For fellow Tilders of other nations, this may seem horrifying, or irrelevant to your concerns. However, in the United States, it's a result of a long-term strategy to undermine women's...
For fellow Tilders of other nations, this may seem horrifying, or irrelevant to your concerns. However, in the United States, it's a result of a long-term strategy to undermine women's self-determination.
It shouldn't require extraordinary courage to provide healthcare.
Abortion is a controvesial topic, unfortunately. That we stand in one side of the argument does not make it less or non- controversial. Most people are superstitious, hopefully their number will...
Abortion is a controvesial topic, unfortunately. That we stand in one side of the argument does not make it less or non- controversial. Most people are superstitious, hopefully their number will decrease as time goes by. My impression has been that fighting and demonstrations and the like are only the initiators/accelerators of change, but the actual change needs time and it's mostly not possible to get something that'll take fifty years to happen in five days or five months. Revolutions do not generally produce sound results, so maybe this is a good thing, IDK.
I hope the law protects women from the superstitious there, until we have a better world that's what will help "free" people live on. We're lucky in Turkey that in some aspects of life like this the legislation happens to have taken sides with reason in the past, albeit the general vibe is rather depressing (who knows these current guys will not attempt to change the status quo? no one). Maybe in a couple generations we'll look back on all these "controversy" and think how stupid people were back then...
That stat feels misleading; "Some" vs. "All" is a pretty big difference in this scenario. EDIT: > OB/GYN is not pronounced in the civilian way, where it’s spelled out, but shortened by a syllable...
with around 80 percent of Americans in favor of legal abortion in some or all cases
That stat feels misleading; "Some" vs. "All" is a pretty big difference in this scenario.
EDIT:
> OB/GYN is not pronounced in the civilian way, where it’s spelled out, but shortened by a syllable to oh-bee-guy-n.
Also, who pronounces it "O-B-G-Y-N"? What?
EDIT EDIT:
>“It’s the first line in my Tinder bio,” said K, a local student set on becoming a provider. “If a guy can’t handle that, then he can’t handle me.”
...Was this written by a conservative? This has to have been written by a conservative.
EDIT EDIT EDIT:
>There was a relieved sigh when the audience heard that psychiatrists are more likely to be murdered in the course of their work than abortionists are.
Given that the last time that happened with public recognition was in June, and it's common enough to where multiple academic papers have been written about it...um...might not be the best statistic to compare? Why not compare it to like, number of doctors as a whole?
According to the most recent Gallup poll, only 18% of Americans believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances. As to a couple of your other criticisms, I'm not sure why direct quotations...
According to the most recent Gallup poll, only 18% of Americans believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances.
As to a couple of your other criticisms, I'm not sure why direct quotations of the participants should be scrutinized as if they're editorials, rather than straightforward reportage.
That's a significantly different statistic than the one stated in the article. Many people and organizations, like the Catholic Church, for example, allow them if they're going to be lifesaving...
That's a significantly different statistic than the one stated in the article.
Many people and organizations, like the Catholic Church, for example, allow them if they're going to be lifesaving for the mother.
You can't mix "some or all" like that if you're wanting to be statistically honest.
If it's in some cases, the idea that there needs to be general training beyond what there already is isn't necessarily a good one; especially given that the article goes into the topic of...
If it's in some cases, the idea that there needs to be general training beyond what there already is isn't necessarily a good one; especially given that the article goes into the topic of "abortionists," people solely there to eagerly administer abortions:
A smaller number of people were there because they had decided to become abortionists. They talked differently than their peers, and I got the sense they wanted to fast-forward through parts that weren’t relevant to them, the parts they were supposed to find convincing. They were the already convinced.
“It’s the first line in my Tinder bio,” said K, a local student set on becoming a provider. “If a guy can’t handle that, then he can’t handle me.”
If "Some/Limited Cases" is the majority opinion, then 1500+ full-timers isn't a bad number; more than enough people per-state.
(I'd really love for a "Quality" comment tag to be added to Tildes; your comment really deserves one. You do make a pretty good point.)
It's not, as "Some" wouldn't necessarily include non-medically necessary options; which AFAIA are the most common? I did, and I was moreover pointing attention to the second quoted paragraph,...
This is explicitly contradicted by the article we're discussing:
It's not, as "Some" wouldn't necessarily include non-medically necessary options; which AFAIA are the most common?
If you read that entire paragraph in context, it's clear that the passage you quoted is not about people who "solely" want to administer abortions (emphasis added):
That is, it sounds like the conference had sessions targeted towards the majority of people who think abortion should be legal some of the time, and convincing them why abortion rights should be protected. Also present at the conference, in smaller numbers, were the people who believed abortion should be legal most or all of the time. To those people, any discussion aimed at convincing the "some of the time" crowd is going to be boring and superfluous.
I did, and I was moreover pointing attention to the second quoted paragraph, demonstrating how eager they seemingly were, and what I assumed to be the difference in voice.
Part of the point of the article is that in many medical schools, there's little or no training:
Exactly, I was talking about the number of people being trained, and how it might be enough from the perspective of people in the "Some" group.
