Story recommendation - ILU 486

[reynardo]

Recommended by kerravonsen, HELLO THERE. WE HEARD U NEED THIS.
DON’T WORRY, WE LOVE YOU.
EVERY PART OF YOU BELONGS TO YOU.

Warning: it's a Pro-life story what happens if the Pro-lifers win.., and it will make you cry.

Comments

[kerravonsen]

Don't you mean it's a Pro-choice story? (is puzzled)

But yes. It will. I see you re-tweeted my tweet about it. 8-)

[reynardo.livejournal.com]

It's what happens if the Pro-lifers win... which I will clarify.

[kerravonsen]

My personal beliefs on the subject are a bit more complicated than a mere label could sum up, but I don't agree with the extremists on either side, which is why that story is so chilling: one of the extremes has been enacted.

I mean, I can understand why some people hate abortion, because they sincerely believe that it's murder, but opposing birth control at the same time is baffling, though I could speculate that what they really want to outlaw is premarital sex, and they think that birth control encourages promiscuity... which wouldn't explain why they would want it outlawed for married couples too. Unless it's also being conflated with the Catholic belief that birth control itself is sinful. Which a Catholic explained to me once and it made sense at the time, but I can't remember what they said.

[nefaria.livejournal.com]

The Catholic church is trying to cling to the sanctity of procreation in a world where nothing is sacred anymore.

Some contraceptives work not by preventing conception but by preventing a fertilized egg from implanting in the womb. Catholics who believe life begins at conception consider this abortion; pro-choicers do not.

Also, many Catholics feel the contraceptive issue may be a trial balloon for the abortion issue. If the government can require all health insurance to cover contraceptives, even when there are religious concerns, why not mandatory abortion coverage as well? The Catholics may yield on the contraceptive issue, but I see Catholic hospitals shutting down and Catholic organizations terminating health care coverage if they're forced to pay for and perform abortions.

FWIW...

[delphipsmith]

In the 1990 Supreme Court decision on Employment Division v. Smith, Justice Antonin Scalia said, “Congress and the courts have been sensitive to the needs flowing from the Free Exercise Clause (i.e., the Constitution’s guarantee of the free exercise of religion), but every person cannot be shielded from all the burdens incident to exercising every aspect of the right to practice religious beliefs. When followers of a particular sect enter into commercial activity as a matter of choice, the limits they accept on their own conduct as a matter of conscience and faith are not to be superimposed on the statutory schemes which are binding on others in that activity.”

In other words, if you are going to operate in the realm of commerce, you have to abide by the same rules as do other businesses. Religious institutions that serve only members of their faith (e.g., churches) are and should be exempt. When they start operating in the public sphere, they have to follow public laws.

Re: FWIW...

[nefaria.livejournal.com]

That logic presumes that the religious and public spheres are mutually exclusive. Religious folks will assert that their religious freedom does not end outside the church doors.

Re: FWIW...

[delphipsmith]

Not so much religious and public as religious and commercial, I think. And that's exactly what this decision addresses: it says, basically, that religious freedom in the private sphere does not override regulations in the commercial sphere. Seems like that makes it settled law (though the Supreme Court does occasionally overturn themselves, o' course...).

Re: FWIW...

[nefaria.livejournal.com]

The assertion that the government should have unlimited control over the commercial sector (including compelling private citizens to purchase health care or other commodities) is another point of contention.

The commerce clause was originally intended to prevent states from giving preferential treatment to certain other states or to foreign nations, not to give the Federal government unlimited regulatory power over the economy, but the Supreme Court has allowed it to drift that way over the decades. Some of us do not wish the courts to push past this recent hurdle and force the citizens and religious organizations to purchase things they do not want.

[kerravonsen]

That story is so haunting I hope it doesn't give me nightmares...

[nefaria.livejournal.com]

Too over-the-top and paranoid. It was like The Day After Tomorrow as an argument against climate change skepticism.

The pro-life hell, alas, is non-fiction: mandatory abortion and sterilization have been taking place in China for decades. And the supposedly pro-choice Planned Parenthood International has been at the forefront of it.

[delphipsmith]

Holy #$*&($%. That was really seriously nightmare scenario, thank you very much. But very, very well done: unnerving, frightening, credible, horrifying. That I read it while listening to the GOP candidates dance around the question of birth control just made it all the more vivid >:p LOVE the title.