The Political History of Abortion and Contraception

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by jnpy!$4g3cwk, Mar 26, 2014.

  1. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #1
    Over the years, the facts put together in this little article have sometimes crossed my mind-- what a strange history abortion politics has had.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/03/hobby_lobby_and_contraception_how_conservative_evangelicals_went_from_not.html

    There are so many odd things that have changed -- first, that today, the actual science doesn't matter, it is their belief about the science that matters. Second, that corporations now have personhood-like rights. Third, abortion, back in the day, was the an issue for the Catholic Church, but, although different Protestants had their own ideas or feelings, it just wasn't the issue of the day, but today, it is a great wrong. Fourth, and to me this is the most disturbing, really-- back then, it was the Catholic Church that was consciously, by design you might say, authoritarian, but, many Protestant churches were decidedly not. Today, Baptists, who actually helped create the separation of church and state doctrine, are playing a leading role in the Fundamentalist/Authoritarian political movement.

    The strange swapping of various roles and ideas in the last 50 years has everything to do with politics, and, the sequence of events as I remember it is pretty much the same as in this article. I guess if you were born after 1984 or so it has always been this way as far as you know.
     
  2. ElectronGuru macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #2
    Well sure, as soon as beliefs and values were proven to have political value, the importance of those beliefs flew off the charts (literally beyond reason). It's simply to effective and easy a technique to garner votes, not to. If and when it becomes easier to get votes (or more votes) in some other way, that way will get all the attention. In the mean time, being the bell of the ball feels pretty good.
     
  3. jnpy!$4g3cwk thread starter macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #3
    It is particularly disturbing, though, because "morning after" pills work by prevention of ovulation:

    http://ec.princeton.edu/questions/eceffect.html

    Because it is asserted to be a "religious belief" that such pills "induce abortion", therefore, mandating availability or coverage goes against "religious beliefs"? We are going backwards...

    What if I assert that π is 22/7 as a religious belief?
     
  4. ElectronGuru, Mar 29, 2014
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2014

    ElectronGuru macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #4
    This isn't about facts or even really, understanding. A key strength of religions is that they understand intuition. Its intuitive that inception from sex happens during sex. Its counterintuitive that inception should happen days later, during some random activity. Morning after pills feel like abortion pills because by the next day, inception should have already occurred.

    Ive said in climate change threads that scientists suck at PR. Morning After has 'after' right in the name, but after what? Its not a pill for sex, thats Viagra. Oh, after the important thing the pill is for, pregnancy. It must be an after pregnancy pill!

    The public is intuition powered. To get them on board, we need intuitive messaging, starting with the pill itself. Like a name for an anti pregnancy pill that starts with the word 'pre' or 'before...'
     

Share This Page