" my ass. Barrett is in over her head. She is not a serious justice. My guess is that Trump picked her because someone else told him to pick her. He doesn't have an interest in vetting. Anyone who advances his agenda is a great pick.
Barrett is not a serious justice, and neither is Kavanaugh. Trump and McConnell have made a joke out of the Supreme Court.
I'll make a prediction, and my credentials as an amateur prognosticator give me license: The Roe reversal will destroy the GOP. They might have been able to gaslight the public into another few election cycles by spreading lipstick on the insurrection pig, but the Roe reversal will finish them off. MILLIONS OF WOMEN, to mention a few, are livid. Reasonable men are livid. Most changes in policy or judicial actions don't normally induce visceral reactions from the population. But THIS is different. This pending decision will excite and alarm pro-choice factions en masse. The nation is pissed.
Tumbulu
(6,274 posts)My impression of both Barrett and Kavanaugh are that they are not bright, despite all the rhetoric. They might have been good at memorizing, and are certainly good about saying and believing the bizarro propaganda of their cult leaders. But not capable of any original or creative thoughts.
And my sense is that you are correct, and that for once there will be an energized group of voters going in and voting democrat. At least I certainly hope so!
Scottie Mom
(5,812 posts)What a stupid RWNJ.
keithbvadu2
(36,775 posts)How about these forced birth proponents agree to adopt the baby long before it is born and take financial care for the medical care during pregnancy as if it was their own?
greymattermom
(5,754 posts)should start at 15 weeks. When would the fetus get a social security number?
bluestarone
(16,906 posts)To adopt one of these kids too! (Quite awhile my son and his wife) went that route because they were having troubles having a child. They BOTH complained that in order to adopt they had to be involved in a church. TOTAL BULLSHIT!!
Orrex
(63,203 posts)llmart
(15,536 posts)They didn't seem to think Hillary was a good choice so they did everything they could to siphon off votes for her.
greymattermom
(5,754 posts)collect 3000/month, feed them a lot of beans and rice, then send them to universal pre K? Isn't this what will happen?
BillyBobBrilliant
(805 posts)$50,000 stipend (tax free) for the rental of the womb. PLUS 100% free prenatal care, labor, delivery, and post natal. for starters.
bucolic_frolic
(43,128 posts)Surrogate moms for couples who can't produce for some reason. And if the state is mandating this occupying of the womb, shouldn't they be subject to payment? $50k seems to be about a going rate for high end couples. A serial brooder could just about retire on the income.
Mz Pip
(27,439 posts)What an appalling point of view.
Aviation Pro
(12,151 posts)Ask me how I know this.
StevieM
(10,500 posts)The practices of the adoption industry really need to be exposed.
Anyway, how do you know this?
Aviation Pro
(12,151 posts)I think she means women.
Semper under his eye, amirite, handmaiden or is it Martha? I get so confused.
Xipe Totec
(43,890 posts)Forcing women to carry a fetus to term is akin to a death sentence for those women under forced pregnancy.
olegramps
(8,200 posts)She is representative of what is left of the Catholic Church membership when millions including priests and nearly every nun got the hell out. Can you imagine what would be in store for any kid she adopted? She is good example of what would be the outcome. She is a brain washed, lying bitch who didn't hesitate to commit perjury during her confirmation hearing to get on the Supreme Court. Just like the other trash that Trump nominated.
haele
(12,647 posts)Francis is just a placeholder because too many "Communists and Liberals" wanted someone less dogmatic than the truly he-man dictator of God's Plans that Benedict the Hitler Youth member was.
And yes, I know all German boys at that time were members of HY. I just don't think from the way he ruled during his time as Priest/Cardinal/Pope that he was ever especially troubled about the Nazi environment as he grew into manhood.
Haele
shrike3
(3,572 posts)But as I often point out only eight percent of the church is in the U.S. and in the Third World particularly Francis is quite popular.
The U.S. Church matters less and less as time goes on and has more and more tantrums as time goes on. It's a bizarre situation.
shrike3
(3,572 posts)World-wide, the church is basically intact and dealing with conditions in the third world caused by climate change. One of the reasons Francis has told U.S. Bishops to stay out of culture wars repeatedly and to no avail.
There are noises every now and then about schism in the U.S. Sometimes I wish they would hurry up.
Cozmo
(1,402 posts)TOGETHER WITH THE FATHER'S CONTACT INFORMATION
barbtries
(28,787 posts)and all republicans actually.
FakeNoose
(32,634 posts)I've known many Catholics just like her in my lifetime.
I don't call her "sick" or "crazy." She's indoctrinated - or brainwashed, if you prefer that term - and she will consider no other opinion or philosophy. For that reason alone she has no right to be sitting on the SCOTUS bench.
For the record, I was also raised a Catholic and educated in Catholic schools. However I've thrown off almost all of the doctrines that were pounded into my brain at an early age. I consider myself a lapsed Catholic because even though I haven't quit altogether, I consider their teachings anathema especially those that overlap into the political arena.
Duppers
(28,120 posts)Are Perfect!!
Jersey Devil
(9,874 posts)"Let them eat cake." It certainly is the same kind of sentiment.
BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)Let them eat babies
Walleye
(31,008 posts)She has no concept of reality for the average American. He asked her if she had ever stood in line more than a half an hour to vote. She said what? She looked at him like he was speaking a foreign language.
Generic Brad
(14,274 posts)The arrogance of imposing her personal religious views on people who do not subscribe to her belief system has nothing to do with law.
BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)From ever sitting on any bench any where.
Blue Owl
(50,349 posts)Yeah, thats a GREAT idea, isnt it
.
stuffmatters
(2,574 posts)Roy Rolling
(6,911 posts)Really? People? It isnt people, its women. And 13-year old girls. And young rape victims. Child victims of incest.
It isnt people. Each one of these women has a name and a story. And all are women, not a people.
ShazzieB
(16,370 posts)Vogon_Glory
(9,117 posts)Who has little to no contact with how most people live
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)Sorry for my language, but that is honestly how i feel about her.
Right, you stupid bimbo, unless they die in childbirth, like my mother, then what Amy? Then what are you going to say to those motherless children and everyone else in her life who has lost her?
Arghhh!
I just want to scream at this stupidity and ignorance!
Roisin Ni Fiachra
(2,574 posts)shallow box of mind and consciousness stifling privilege.
How narrow minded does someone have to be, to think they have the divinely decreed legal right to control women's bodies, and try to force women to give birth against their wishes?
She's like some starry eyed fanatic straight out of Gilead, in The Handmaid's Tale.