Not at all, I've got very little strong opinion either way on abortion; as a lesbian it's not something I'm ever going to encounter. As an academic, I despise misleading statistics, though. The...
I think you're taking your own personal beliefs (which from what I gather in this thread seem to be at least partially in favor of restricting access to abortion) and projecting them onto the results of that poll.
Not at all, I've got very little strong opinion either way on abortion; as a lesbian it's not something I'm ever going to encounter. As an academic, I despise misleading statistics, though.
The author of this article doesn't link to their source for the 80% figure, but they seem to match up with this Gallup poll. They include the exact questions asked as well as the responses:
The Gallup poll doesn't do anything wrong reporting-wise, as it's honest, but the author does do something wrong.
You cannot compare the "Some" cases to the "All" cases. "Some" includes clauses like "to save the life of the mother;" something that a great number of people exclusively believe in; including the majority of American Catholics. It's very likely that a sizable majority of them could think the "All" view is reprehensible, or that it just absolutely shouldn't be done.
Notice the Gallup poll also shows that 48% of those people claim to be pro-life, while 48% claim to be pro-choice, which implies that half of them believe it should happen in only life-saving cases.
For fellow Tilders of other nations, this may seem horrifying, or irrelevant to your concerns. However, in the United States, it's a result of a long-term strategy to undermine women's self-determination.
It shouldn't require extraordinary courage to provide healthcare.
Abortion is a controvesial topic, unfortunately. That we stand in one side of the argument does not make it less or non- controversial. Most people are superstitious, hopefully their number will decrease as time goes by. My impression has been that fighting and demonstrations and the like are only the initiators/accelerators of change, but the actual change needs time and it's mostly not possible to get something that'll take fifty years to happen in five days or five months. Revolutions do not generally produce sound results, so maybe this is a good thing, IDK.
I hope the law protects women from the superstitious there, until we have a better world that's what will help "free" people live on. We're lucky in Turkey that in some aspects of life like this the legislation happens to have taken sides with reason in the past, albeit the general vibe is rather depressing (who knows these current guys will not attempt to change the status quo? no one). Maybe in a couple generations we'll look back on all these "controversy" and think how stupid people were back then...
That stat feels misleading; "Some" vs. "All" is a pretty big difference in this scenario.
EDIT:
> OB/GYN is not pronounced in the civilian way, where it’s spelled out, but shortened by a syllable to oh-bee-guy-n.
Also, who pronounces it "O-B-G-Y-N"? What?
EDIT EDIT:
>“It’s the first line in my Tinder bio,” said K, a local student set on becoming a provider. “If a guy can’t handle that, then he can’t handle me.”
...Was this written by a conservative? This has to have been written by a conservative.
EDIT EDIT EDIT:
>There was a relieved sigh when the audience heard that psychiatrists are more likely to be murdered in the course of their work than abortionists are.
Given that the last time that happened with public recognition was in June, and it's common enough to where multiple academic papers have been written about it...um...might not be the best statistic to compare? Why not compare it to like, number of doctors as a whole?
Interesting how that conflicts what the article said; I wonder if it was a typo or regional difference.
"Guy"?
Most people use "Gin."
Odd.
I've always heard o-b-g-y-N! Weird weird.
I also just learned that not everyone pronounces the "L" in "Almond." In my region, I think everyone does!!
According to the most recent Gallup poll, only 18% of Americans believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances.
As to a couple of your other criticisms, I'm not sure why direct quotations of the participants should be scrutinized as if they're editorials, rather than straightforward reportage.
That's a significantly different statistic than the one stated in the article.
Many people and organizations, like the Catholic Church, for example, allow them if they're going to be lifesaving for the mother.
You can't mix "some or all" like that if you're wanting to be statistically honest.
If it's in some cases, the idea that there needs to be general training beyond what there already is isn't necessarily a good one; especially given that the article goes into the topic of "abortionists," people solely there to eagerly administer abortions:
If "Some/Limited Cases" is the majority opinion, then 1500+ full-timers isn't a bad number; more than enough people per-state.
(I'd really love for a "Quality" comment tag to be added to Tildes; your comment really deserves one. You do make a pretty good point.)
It's not, as "Some" wouldn't necessarily include non-medically necessary options; which AFAIA are the most common?
I did, and I was moreover pointing attention to the second quoted paragraph, demonstrating how eager they seemingly were, and what I assumed to be the difference in voice.
Exactly, I was talking about the number of people being trained, and how it might be enough from the perspective of people in the "Some" group.
Not at all, I've got very little strong opinion either way on abortion; as a lesbian it's not something I'm ever going to encounter. As an academic, I despise misleading statistics, though.
The Gallup poll doesn't do anything wrong reporting-wise, as it's honest, but the author does do something wrong.
You cannot compare the "Some" cases to the "All" cases. "Some" includes clauses like "to save the life of the mother;" something that a great number of people exclusively believe in; including the majority of American Catholics. It's very likely that a sizable majority of them could think the "All" view is reprehensible, or that it just absolutely shouldn't be done.
Notice the Gallup poll also shows that 48% of those people claim to be pro-life, while 48% claim to be pro-choice, which implies that half of them believe it should happen in only life-saving cases.