Roe v. Wade overturned

Absolutely correct. Boost income, mutually, for the US and China via Trade, with the hopes that China becomes more open to capitalism, democracy, ending atrocities, etc. The US knew exactly what might happen but the risk was worth it to avoid nuclear war with China and prevent a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.

In 2000 after near-war with China following the US attack on the China Embassy in Belgrade in 1999 and raw feelings still from Taiwan Strait crisis in 1996, Clinton says this about about favoring establishment of permanent normal trade relations between US-China (PNTR and leading up to bringing China into the WTO):

“the other point I would like to make is there is a SERIOUS National Security issue here - we do not know what China will choose to do in the future - and China will make that decision for itself - but we know that one decision will dramatically increase the chances of a constructive relationship with China in a stable Asia…and the other will increase the chances of a less happy outcome…” - President Clinton

US understood the risks of establishing PNTR with China and allowing them into the WTO – but the alternative was unthinkable. People need to remember how dire US-China relations were.

By interlocking with China economically, the US strategy at the time was that “we can keep them close, under watchful eye, and hopefully even make them depend on us through mutual economic benefits”. If US and China become dependent on each other, there is less chance of a terrible conflict. It’s the classic “keep your friends close, enemies closer” strategy.

Fast-forward — Now we know that China didn’t loosen up even with dependencies in place, and instead doubled down on knocking the US out economically, psychologically, and militarily. Again, US knew the risk, but deemed it worth it.

Between when Clinton was leaving and Bush’s first days in office, the situation with China was dire…

China was caught building military facilities inside Iraq. Major red flags were going up in UN Security Council and NATO. The US China Hawks deemed China in early 2001 to be the number one threat to humanity.

This quote from Pres Bush press conference Feb 2001:

Mr. President, on Iraq, what is your understanding of the Chinese presence in Iraq, especially with regard to constructing military facilities? And do you see anything that you see as a violation of U.N. sanctions? THE PRESIDENT: We’re concerned about the Chinese presence in Iraq, and we are, my administration is sending the appropriate response to the Chinese. Yes, it’s troubling that they’d be involved in helping Iraq develop a system that will endanger our pilots. REPORTER: “That is what they’re doing, sir?, you’re convinced that is - - THE PRESIDENT: “We are going to send a message to the Chinese” - President Bush

Pre-Gulf War 1 context:

From 1982 to 1989, China sold almost $5 billion worth of arms to Iraq, which represents 31.4 percent of all China’s arms sales during that period and over twice the value of Chinese arms sold to Iran in those years.

After the Iran-Iraq war Chinese arms to Iraq fell dramatically and then China completely lost Iraq as an arms customer at the onset of the Gulf War. Iraq’s poor performance during the Gulf War in the face of high-tech U.S. weapons further showed apprehensions about the quality of Chinese weapons systems in Iraq and the rest of the region.

US was alarmed that China would come in again after GW1 and start building military facilities inside Iraq. Anyways, US went back again in GW2.

US-China tensions soon escalated even further with the Hainan Island Incident. And then we all know what happened later that year. The US responded in kind - planting a Massive Army right on China’s doorstep (Afghanistan) while simultaneously opening WTO to China, plus the US went after China’s interests in Iraq. It was an incredible power move by the US when you think about it. Unfortunately China wiggled out of it and pivoted to militarizing the South China Sea while massively growing their global influence, supply chain, and trade. China turned the US response into its strength… Until 2018 when the tariff war started.

In summary, the US knocked out China’s Arms Customers one by one, sabotaged China’s oil development projects, and pushed China to become economically reliant on US consumers. Has it worked? We won’t know for a while as US-China war is ongoing.

Here we go…

what a coincidence …

For women to be required to register, Congress would need to amend the law.

https://twitter.com/SSS_gov/status/1535306097707343873?s=20&t=X42YSR5MBGZeCeAqgKeP9Q

Every branch of the military is struggling to make its 2022 recruiting goals, officials say

With a record low number of Americans eligible to serve, and few of those willing to do it, this "is the year we question the sustainability of the all-volunteer force,” said an expert.

Well, you can’t have pregnant female troopers getting KIA’d, then you’d have 2 KIAs.
So, it makes sense from DoD’s obtuse thinking nowadays.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1540339085230968834?t=R-qRatgGdm-tsEJwC9LGEg&s=19

My childhood scoutmaster snarkily noted on FB, Justice Thomas didn’t say Loving vs. Virginia (prohibiting anti-miscegnation laws), because he’s married to a white woman.

1 Like

Yes, parents have sovereignty (I include father too) over their children growing up, over their behavior, lifestyle, can’t wear earrings or date until certain age, but we’re talking about life and death, which is a sovereignty even parents don’t have, but God. Society may exercise this sovereignty in cases of murder, but it is stipulated by law and usually not in the control of one person.

Mother’s are naturally maternal and instinctively care for and defend their children. I’ve heard many who have had abortions struggle with the implications of what they’ve done many years after the fact. But deciding to end their children I wouldn’t call that uniquely biological. It seems to go against biological instinct.

