There's a lot of political stuff that this guy glosses over because it doesn't affect him as a white male Christian. The "traditional gender roles" thing, for one. With our governor and the 5th Circuit eager to send anything and everything regressive up to our 6-3 SCOTUS, my lesbian neighbors are worried about things as basic as their marriage. The University of Austin he cites approvingly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Austin) is a right-wing project set up explicitly to be "anti-woke". And the heartbeat bill he cites as something that people can just disagree about has no exception for rape or incest, something that 75+ percent of people in Texas support. The government has moved to the right of the median Texan, and with the gerrymandered districts and no ballot initiative, it is not really democratically accountable to the voters.
And Texas is 45th in percentage of public land, definitely not a 7/10. With the growth in the Austin area, the hikes and water features that are nearby are always crowded, and you have to reserve campsites months out at state parks. If this dude went hunting, he more than likely paid to hunt on somebody else's land, something I never had to do when I lived in NC or VA.
Texas is anti-human, unless you happen to wealthy, white, male or the first two and a woman who agrees that "her place" is in the home. My wife is always on edge here. It's violent and people are becoming more cruel as the politics more and more support our worst inclinations.
How absurd. How is Texas anti-human for non-whites? For the poor? For women?
The only thing that could be argued is "anti women" would be the abortion bill. But a lot of people don't view that as a woman's rights issue. The "my body my choice" argument is about the same as if a single father advocated to kill his infant and claimed "my life my choice". The 9 months of pregnancy are by no means more of an invasion of autonomy than the following 18 years of care.
For the poor? See https://itep.org/whopays/ -- we have the second most inequitable tax system in the nation, where the poor pay the highest effective rate. We also have no expanded Medicaid, so the rate of uninsured is twice the national average. The State of Texas blocked Austin's sick leave ordinance (https://www.texastribune.org/2020/06/05/texas-supreme-court-...). All this affects women and minorities disproportionately -- we're above the national average for maternal mortality, and non-white women are at disproportionate risk above that.
Losing black people doesn't mean Austin is "anti black". SF also lost minorities when the tech scene blew up.
Texas doesn't even have state income tax.
The state isn't and shouldn't be responsible for ensuring everyone has medical insurance. That's an individual responsability.
Blocking the sick leave ordinance just put us in line with the majority of the country. Not exactly a radical move.
Edit:
Also citations not from a .org would be great. I don't need a write up to wade through. Your data should be able to speak for itself if it's legitimate.
Oh man... The wall of text we'd need to discuss this.
Anti abortion laws impact one segment (and the sub segments within, obviously) of society: women. Before you start talking about men's rights and whatnot, please consider not doing that. Nothing grows inside you. Anyway, these laws ONLY IMPACT WOMEN. The US has a ridiculously high Maternal Mortality rate for a "developed" nation and it's worse for non-whites:
For many, abortion is the safe option but making it illegal means it's harder for the poor (which are disproportionately non-white) means they will either have to have back room abortions (remember that talking point in the 80s?) or have babies, which will increase the mortality rate for non-whites even further.
Know what we love? Forcing women to have babies. Know what we don't love? Their kids. Our social support structure in this state is abysmal. So now we're forcing people to have kids that we won't help them with, driving further into poverty, so we can talk about how minorities are The Problem.
But wait! These kids are US citizens, surely they can grow up and vote for change! Not so. We are big fans of gerrymandering. It's a Texas art form and the lines are constantly shifting in obvious ways that basically make voting more of a spectacle than a real thing. We draw lines through minority neighborhoods to split their votes with surrounding neighborhoods that are rich white folks.
And this is all just stuff I can type out on my phone because it's such a common discussion point that I don't have research it any more. We could for hours about laws that are on the books already and those that have been added recently and those that are coming up but if you read this far, I'm already surprised. Texas is tailor made for white republican men and those that that orbit them. Our state laws are giant piles of hypocritical BS. We use one argument to support a thing and the opposite to support another and they're bought and paid for by gun and Christian lobbying.
We're not forcing anyone to have kids. 99% of would be abortions are preventable by just practicing safe sex. Yes I know there's the 1%, but let's talk about the overwhelming majority here.
If you can't afford children, be a responsible adult and don't have them.
I wasn't talking about men's rights, but a humans right to life. How do you justify a mother opting to kill her unborn child while still condemning the killing of a born child? Again, 9 months of gestation is absolutely not more an invasion of autonomy than the following 18 years of care. To believe that its okay to kill a fetus 3 months into pregnancy but not okay to kill a newborn is pure mental gymnastics. In most abortions the aborted fetus would have developed into a healthy, functioning human being had you not prevented it. That's murder. You're taking away a humans opportunity for life.
