SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Iowa approves one of strictest abortion bills in US
The US state of Iowa has approved one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country, banning most abortions once a foetal heartbeat is detected. Republican lawmakers, who control both chambers, passed the bill in back-to-back votes, sending it to the governor's desk to sign into law.
If [signed], the bill would ban most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. Critics argue the bill makes having an abortion illegal before most women even realise they are pregnant.
[...] If [Governor Kim] Reynolds signs the bill into law, it will likely be challenged in court for possibly violating Roe v Wade, the US Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion in 1973. [...] Some Republican lawmakers welcomed the challenge. "I would love for the United States Supreme Court to look at this bill and have this as a vehicle to overturn Roe v. Wade," Republican Senator Jake Chapman said.
Also at NPR, Reuters, the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier, and The Hill:
Nineteen states adopted a total of 63 restrictions to the procedure in 2017, which is the highest number of state laws on the issue since 2013, according to the Guttmacher Institute. State legislatures have proposed 15 bills that would ban abortions after 20 weeks and 11 bills that would ban abortions if the sole reason is a genetic anomaly like Down syndrome.
Related: Ohio Bill Would Ban Abortion when a Prenatal Test is Positive for Down Syndrome
These 9 Places in America Will Pay You to Move There
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday May 04 2018, @02:55PM (1 child)
I'm a New Right guy not an Old Right guy so I don't agree with many aspects of Old Right thinking. However I know boomer RINOs purty well, so I can intelligently comment on your claims about my Old Right cousins:
Basically we as a culture already have everything demanded on your list, to a rational minimum if not far to excess, so pushing hard for even more seems pointless to the Old Right and New Right. Left wing ranting about birth control being unavailable sounds as comedic as voting ID laws causing massive disenfranchisement of non-whites, highly ridiculous and unlikely straw dogging and race baiting rabble rousing. Its the same argument about a unrelated topic. Until every day we have police force a pack of condoms into every hand of every child at gunpoint with summary execution of those who won't accept, we'll have endless left wing claims that its simply scientifically proven impossible to obtain birth control and its so much work and nobody should be expected to put any effort into anything and we just need ever more programs and liberal arts grads to staff them, and its such a crisis we have to worry about, blah blah blah. Obtaining a condom is a rounding error for men compared to the willpower, money, and time required to get laid, amid a lot of straw dogs about imaginary victims and much like gun control no amount of regulation and expense is too much to save even one life blah blah. Its all kinda tired and old and not a modern outlook on life. Its not really a specific topic to argue against; its a legacy 60s hippie style of argument that is fought against as a class of argument, such that the facts of birth control don't matter to the debate, the problem is the philosophy behind the argument itself is unappealing and tired legacy arguments. If you take away the style of argument thats being opposed, there really isn't much of a point left. What is being fought against is kinda the left wing equivalent of the really old right doctrine of "total war". Much like its not possible even in theory to ever "win" the war on drugs, its not possible even in theory to "win" the war against sexual morality. I'm further not entirely clear why we "need" to win a war against sexual morality, how shitty of a world would it be to live in if we won that war? Other than pissing off the Old Right Christians the war against sexual morality doesn't seem like a useful goal to aspire to. A crazy alternative history world where leftists won everything they want, sounds like a great place to be a refugee from, or to write a dystopian novel about, but nobody would want to live there; so whats the point of the endless push?
As for why the Old Right believes certain non-rational things, its no different than Old Left Jewish Dietary Purity Laws or any other religious issue. They didn't get those cultural lifestyle outlooks by calm rational academic philosophical debate as grown adults consciously deciding the right way to live, and you're not going to talk them out of their belief in a rational manner. Find me a leftist who was keeping Kosher twitter posting or Kosher diet or Kosher community participation guidelines who was talked out of it in a calm rational academic philosophical manner, LOL good luck. If you're anti-Christian, in opposition to the beliefs and lifestyles of Christians, then actively and consciously be anti-Christian, don't be deeply closeted talking endlessly about how the Bible's calculated value for pi is wrong past the first digit of rounding in the writing about the dimensions of some round biblical thingie so THAT is we have to keep the ten commandments out of school because it would be awful to bring up a generation thinking pi is about three instead of the far more accurate fractional numerical representations of that irrational number. None of that angels dancing on head of pin stuff is convincing to anyone on either side. Christians will support Christian thought, people who don't care are mostly chill about living under Christian dominated areas, and anti-Christians are closeted and won't admit it instead producing vast bowls of word salad that convince nobody on either side. A long academic screed about abortion is like a long academic screed about why Jesus did (or did not) die for your sins or bacon is or is not kosher, nobody who agrees or disagrees has ever changed their mind because the sophistry was so well written or repeated enough times. Essentially most of the arguments boil down to "I'm not Christian so I'll make fun of weird corners of Christian thought", naturally the Old Right Christians are not going to respond favorably. Not being honest is a weak way to argue. Its like people who don't like black men shooting people fighting for control of the guns, as if the guns are the problem, because they don't think black-control will market as well as gun-control, but too many people see thru it and find the argument very unconvincing.
Old Right was wedded at the hip to evangelicals and neocons. New Right are mostly refugees from the capital L Libertarian party turning hard left, and as such are generally fairly socially libertarian. Generally speaking Old Right is dying out with the boomers and New Right is ascendent with Gen-X and younger so that statement will likely look really bizarre in a decade or two, when President Richard Spencer legalizes weed or replaces the Federal Reserve with bitcoin or whatever. Also Conservative in the sense of keeping society on the same path its been on since long before they were born, does not describe New Right who see 60s Old Left as hyper conservative and "the man" and demanding hyper conformist behavior and speech, whereas New Right is the rebels who want to change everything. Consider Hillary and her picture perfect 1975 campaign failing in 2016 because 2016 isn't 1975 anymore so a paleo-conservative 60s hippie simply had no chance in 2016, of course Hillary lost, it hadn't been 1975 in about 41 years at that time. Which side is getting trash talked by the conservative legacy cultural leaders in media and politics.. As a hint "the establishment" at CNN or NYT or the Post or Twitter or any of the online censors are not trash talking the old or new left... All the cool rebelious kids (and Kayne) are on the new right. In that way Hillary and her weird alliance with globalist business makes sense, leftism IS the new conservatism, its the new right who are the radicals. Making the statement look even weirder as USA politics continues its great realignment.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday May 04 2018, @03:05PM
Posted to edit that there is a specific name for that style of argument "tactical nihilism" where we MUST destroy society in order to save society.
There are entire reams of leftist thought on numerous topics that get written off by the Old Right and New Right as yeah yeah whatever nice argument "proving" civilization was a terrible idea and totally proving its impossible, therefore we must get rid of it and stamp out any semblance of civilization, and the response being something like I'd rather live in civilization so nice argument but oh well.
Its like taking a print out of that scientific paper that proved given simplified obsolete fluid dynamics equations, honeybees are unable to fly, then walking up to an active honeybee hive full of happy and busily working bees, and screaming that paper over at over at the bees as loud as possible from every form of media imaginable then being surprised the bees don't magically fall out of the sky, or the bees don't feel really bad about the proven facts of the argument, or really have much of any reaction other than "they crazy" and "I'm not electing that character as our next queen, no way" "sorry busy running civilization over here plz be quiet and get out of the way with your parodies".