cross-posted from: https://wolfballs.com/post/26479
So, from seeing posts from "the other side", some people are concerned women with ectopic pregnancies will die if they cannot have abortions. From the little I've read of this topic, such children and mothers can still sometimes survive, so in some cases it may be a non-issue. And perhaps, instead of recommending abortion for this problem, more research could be done to find safe ways to amend this condition to save the lives of both mother and child, rather than resort to abortion. Also, elective abortions in contrast cause more harm in society than the few ectopic pregnancies that exist, and even people getting abortions die from abortion, so I'm not sure this is the biggest concern (although we should try to reduce as much harm in these situations as possible).
Others are concerned about a foster care system needing to expand to absorb many new children that parents wouldn't be able to take care of. So does a plan need to exist there for creating new services?
I think also "abstinence only" programs could be re-understood. I do believe in an "abstinence only" policy, kind of, but I think that either single men should focus their energy on work to be able to get married, or be able to marry at younger ages if they desire it. So you're not really abstaining if married. And if not married then working. I guess to me it's a shift in the perception of the lifestyle, "abstinence only" sounds negative, rather than "busy working or married" as alternatives. With lot of people being for contraception or using pornography, lust is a powerful impulse that needs to be addressed and put in some constructive direction, so it doesn't lead to fornication (which can then lead to abortion for some people). So the culture of fornication should change, lust is kind of a "violent" impulse that can bring forth life (or death in the case of abortion). It's frequently misunderstood perhaps as being a "mostly peaceful" impulse.
Basically my question is how can abortion bans be made to have a smooth transition? Kind of like the "boiling frog" idea but used in a constructive direction or a reverse of accelerationism maybe. If abortion bans happen slowly enough, people can accept and adapt to them. If it happens too quickly, it can trigger an accelerationist overreaction and people aren't aware of how to adapt.
sj_zero@lotide.fbxl.net 3 years ago
Kids actually aren't stupid. They can be dumb, but they aren't stupid. We don't necessarily need to give a complete abstinence only education, but it should be made perfectly clear that it's an option. And after that, it needs to be made perfectly clear that no matter how fun it is, that action can create a life.
Beyond that, if these people actually care about women, they should absolutely be focusing on the establishment of healthy relationships. If they care about children, they should absolutely be focusing on the establishment of healthy relationships. The majority of violent criminals, including something like 85% of violent rapists come from single family households. Even under a regime that basically allowed abortion, that was the case. Therefore, a clear moral imperative to go out there and promote healthy relationships, and to promote getting out of unhealthy relationships, and to make sure that if you're about to have kids you better be having kids with somebody that you can see yourself with for the next 20 years.
The fact that our society has its priorities so broken is a thing that needs to change. In an ideal world, none of what just happened needed to happen.