Texas law has no exceptions for rape or incest. In these circumstances, you are literally forcing someone to have a child after they've been violated. Abbott's argument is "Rape is a crime. And Texas will work tirelessly to make sure that we eliminate all rapists from the streets of Texas by aggressively going out and arresting them and prosecuting them and getting them off the streets."
What have they been doing up to this point? Texas outpaces the nation in rape and has been trending upward.
Know what else is illegal? Gun possession by violent criminals. Didn't Abbott also claim that if we made it harder for 18 year old white boys to get AR-15s then only the criminals would have guns? Why not apply the same logic in two places? (I own guns, I like shooting, I'm just no a fan of being full of shit and I believe in common sense fun laws, like most gun owners.)
I know that last bit was a different topic but it illustrates some of the absolute mess that exists in TX politics. They can't even avoid using contradictory arguments in public statements. This is a bad state run by bad people who will say and do absolutely anything to defend the status quo, even if it means saying two opposing things in almost the same breath.
So you focused on a fraction of a percent of abortion cases rather than the overwhelming majority that happen because the mother and/or father couldn't be bothered to have safe sex. I explicitly said in my comment lets talk about the majority. Marijuana causes some fraction of a percent of the population to go into a temporary psychosis, that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
Why do you single out 18 year old white boys specifically? Was there a law that restricted 18 year old white men from purchasing guns that got shot down? If so, good. That's sexist and racist.
Ah. So because it's on a small portion (cite your sources) that we harm irreparably, then it's ok. Cool beans. What was I thinking. Harming the most vulnerable to protect the majority is stupid math. You're also make an assertion about the majority without providing any data, so it's not fact but feeling.
Re: the white boy problem
Because as a an adult white male, I am allowed to call out my own. The perpetrators of most school shootings have been young, white, men. My wife isn't allowed to say it because she'll be shouted down by "not all men" and minorities can't say it because we'll call them racist and point out the one or two times a minority did it. Not enough white men are pointing at the common denominator (aside from "gun") and it's our responsibility to do so.
Black men are also responsible for the majority of firearm murders ala gang violence, the total number of which make the number killed in school shootings look miniscule by comparison, but I don't see you calling them out. I bet you'll say it's a systemic issue. No chance the white school shooters are dealing with any systemic issues themselves? Perhaps people like you who seem to have an unreasonable disdain for young white men?
Just because you've internalized self-hatred and white-guilt doesn't give your the right to project that on the rest of the population.
I'm just happy to know you're concerned for their safety. We should do something about that too. Know what might work? Gun control.
Know what might really help? Ending cycles of poverty. Know a way we could do that? By not forcing them into poverty. Birth control is not free (it was but you killed Planned Parenthood, remember that?). So maybe everyone should stop having sex. That's realistic, right? Oh wait...
So you're concerned about gang violence, which is generally an issue for the most impoverished, who likely don't have healthcare and may not have the money for other birth control devices and you've forced the most well know women's health organization out of business, who used to provide these things for free and you want to force them to have babies, knowing they don't have money, creating more poverty and more desperation and higher likelihoods of violence and then... Shit. Did it come right back around?
Math is hard. Let's go shopping.
ps- I don't have internalized guilt. I haven't massacred one single school. I'm just not blind to the fact that almost all the people who have look like me and I'm smart enough to know that the only people who anyone will listen to (not everyone but most) are the ones who look like me because the only response you can muster is that I just feel guilty, which is ridiculous, I feel angry and sad.
I can't find a "WIC doesn't cover birth control article" but I can't one that says it does. I can also find the FAQ from PP that says they'll give you free birth control but if you're in a red state, they won't exist.
Not only is there work in this area, it's a not a leap at all. A minor application of critical thinking and logic makes cause and effect pretty simple. This has always been about forcing personal feelings onto others. We make a giant show of being anti-choice and then talk down to the poor and point out the issues in poverty stricken areas to make ourselves feel better, ignoring the clear evidence that this is a self fulfilling issue.
This was fun but I'm going to go back to getting the hell out of here, literally. I have packing to do.
Sure, but some things don’t warrant all that many words. Bless your heart: I hope you have many life experiences that help you enrich your perspective and add nuance to your worldview.