You say abortions help women who don’t want fathers forcing them to bear their children. But I think it’s rather because the woman knows that the father is missing, vamoose, and won’t be helping her with anything at all that causes her to decide to end her child, against her maternal, biological instincts. It takes two to tango, and childrearing requires two parents, or at least is sure is a lot easier and smoother if there are two doing it.

I really don’t think banning abortions in those Republican states is going to matter a whole lot where the rubber hits the road. Most proabortionists already live in Democrat states where abortion will still be available. There’s not gonna be masses of people that’s affected by this decision.

In terms of biological instinct, wouldn’t you say it is also the case that women do not wish to bear children of men whom the women consider undesirable? But in some cases, women especially younger women are in the predicament of forced arranged-marriage, human trafficking, date-rape, forced polygamy, and abusive boyfriends and husbands. Having the legal right to abortion is the minimum deterrence mechanism they have against those men who intend to cause pregnancy as a means to exert control over the women. I’m not talking about rapists who rape for only sexual pleasure, I am talking about men who use pregnancy to generate control and dependency.

Having a right as a tool and when one actually exercises this to right is very different.

In terms of actual regret, the women having this right will have to bear the negative consequence as well. Like Thomas Sowell said, there are no solutions, only tradeoffs.

RV’ing.
Great memories from my family doing it all throughout the 1970s, until the gas crunch finally forced my dad to sell it.

That reasoning is the same a minute before birth as it is a minute after birth, or 2 years after. Plus the premise is fairly ridiculous for the most part.

1 Like

I agree with that philosophically, as a matter of principle. But in practice, there are cases where most Americans honestly, frankly don’t care about life and death as much, such as if the killing of innocent, defenceless human beings occurs in a different country, i.e., outside of US jurisdiction. I’m not blaming anyone, because this is pretty universal, that human beings are able to compartmentalize very well even when the question of moral standard arises. So in my argument, I can admit I’m asking you to compartmentalize not according to geographical boundary but to human body?

But it’s nothing new, legality is about defining terms and drawing boundaries. Look, are you counting US population by taking into account babies still in the womb? Can a pregnant woman by herself drive on HOV lane? There is a rather arbitrary boundary, sure, and that is called birth. After which, one is conferred personhood. I can even ask you, using your logic, in what substantive way a person is different one minute before his or her 18th birthday at midnight, and a minute after?

And I even agree that in modern medicine doctors can operate on unborn babies to treat them, in which case I agree these babies are patients no different from anyone else, medically speaking. My personal opinion is that physicians should not perform abortion since it’s morally and ethically wrong.

My stance is that the women should be able to choose abortion. But physicians won’t necessarily be obliged to help them. Maybe a specialized profession will emerge, perhaps sponsored by UN or left-wing organizations.

While I generally agree with your arguments, there is a huge difference between your examples and killing a human being.

1 Like

Hey look! People are already behaving more responsibly.

3 Likes

Women not wishing to bear children of undesirable men (and thereby destoying them) is understandable, but not biological instinct at all. When you think biological or instinct, you have to think about animals, get on their level. We humans are more sophisticated and have powers of ratiocination that go beyond biological.

If there are some cases like you report, I don’t think that’s a whopping majority for why most abortions are done, and they provide little justification to keep abortion going full swing as before and enabling the majority of abortions that I’m guessing you also condemn because of these very relatively few cases.

And I’m also not talking about raping for pleasure. I’m talking about boyfriends or casual dates with consensual sex. I really can’t see the men in these real-life cases forcing her to bear his kid unless he’s dang serious about committing and marrying the woman. (And as I said before, most abortions are because men are absent and won’t be helping with the children, not because they are forcing it.) I think it lets him off the hook too if an abortion can delete the problem instantly…then he can go off to the next woman. He doesn’t have to feel guilty about not committing, or having to pay child support.

I don’t know that Americans don’t care about killing in other countries. But our laws and Constitution don’t apply there. Though the USA is a beacon of hope for the world, we can’t just go around and make everyone as enlightened as we are, if that’s what you’re insinuating. (And I think the left would mightly agree on that point.).

But Americans are more concerned about killings, murders, thefts, or any criminality that happen near their backyard and willing to vote or advocate to improve the situation where one is. Because that’s where we live and if there is an atmosphere that isn’t fully appreciative of life, it will demonstrate itself, rear its ugly head in a variety of ways.

Just because merciless killing is going on far away without much being done about it doesn’t obviate the need to improve the situation where you are at currently and get involved and decrease that killing (whether crimes or abortion).

In a way, it’s a bit like your previous argument that the existence of some relatively rare or far-away evil incidence somehow justifies the continuing of a frequent or at-your-doorstep evil incidence.

1 Like

In the UK 24% of females in the military have mental health issues. Double that of males.
I seem to recall it is similar in the US.

1 Like

Yep- according to the article, they’re stockpilng abortion pills.

Source?

1 Like
3 Likes

FIFY [quote=“jotham, post:1017, topic:219406”]
Though Americans see the USA is a beacon of hope for the world, we can’t just go around and make everyone as enlightened as we think we are
[/quote]