Texas, Afghanistan, the Taliban, and Women's Rights

[Alias]

Let me put it this way: the new laws in Texas have pushed its citizens a little more than half a century back in history. Afghanistan with the Talibans are going backwards several centuries and are a bit closer to the Middle Ages.

20 years. They were in charge after they wore the Russians down (with a little behind-the-scenes assistance and encouragement from the United States) and they, or something like them, were in charge before and after the British attempts to colonize their country. They've been in charge since about 700 AD. And if all the empires would just leave them alone for a century, they would evolve into a modern nation. But since they're all the time having to fight guerilla warfare against invaders, they can't relax and move on.

The push to the middle ages is more economically driven than religious. While fundamentalist religion thinks it has harnessed the political system, both the political system and religious suasion are being used by economic factions. Disempowering women is part of the same strategy as suppressing Black, and Hispanic voters and disabling labour unions: it's an essential component in tearing down what remains of the social safety net. Then they can do whatever they want with working people - just like in the good ol' days.

[Alias]

In case it was unclear. The second ^^ paragraph is about the US, not Afghanistan. The two really have very little in common.

[Steve3007]

So go ahead accuse me over exaggerating

I think it would be an exaggeration to say that you're over exaggerating. I think you're just exaggerating.

The new Texas anti-abortion laws are, apart from anything else, apparently cynically designed to promote "bounty hunting" against anyone who even drives a woman to the Texas border. But I don't think they're motivated primarily by misogyny or the desire to subjugate women as such. I think they're motivated by a pathological fixation on the concept of the sanctity of human life in the abstract, without any thought for what it means in the real world, or for the quality of that life in the real world. In restricting abortion to before most women know they are pregnant, even in cases of incest or rape, they clearly don't pay much heed to the welfare of women. But it's not the welfare of living things they care about. It's simply this fetishizing of "human life" which leads to the idea that a single fertilized human cell ought to be afforded more rights than a fully formed, thinking, living, breathing non-human.

It's interesting to wonder if they would feel the same way if the recent extinction of our nearest hominid relatives (homo erectus etc) hadn't created such a relatively large evolutionary divide between us and our nearest extant relatives. If birds had brains that were sufficiently developed to have moral opinions about abortion similar to ours, I wonder if blue **** would regard single-celled blue tit embryos as deserving more rights than fully formed great ****.

[Steve3007]

Note: Amusingly, my use of the name for two closely related species of birds has been replaced by stars, presumably because it's also "a rude word". Hopefully, if you interest in the post, you can guess what it says.

[UniversalAlien]

So go ahead accuse me over exaggerating

I think it would be an exaggeration to say that you're over exaggerating. I think you're just exaggerating.

The new Texas anti-abortion laws are, apart from anything else, apparently cynically designed to promote "bounty hunting" against anyone who even drives a woman to the Texas border. But I don't think they're motivated primarily by misogyny or the desire to subjugate women as such. I think they're motivated by a pathological fixation on the concept of the sanctity of human life in the abstract, without any thought for what it means in the real world, or for the quality of that life in the real world. In restricting abortion to before most women know they are pregnant, even in cases of incest or rape, they clearly don't pay much heed to the welfare of women. But it's not the welfare of living things they care about. It's simply this fetishizing of "human life" which leads to the idea that a single fertilized human cell ought to be afforded more rights than a fully formed, thinking, living, breathing non-human.

It's interesting to wonder if they would feel the same way if the recent extinction of our nearest hominid relatives (homo erectus etc) hadn't created such a relatively large evolutionary divide between us and our nearest extant relatives. If birds had brains that were sufficiently developed to have moral opinions about abortion similar to ours, I wonder if blue **** would regard single-celled blue tit embryos as deserving more rights than fully formed great ****.

"I think it would be an exaggeration to say that you're over exaggerating. I think you're just exaggerating."

I might agree - But then I see this:

"Texas abortion law likely to lead to worse mental health for women, says APA president"

WASHINGTON — Following is a statement by Jennifer F. Kelly, PhD, president of the American Psychological Association, in response to the implementation of a law in Texas banning most abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy:

“The American Psychological Association is very concerned about the impact of the Texas law on the mental health of women experiencing unwanted pregnancies. The association has a long history of supporting a woman’s right to choose as a basic civil right. Our position is based on scientific research showing that women who are denied abortions are more likely to experience higher levels of anxiety, lower life satisfaction and lower self-esteem compared with women who are able to obtain abortions. Laws restricting access to safe, legal abortions are most likely to affect low-income women, women of color, and sexual and gender minorities, as well as those who live in rural or medically underserved areas. Research also suggests that adding barriers to accessing abortion services may increase symptoms of stress, anxiety and depression.

