Abortion-Keep Legal, Yes or No?

mrussel1

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

PJPOWER

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic.  As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing.  I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it.  I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls.  It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.

cincybearcat

mrussel1 said:

cincybearcat said:

mrussel1 said:

cincybearcat said:

I should say…I do think majority opinion matters in a lot of cases. Especially when granting more rights bs taking them away. 

I believe this had been settled in the courts and by the people. So I think pro life efforts should shift to sex education and providing contraception. And also ensuring pregnant women can have a true open conversation about alternatives if they wish.

There are certainly crazy zealots on both sides and more so on the anti-abortion side. But there are a lot of people that just believe it’s a life and therefore a terrible tragedy.

Why do you think the majority should have the right to dictate here?  For example, the Bill of Rights was established precisely to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.  When Loving v Virginia was decided, finally allowing mixed marriages in this country, a strong majority of the population was against interracial marriage.  Were they right?  Should the majority have the ability to prevent the exercise of free will that does no harm to another living human?  You might say, well that's crazy that we wouldn't allow interracial marriage today.  But Sen. Mike Braun (R-ID) said that you can't have it both ways and even Loving should be left to the states to decide.  

You can believe it's a terrible tragedy.  I do.  I wish we didn't have to have abortion, but I support a woman's choice here.  As Clinton put it, it should be safe and rare.  

I mentioned the opinion of the majority in a society matters and especially when granting more rights vs limiting them. I think that is how you move forward. That’s all.

It matters, inasmuch as it makes it easier.  But it shouldn't matter.  Personal rights should not be subject to the tyranny of the majority.  

Yeah I get that.  I'm no expert here and I was speaking more from the standpoint of myself I suppose.  Being that even if it's something I don't like or agree with, if it is adding rights and not taking away, then I am swayed by public opinion to understand it's the will of the people.

But you are correct, the way the will of the people should work is simply through electing officials and then laws being made.  So for sure, you are correct.

Halifax2TheMax

National Review had a headline that began by reading, “Abortion Enthusiasts……..” Yup, that’s what the pro-choice movement is.

mrussel1

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic.  As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing.  I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it.  I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls.  It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.

the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court.  For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill.  76 were 'yea'.  Of those 'yea', 7 were women.  https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671

Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend. 

cincybearcat

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic.  As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing.  I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it.  I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls.  It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.

the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court.  For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill.  76 were 'yea'.  Of those 'yea', 7 were women.  https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671

Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend. 

On the issue of men making laws for women...it's seems pretty clear to me that the majority of government representatives voting on these issues are male.  But it is also true that there is a group of women that vote for these reps knowing exactly what their position is....and they have the same position.

I mean - 42% of women voted for Trump over Biden no?

PJPOWER

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic.  As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing.  I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it.  I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls.  It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.

the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court.  For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill.  76 were 'yea'.  Of those 'yea', 7 were women.  https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671

Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend. 

Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right?  There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”?
Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill.
If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills.  Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue.
Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.

mrussel1

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic.  As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing.  I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it.  I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls.  It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.

the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court.  For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill.  76 were 'yea'.  Of those 'yea', 7 were women.  https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671

Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend. 

Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right?  There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”?
Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill.
If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills.  Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue.
Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.

It is down the party line, but that is irrelevant.  The point remains that the overwhelming number of people attempting to regulate a woman's right to choose are men.  If the legislature was 50/50 men and women, would the bills have passed?  Who knows.  

Regarding 42% of women voted for Trump, I'd say 1. That's not a ringing endorsement compared to 58% for Biden and 2. Abortion was not a key issue in the election.  I think many people who are not court watchers are rather surprised that Roe could be swept away. 

PJPOWER

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic.  As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing.  I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it.  I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls.  It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.

the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court.  For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill.  76 were 'yea'.  Of those 'yea', 7 were women.  https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671

Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend. 

Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right?  There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”?
Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill.
If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills.  Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue.
Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.

It is down the party line, but that is irrelevant.  The point remains that the overwhelming number of people attempting to regulate a woman's right to choose are men.  If the legislature was 50/50 men and women, would the bills have passed?  Who knows.  

Regarding 42% of women voted for Trump, I'd say 1. That's not a ringing endorsement compared to 58% for Biden and 2. Abortion was not a key issue in the election.  I think many people who are not court watchers are rather surprised that Roe could be swept away. 

