_drjayphd_

_drjayphd_ t1_j3ru27t wrote

That's... that's the joke. The whole "you must be an SJW with blue hair and pronouns which is the worst thing ever" thing if you express the slightest bit of empathy, or even choose to not dogpile on him for his appearance.

(I should probably mention some of my hair is blue and because I exist, I have pronouns, they're not any different than how I present or anything.)

−1

_drjayphd_ t1_iwtlgcn wrote

You ever consider that maybe "the overwhelming majority of the developed Western world" has reasons why it's so short that aren't applicable to the US? Like long established (longer than the US has been a country) intertwining of religion and government? Look at how long it took Ireland to decriminalize abortion because of the overwhelming history of Christian denominations as seats of power. It was only legalized four years ago because of a dentist dying from a miscarriage. That was the impetus to repeal a constitutional amendment that banned abortion in Ireland (which had already been outlawed since 1861 but anti-choice dickheads wanted to lock it in once they saw the tides were turning against them). You have zero perspective and you think you have the high ground. Do yourself a favor and walk away, neither of us are enacting any policy changes, especially not this deep in a thread.

1

_drjayphd_ t1_iwrfy6s wrote

"not sure why some (like the Guv) are so opposed to it"

Ooh, this one's easy, because when you gerrymander districts it makes it easier to get rid of competition and retain party control, even when you're not supported by the majority of the electorate. (Take a guess which party poured more resources into gerrymandering... it's not the one that supports independent commissions, which is what we should have.)

21

_drjayphd_ t1_iwpytiz wrote

You did a really terrible job of it, for starters. And the numbers don't back up what you're talking about either. What I was talking about is well beyond any kind of contraceptive use, as the vast majority of abortions after 24 weeks are because of complications. (And notice how we're talking about 24 weeks and now you're moving the goalposts to "oh, I would be okay with 12-15 weeks"? Fuck outta here with that.) I recognize that my view on abortion (no restrictions on elective abortions) isn't exactly shared with everyone here but guess what, yours isn't either and it's not grounded in reality.

Also I'm gonna assume you're going to support legislation to enshrine Griswold v. Connecticut and the subsequent right to contraception before Clarence Thomas isn't just musing about getting rid of that decision too. You can't base your views in "well, it shouldn't be an alternative to contraception..." without protecting access to contraception too.

2

_drjayphd_ t1_iwogqhl wrote

Guess you gotta sink into delusion when your party fumbled the easiest bag they've had in years. Midterms favor the opposition party, the recession, gas prices, everything else youse tried to hang on Biden... and the Republicans picked up exactly zero net seats in the Senate (and may lose one after the Georgia runoff), only won the House by the smallest of margins (if the projections hold the Republicans will have a seven seat majority and only flip eight net seats when y'all flipped 50+ seats in the first midterms against Clinton and Obama each)... Republicans had everything going their way and you. blew. it. Save some copium for Lakers fans, Republicans are hogging it all.

4

_drjayphd_ t1_iwmoe0w wrote

No crying, I said there shouldn't need to be exceptions because there shouldn't be restrictions in the first place. That ban (which, as we all remember, didn't have those exceptions originally because the Republicans were running such a sloppy shop) only exists to normalize pushing for more restrictions because elective abortions are nearly non-existent that late.

6