“There are seven million women of child-bearing age in Texas, many of whom will now face insurmountable obstacles if they need an abortion. Research published in the American Journal of Public Health showed that experiencing unwanted pregnancies appears to be strongly associated with poor mental health effects for women later in life. Laws like this one will increase the chances that women will seek abortions outside of legal channels and cause many women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term, with potential long-term mental health consequences.

“We believe the Texas law is unconstitutional and look forward to seeing it challenged on the merits and ultimately overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.”........

https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases ... ortion-law


So am I really "over exaggerating" to make a point - Or in fact is the situation in Texas even worse than my so-called exagerations

After all women in Afaghanistan are used to being suppressed by Taliban rule from the past and tried to adapt.

- Will woman in Texas get used to living under the Neanderthal politicians now controlling their State

[Alias]

Keep in mind that, in both places, women profess the same religion as the men. A great many right-to-lifers are female, just as a great many advocates of women's reproductive rights are male. The divide is between the sexes; it's between political factions.
In fact, Democrats and their sympathizers slightly outnumber Republicanshttps://www.pewforum.org/religious-land ... filiation/, but are shut out of power by Republican election rigging and shouted down by the militant fundamentalists.
In Afghanistan, there is no effective government or law-enforcement, now that the US puppets have gone the way of their imperial predecessors. The militant fundamentalists constitute federal authority, army, police, court and church.
When all the warlords are defeated or assimilated, the Taliban will have absolute control.

Texas. meanwhile, could have a civil war.

[Alias]

Can't edit. Left out a word. Sentence 3 should read: The divide is not between the sexes; it's between political factions.

[UniversalAlien]

Keep in mind that, in both places, women profess the same religion as the men. A great many right-to-lifers are female, just as a great many advocates of women's reproductive rights are male. The divide is between the sexes; it's between political factions.
In fact, Democrats and their sympathizers slightly outnumber Republicanshttps://www.pewforum.org/religious-land ... filiation/, but are shut out of power by Republican election rigging and shouted down by the militant fundamentalists.
In Afghanistan, there is no effective government or law-enforcement, now that the US puppets have gone the way of their imperial predecessors. The militant fundamentalists constitute federal authority, army, police, court and church.
When all the warlords are defeated or assimilated, the Taliban will have absolute control.

Texas. meanwhile, could have a civil war.

"Texas. meanwhile, could have a civil war."

You realize that it would never stop in just Texas

I was just listening to an interview on NPR {National Public Radio} of a woman who wrote a book on the history of abortion in the US.
According to her the new Conservative Supreme Court may hold up the Texas law and a bunch of other state anti-abortion laws which would not only overturn Roe vs. Wade but might even lead to abortion becoming illegal on a nationwide bassis

[chewybrian]

Now I have two questions:
1. Is Texas part of the United States of America and functioning under the laws and Constitution of The United States of America, or is Texas an independent country functioning under Fundamentalist Christian law {America's Christian version of Moslem Sharia law}

2. Is a woman today better off in Texas or Afghanistan - Or does it really matter ...

I see it as much, much worse than a cultural anomaly where we can compare Moslem vs. Christian ideology and and its enforcement.

I see it as a left over remnant of the 'Inquisition' and the 'witch hunts' of the middle ages where women where systematically tortured and burned alive by a sick bunch of Devils supposedly doing the work of God.
- These evil and ill conceived anti abortion laws to supposedly protect the unborn from the evils of the living are sick - And the people trying to push the agenda are at least sick, if not insane.

I saw a proponent of the anti-abortion agenda on TV a few years ago trying to explain himself - He grew teary eyed as he started to cry about those poor unborn babies, as if he felt personally responsible to be sure he they all get born. And how many doctors have been attacked, and in some cases even murdered by these crazy devils supposedly doing the work of god

I see it as much, much worse than a cultural anomaly where we can compare Moslem vs. Christian ideology and and its enforcement.