Why is party line irrelevant?  Don’t they vote based on their constituents consisting of men and women?  And based on trends (data), if it were 50/50 men and women, the result would probably be the same.  Remember, only 1 out of the 7 women voted against that bill you used for an example.  To add, there were plenty of men that voted against the bill, albeit Dems.

The most significant factor is literally the party line, so how is that irrelevant? I would venture to guess that religious views play a way more significant role than gender on this issue.

stuckinline

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic.  As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing.  I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it.  I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls.  It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.

the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court.  For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill.  76 were 'yea'.  Of those 'yea', 7 were women.  https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671

Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend. 

Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right?  There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”?
Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill.
If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills.  Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue.
Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.

It is down the party line, but that is irrelevant.  The point remains that the overwhelming number of people attempting to regulate a woman's right to choose are men.  If the legislature was 50/50 men and women, would the bills have passed?  Who knows.  

Regarding 42% of women voted for Trump, I'd say 1. That's not a ringing endorsement compared to 58% for Biden and 2. Abortion was not a key issue in the election.  I think many people who are not court watchers are rather surprised that Roe could be swept away. 

I will respectfully disagree with the bolded statement. For some people, abortion was a key issue in the last election. In my area, many women acknowledged Trump is a horrible human being but voted for him solely on his pro-life stance, and Biden's pro-choice stance.

FiveBelow

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic.  As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing.  I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it.  I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls.  It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.

the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court.  For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill.  76 were 'yea'.  Of those 'yea', 7 were women.  https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671

Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend. 

Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right?  There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”?
Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill.
If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills.  Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue.
Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.

It is down the party line, but that is irrelevant.  The point remains that the overwhelming number of people attempting to regulate a woman's right to choose are men.  If the legislature was 50/50 men and women, would the bills have passed?  Who knows.  

Regarding 42% of women voted for Trump, I'd say 1. That's not a ringing endorsement compared to 58% for Biden and 2. Abortion was not a key issue in the election.  I think many people who are not court watchers are rather surprised that Roe could be swept away. 

But probably the main issue for the uninformed voters who make up the majority of the electorate in every election. It is the main reason many people even bother voting.

mrussel1

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic.  As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing.  I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it.  I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls.  It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.

the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court.  For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill.  76 were 'yea'.  Of those 'yea', 7 were women.  https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671

Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend. 

Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right?  There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”?
Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill.
If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills.  Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue.
Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.

It is down the party line, but that is irrelevant.  The point remains that the overwhelming number of people attempting to regulate a woman's right to choose are men.  If the legislature was 50/50 men and women, would the bills have passed?  Who knows.  

Regarding 42% of women voted for Trump, I'd say 1. That's not a ringing endorsement compared to 58% for Biden and 2. Abortion was not a key issue in the election.  I think many people who are not court watchers are rather surprised that Roe could be swept away. 

Why is party line irrelevant?  Don’t they vote based on their constituents consisting of men and women?  And based on trends (data), if it were 50/50 men and women, the result would probably be the same.  Remember, only 1 out of the 7 women voted against that bill you used for an example.  

The most significant factor is literally the party line, so how is that irrelevant?

Because the argument isn't about party, it's about men and women.  I could argue your 1/7 statement the other way and say 15% of women defected from the party.  That's a high number for a 'core' Republican issue.  Now both the numbers 1 and 7 are too small to draw conclusions, so that's why I wouldn't make that argument, nor would I make the argument that 6 of 7 women would vote to ban abortion if the legislature was 50/50.  

The only argument I'm making is that the legislatures making these laws are overwhelmingly men.  As a comparative, 50 of the 150 members of the NY legislature are women.  Is it a surprise there are no laws pending to outlaw abortion there?  Well you'll say, no it's a D state.  But that's a chicken/egg conversation.  

PJPOWER

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic.  As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing.  I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it.  I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls.  It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.

the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court.  For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill.  76 were 'yea'.  Of those 'yea', 7 were women.  https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671

Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend. 

Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right?  There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”?
Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill.
If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills.  Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue.
Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.

It is down the party line, but that is irrelevant.  The point remains that the overwhelming number of people attempting to regulate a woman's right to choose are men.  If the legislature was 50/50 men and women, would the bills have passed?  Who knows.  

Regarding 42% of women voted for Trump, I'd say 1. That's not a ringing endorsement compared to 58% for Biden and 2. Abortion was not a key issue in the election.  I think many people who are not court watchers are rather surprised that Roe could be swept away. 