It's incredible that when you disagree with someone, your assumption is that they lack life experience and have a naive worldview. Because surely if they were wiser, they'd agree with you, right?
If you truly have a good response to the things I mentioned, I'd like to hear them. Your current behaviour truly is incredibly condescending.
>99% of would be abortions are preventable by just practicing safe sex.
Non-substantial and uncited statistic. 99% of pregnancy is prevented by safe sex.
>Yes I know there's the 1%, but let's talk about the overwhelming majority here.
Unsubstantiated ratio. Assumption that safe-sex is universally possible. It’s a privilege that not all get to enjoy, and abortion is the edge-case of human behavior that addresses those situations.
>If you can't afford children, be a responsible adult and don't have them.
Assumption of full reproductive autonomy.
>Again, 9 months of gestation is absolutely not more an invasion of autonomy than the following 18 years of care.
Moral hazard.
>In most abortions the aborted fetus would have developed into a healthy, functioning human being had you not prevented it. That's murder. You're taking away a humans opportunity for life.
In law we call this “but-for” analysis. Essentially, “but for” someone aborting a fetus, the fetus “would have developed into a healthy, functioning human being.”
Everything else up to this point was fine but the last point is where the “bless your heart” materialized in my soul. Would that we could guarantee the health and functioning of humans, simply by not aborting them.
They say “If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans,” but in your case it’s “If you want to make God laugh, tell him his plans.”
Okay my exact percentages are probably wrong, the point being the vast majority of abortions could be prevented by safe sex.
Safe sex is absolutely universally possible. Free condoms are given out all over the place, and in places where they aren't it's probably better to practice abstinence until you're ready than kill unborn children so you can get a quick nut.
In cases except rape, which are a small minority of abortions, there is reproductive autonomy.
Elaborate on "moral hazard".
I explicitly said most. Not all. Most. Most abortions, like most births, would have resulted in a healthy adult human. You're responding to a misreading of what I said.
My dudebro, you are the living answer to your own questions.
You couldn’t pay me or my wife enough money to move back to Austin, let alone anywhere else in Texas, and we called it home for longer than anywhere else we’ve been since. Enjoy the hellhole.
On top of restricting women’s healthcare, there is also the lack of parental and sick leave laws, and extended disability leave for women who give birth. Probably a lack of adequate breastfeeding laws too. And of course, non existent min hourly and salaried wage laws.
I would never subject my wife/daughter to that kind of society, as long as I have the means not to.
My wife is also a physician. The level of care provided to low-income patients is barely existent compared to a state like Massachusetts, both some of the places she has practiced. Have you seen the state of Medicaid in Texas?
Go expose yourself to it and you’ll see how Texas is anti-poor.
Thank you for this. It really infuriates me when white guys (and I am a cishet white guy, but I have empathy for those who aren't) treat issues like gay marriage and abortion access like "culture war" nice-to-haves, as if for any controversy the center must be the right place and both sides must have a point. It ain't so.
Some people in our society really want to turn women into passive baby-making machines, just as some people in our society want back the legal right to own people, just as some people think capital's leverage over labor is morally legitimate. Human rights and civil rights are non-negotiable and we must give our adversaries no quarter.
I looked at the advisory board and trustees for the University of Austin, and it's a mix of left- and right-wing, but mostly centrists. Among the right-wing members, they seem to be the think tank type.
Furthermore, even if it were set up to be "anti-woke," why is that a problem? Most of the woke stuff in higher ed has little basis in reality or is conceptually incoherent. It's signaling for social capital because nearly everyone is straight, white, etc.
There's a lot of political stuff that this guy glosses over because it doesn't affect him as a white male Christian. The "traditional gender roles" thing, for one. With our governor and the 5th Circuit eager to send anything and everything regressive up to our 6-3 SCOTUS, my lesbian neighbors are worried about things as basic as their marriage. The University of Austin he cites approvingly (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Austin) is a right-wing project set up explicitly to be "anti-woke". And the heartbeat bill he cites as something that people can just disagree about has no exception for rape or incest, something that 75+ percent of people in Texas support. The government has moved to the right of the median Texan, and with the gerrymandered districts and no ballot initiative, it is not really democratically accountable to the voters.
And Texas is 45th in percentage of public land, definitely not a 7/10. With the growth in the Austin area, the hikes and water features that are nearby are always crowded, and you have to reserve campsites months out at state parks. If this dude went hunting, he more than likely paid to hunt on somebody else's land, something I never had to do when I lived in NC or VA.