I see it as a left over remnant of the 'Inquisition' and the 'witch hunts' of the middle ages where women where systematically tortured and burned alive by a sick bunch of Devils supposedly doing the work of God.
- These evil and ill conceived anti abortion laws to supposedly protect the unborn from the evils of the living are sick - And the people trying to push the agenda are at least sick, if not insane.

I saw a proponent of the anti-abortion agenda on TV a few years ago trying to explain himself - He grew teary eyed as he started to cry about those poor unborn babies, as if he felt personally responsible to be sure he they all get born. And how many doctors have been attacked, and in some cases even murdered by these crazy devils supposedly doing the work of god

In my opinion we are not dealing with politics or philosophy - These anti abortion laws, more than anything are based upon mental illness, the same type of sick minds that gave the World the Inquisition and Witch hunts of the past.

So am I really "over exaggerating" to make a point - Or in fact is the situation in Texas even worse than my so-called exagerations

After all women in Afaghanistan are used to being suppressed by Taliban rule from the past and tried to adapt.

- Will woman in Texas get used to living under the Neanderthal politicians now controlling their State

Did you just try to argue that denying women the right to abortions in Texas is much worse than denying a laundry list of rights to women in Afghanistan because those women are "used to" being denied basic human rights? By this logic, we'd better not tax Bezos, but continue socking it to the middle class, who are "used to" paying more than their fair share, right?

If "over-exaggerating" is a thing, then by all means you are doing it. This is not the Spanish Inquisition or the Crusades or the Salem witch trials. It is an unfair law and we may rightly oppose it. But overstating the case by miles makes your arguments less convincing.

[UniversalAlien]

"Justice Department Says U.S. Will ‘Protect’ Texas Women Seeking Abortions"

"Sept. 6, 2021, 6:02 p.m. ET
Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said on Monday that the Justice Department would continue to protect women who seek an abortion in Texas, days after a state law enacting a near-complete ban on the procedure went in effect.

“We will not tolerate violence against those seeking to obtain or provide reproductive health services,” Mr. Garland said in a statement. “The department will provide support from federal law enforcement when an abortion clinic or reproductive health center is under attack.”

Mr. Garland said the Justice Department would “protect the constitutional rights of women and other persons” under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, or FACE, a 1994 federal law that guarantees access to the entrances of clinics that offer reproductive health services, including those that offer abortions. Under the law, it is illegal to threaten, obstruct or injure a person seeking access to such a clinic or to damage the clinic’s property, punishable by a fine or imprisonment.

In his statement, Mr. Garland did not directly challenge the.......

President Biden, in a statement last week, slammed the Texas law as “an unprecedented assault on a woman’s constitutional rights.” He pointed to the law’s provision allowing citizens to sue those who violate the statute, saying “complete strangers will now be empowered to inject themselves in the most private and personal health decisions faced by women.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/06/us/t ... rland.html


The facts speak for themselves - The new Texas standard for abortion rivals the Taliban for treating women as dis-empowered entities subject to repression and deputizing the public to engage in a 'Witch Hunt' to stop abortions is unprecedented for modern Western Law - Afghanistan has some historical excuses. But then again so does Texas and its anti-progressive, anti-American agendas.
Maybe it should be called Conservative Regressivism - The philosophy that advocates setting Civilization backwards

[Steve3007]

Sorry to go on about this, but while we're on the subject of respect for women, I think that if I were a woman who'd had a single mastectomy I might find it offensive that the word "tit" is not censored but its plural is. The implication being that a single breast is not considered sexy enough for an informal word for it to be labelled a "sexual swear word" and be censored, whereas the plural is. Over-analyzing?

[Pattern-chaser]

Over-analysing? Yes, but only a bit. The filters that look for such words are simple, and easily fooled. Just ask the good people of Scunthorpe. It's that you care that people are treated decently that matters.

[Steve3007]

Over-analysing? Yes, but only a bit. The filters that look for such words are simple, and easily fooled. Just ask the good people of Scunthorpe. It's that you care that people are treated decently that matters.

Although naturally I like to think of myself as caring about that, I should probably make sure it's clear that my comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek. But I'm intrigued as to what happened to the good people of Scunthorpe now.

[Steve3007]

OK. Googled it. Got it.

[Pattern-chaser]

Setting aside women's rights - just briefly! - I have always found it odd that the words we are appalled to find in print refer to physical love, whereas the trappings of terrifying violence are glorified and widely publicised, uncensored....