Why is party line irrelevant?  Don’t they vote based on their constituents consisting of men and women?  And based on trends (data), if it were 50/50 men and women, the result would probably be the same.  Remember, only 1 out of the 7 women voted against that bill you used for an example.  

The most significant factor is literally the party line, so how is that irrelevant?

Because the argument isn't about party, it's about men and women.  I could argue your 1/7 statement the other way and say 15% of women defected from the party.  That's a high number for a 'core' Republican issue.  Now both the numbers 1 and 7 are too small to draw conclusions, so that's why I wouldn't make that argument, nor would I make the argument that 6 of 7 women would vote to ban abortion if the legislature was 50/50.  

The only argument I'm making is that the legislatures making these laws are overwhelmingly men.  As a comparative, 50 of the 150 members of the NY legislature are women.  Is it a surprise there are no laws pending to outlaw abortion there?  Well you'll say, no it's a D state.  But that's a chicken/egg conversation.  

But the legislatures are representatives, correct?  And almost all of the Dem men voted for abortion rights, so how in any world can you discount party lines?  Your only “fact” to back your conclusion is that there were more male legislators that voted for the bill than women, but that seems a very surface level way of coming up with a conclusion that men are the guiding hand in this.  In fact, actual stats show that the topic of abortion isn’t anywhere near as important of an issue to men as it is to women.  And polls show men and women almost equally hold similar views on abortion as a whole with women actually coming out with a slightly higher number against abortion.

https://www.vox.com/2019/5/20/18629644/abortion-gender-gap-public-opinion

https://www.theguardian.com/science/the-lay-scientist/2014/apr/30/why-are-women-more-opposed-to-abortion

The stats show that there is a far stronger correlation with party line and religion than merely gender….

mrussel1

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic.  As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing.  I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it.  I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls.  It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.

the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court.  For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill.  76 were 'yea'.  Of those 'yea', 7 were women.  https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671

Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend. 

Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right?  There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”?
Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill.
If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills.  Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue.
Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.

It is down the party line, but that is irrelevant.  The point remains that the overwhelming number of people attempting to regulate a woman's right to choose are men.  If the legislature was 50/50 men and women, would the bills have passed?  Who knows.  

Regarding 42% of women voted for Trump, I'd say 1. That's not a ringing endorsement compared to 58% for Biden and 2. Abortion was not a key issue in the election.  I think many people who are not court watchers are rather surprised that Roe could be swept away. 

Why is party line irrelevant?  Don’t they vote based on their constituents consisting of men and women?  And based on trends (data), if it were 50/50 men and women, the result would probably be the same.  Remember, only 1 out of the 7 women voted against that bill you used for an example.  

The most significant factor is literally the party line, so how is that irrelevant?

Because the argument isn't about party, it's about men and women.  I could argue your 1/7 statement the other way and say 15% of women defected from the party.  That's a high number for a 'core' Republican issue.  Now both the numbers 1 and 7 are too small to draw conclusions, so that's why I wouldn't make that argument, nor would I make the argument that 6 of 7 women would vote to ban abortion if the legislature was 50/50.  

The only argument I'm making is that the legislatures making these laws are overwhelmingly men.  As a comparative, 50 of the 150 members of the NY legislature are women.  Is it a surprise there are no laws pending to outlaw abortion there?  Well you'll say, no it's a D state.  But that's a chicken/egg conversation.  

But the legislatures are representatives, correct?  And almost all of the Dem men voted for abortion rights, so how in any world can you discount party lines?  Your only “fact” to back your conclusion is that there were more male legislators that voted for the bill than women, but that seems a very surface level way of coming up with a conclusion that men are the guiding hand in this.  In fact, actual stats show that the topic of abortion isn’t anywhere near as important of an issue to men as it is to women.  And polls show men and women almost equally hold similar views on abortion as a whole:

https://www.vox.com/2019/5/20/18629644/abortion-gender-gap-public-opinion

The stats show that there is a far stronger correlation with party line and religion than merely gender….

That Vox article is silly and provides no meaningful information.  It says there are more important issues that animate men and women.  Maybe that's true.  Or maybe that was true in 2019 when Roe wasn't up for judicial review with an actual chance of being overturned.  It also shows that 20% of Americans have 'no opinion'.  I'm pretty sure if you conducted a poll today, there would not be 20% of Americans with no opinion on abortion. 

But I'm tired of this argument, to be honest.  Someone asked why people said this was men making decisions for women.  I explained why that statement is out there.  It's because of the legislature makeup where these laws are happening.  You can take issue with that statement or not.  I don't care.  It doesn't change anything.  It's a talking point by the pro-choice side of the aisle and it's not without merit.  You can peel the onion five levels and say AHA! not true.  It's still going to be said.  My view is that this is an individual decision, made by one individual.  The woman.  A majority or a state should not take that decision from her.  We don't make people get cancer treatments, we shouldn't make them carry a baby in their body. 

PJPOWER

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

mrussel1 said:

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Once more, look at the lawmakers.  Your social media search isn't exactly empirical or representative.  

It’s definitely not empirical data, but definitely an observation against the men vs women narrative that is always pushed with this topic.  As far as lawmakers go, yes, it not good optics having men signing these bills, but I think conservative women would be doing (and have done) the same thing.  I don’t see any lawmakers signing bills if 75% of their female constituents were against it.  I mean, women traditionally have a higher turnout than men in the polls.  It’s a conservative/religious against non-conservative/not-religious rather than a men vs women thing in my opinion.

the MS heartbeat bill is the one before the court.  For the state legislature in MS, there were 118 votes on the bill.  76 were 'yea'.  Of those 'yea', 7 were women.  https://legiscan.com/MS/rollcall/SB2116/id/818671

Go state by state where these bills are passing and you'll see the same trend. 

Looks pretty much straight down party line, though, right?  There are overwhelmingly more men than women legislators voting, so what percentage of the Republican women voting went “yea”?
Missy Warren was literally the only Rep. woman that voted against it, so data says that roughly 86% of the female Reps voted for that bill.
If the trend is, as you say, similar in other states, then it is justifiable to say that most conservatives, men and women, support anti-abortion bills.  Added to the fact that Republican female citizens outpace male voters, that is significant data showing it is not purely a men vs women issue.
Most data that I’ve seen does not support the men vs women theory.

It is down the party line, but that is irrelevant.  The point remains that the overwhelming number of people attempting to regulate a woman's right to choose are men.  If the legislature was 50/50 men and women, would the bills have passed?  Who knows.  

Regarding 42% of women voted for Trump, I'd say 1. That's not a ringing endorsement compared to 58% for Biden and 2. Abortion was not a key issue in the election.  I think many people who are not court watchers are rather surprised that Roe could be swept away. 

Why is party line irrelevant?  Don’t they vote based on their constituents consisting of men and women?  And based on trends (data), if it were 50/50 men and women, the result would probably be the same.  Remember, only 1 out of the 7 women voted against that bill you used for an example.  

The most significant factor is literally the party line, so how is that irrelevant?

Because the argument isn't about party, it's about men and women.  I could argue your 1/7 statement the other way and say 15% of women defected from the party.  That's a high number for a 'core' Republican issue.  Now both the numbers 1 and 7 are too small to draw conclusions, so that's why I wouldn't make that argument, nor would I make the argument that 6 of 7 women would vote to ban abortion if the legislature was 50/50.  

The only argument I'm making is that the legislatures making these laws are overwhelmingly men.  As a comparative, 50 of the 150 members of the NY legislature are women.  Is it a surprise there are no laws pending to outlaw abortion there?  Well you'll say, no it's a D state.  But that's a chicken/egg conversation.  

But the legislatures are representatives, correct?  And almost all of the Dem men voted for abortion rights, so how in any world can you discount party lines?  Your only “fact” to back your conclusion is that there were more male legislators that voted for the bill than women, but that seems a very surface level way of coming up with a conclusion that men are the guiding hand in this.  In fact, actual stats show that the topic of abortion isn’t anywhere near as important of an issue to men as it is to women.  And polls show men and women almost equally hold similar views on abortion as a whole:

https://www.vox.com/2019/5/20/18629644/abortion-gender-gap-public-opinion

The stats show that there is a far stronger correlation with party line and religion than merely gender….

That Vox article is silly and provides no meaningful information.  It says there are more important issues that animate men and women.  Maybe that's true.  Or maybe that was true in 2019 when Roe wasn't up for judicial review with an actual chance of being overturned.  It also shows that 20% of Americans have 'no opinion'.  I'm pretty sure if you conducted a poll today, there would not be 20% of Americans with no opinion on abortion. 

But I'm tired of this argument, to be honest.  Someone asked why people said this was men making decisions for women.  I explained why that statement is out there.  It's because of the legislature makeup where these laws are happening.  You can take issue with that statement or not.  I don't care.  It doesn't change anything.  It's a talking point by the pro-choice side of the aisle and it's not without merit.  You can peel the onion five levels and say AHA! not true.  It's still going to be said.  My view is that this is an individual decision, made by one individual.  The woman.  A majority or a state should not take that decision from her.  We don't make people get cancer treatments, we shouldn't make them carry a baby in their body. 

I edited my comment and put more adequate links/articles to prove my point (since that Vox article was from 2012), so check those out if you are interested in actual data instead of assumptions.  Thanks for the debate!
I do agree, though, that states have their hands in regulating this (and many other things) way more than they should.

Gern Blansten

I thought the Meet the Press interview with Tate Reeves (Gov of Mississippi) was interesting yesterday.

Chuck Todd pressed him on why there wasn't an exception for incest in MS when there is for rape and life of the mother.  Tate sidestepped it and Todd pointed that out.

Tate's reasoning for being anti-abortion was that "it's an American child".  But isn't it also an "American child" in the case of rape, incest and life of the mother?

Their argument falls apart immediately. You can't argue that life begins at conception with exceptions.

The right answer is that the government should not be able to step between a woman and her doctor.

brianlux

Amanda Gorman is amazing!  I love this:

https://nowthisnews.com/videos/news/amanda-gorman-8-reasons-to-stand-up-today-against-abortion-bans-in-the-united-states

Halifax2TheMax

Gern Blansten said:

I thought the Meet the Press interview with Tate Reeves (Gov of Mississippi) was interesting yesterday.

Chuck Todd pressed him on why there wasn't an exception for incest in MS when there is for rape and life of the mother.  Tate sidestepped it and Todd pointed that out.

Tate's reasoning for being anti-abortion was that "it's an American child".  But isn't it also an "American child" in the case of rape, incest and life of the mother?

Their argument falls apart immediately. You can't argue that life begins at conception with exceptions.

The right answer is that the government should not be able to step between a woman and her doctor.

"Its an 'American child?'" I guess he's pro abortion for the pregnant, cantaloupe calved, drug smuggling, illegal mamacitas? "Its an 'American child.'" Good grief.

If these guys are so prolife, why can't we force them to give up a kidney to someone who needs one? 

benjs

PJPOWER said:

I searched around on different social media pages for this topic and almost all of the comments supporting “right to life” were made by women.  I found relative few men even commenting on the subject, and most that did were on the “choice” front.  Also, at the Planned Parenthood clinic in my city, I’ve only ever seen women outside protesting in favor of “right to life”.   I know it’s not a great metric, but a valid observation I think.  On the same note, most of the “choice” comments seemed to be made by women as well, but there were more men tricking in comments on that side.  What it seemed like was mostly women vs women on this subject.  

Just wanted to say, using social media as a gauge of public opinion is a very, very bad idea. The companies in charge of social media networks all use variations of the same premise in determining what social content makes it onto your screen, and they’re based on either sensationalizing, or reinforcing one’s own opinions through content. The goal is exclusively to keep you on it, meaning they want you riled up or seeing things you feel to be true - neither of which will align with the realities of the world through anything other than coincidence. Truth is never the objective.

Gern Blansten

Halifax2TheMax said:

Gern Blansten said:

I thought the Meet the Press interview with Tate Reeves (Gov of Mississippi) was interesting yesterday.

Chuck Todd pressed him on why there wasn't an exception for incest in MS when there is for rape and life of the mother.  Tate sidestepped it and Todd pointed that out.

Tate's reasoning for being anti-abortion was that "it's an American child".  But isn't it also an "American child" in the case of rape, incest and life of the mother?

Their argument falls apart immediately. You can't argue that life begins at conception with exceptions.

The right answer is that the government should not be able to step between a woman and her doctor.

"Its an 'American child?'" I guess he's pro abortion for the pregnant, cantaloupe calved, drug smuggling, illegal mamacitas? "Its an 'American child.'" Good grief.

If these guys are so prolife, why can't we force them to give up a kidney to someone who needs one? 

Todd also pressed the governor on how horrible MS stats were toward supporting the poor. He asked if MS was going to step up their game given they want all of these "american children" to be born.