The California Catholic Conference opposed the law, arguing the state is “engaging in ideological colonization against states and citizens that do not want abortion.”
Who tf does the catholic church think they are talking about “ideological colonization”? That’s the whole point of religion. Catholics are masters of “ideological colonization”. They’re just bitter it’s not working for them anymore.
That’s what masters do: dominate the game to such an extent that people don’t even know they’re doing it. And cry out if anyone else even tries to play, without irony.
“Ideological colonization” makes it sound like the law encourages California doctors to leave the state, commit what’s considered a crime in another state, but then be shielded from prosecution. According to the article, the law does not apply in such cases.
California just wants to protect their doctors from the crusades of far right wackos. Good for them. Red states are doing everything they can to alienate people like doctors and teachers. It’s a race to the bottom.
Anyone who reads my full comment will understand I’m pro-choice but I understand the need to preface comments like this. Otherwise I’m repeatedly downvoted after a sentence.
So:
I am pro-choice.
I get what you’re saying, but unfortunately if you’re looking at this through the catholic worldview/lense of thought, the doctrine they were raised to believe is the only right way to live, so it’s the same as someone saying to you “citizens who don’t want to murder can just… not murder people. Like, that’s not that hard. We don’t need laws against murdering people though”
Thanks for the preface, but the ending is exaggerated. Abortion does not equal murder. It causes no harm to society or others, unlike murder or guns. It would be more accurate to say it’s like gay marriage. If you don’t agree, don’t get gay married.
You say it causes no harm to society but they’ll argue it causes immense harm to God’s plan, or whatever. They can also point to the plummeting birth rates which are now almost below the level to maintain the American system. It’s a problem that is being debated amongst the highest members of the house and Congress. Of course the reason isn’t abortion and is much more complex and societal and due to uncertainty about the environment and wanting to raise children when the parents are a decade a way from buying a house on two full-time incomes now and how much worse it’s going to get for their hypothetical children.
My point is you have to see it through their worldview, and understand how they believe it affects them, now only see it through yours.
I think you’re zeroing in on an example when it was meant to be an overarching example.
But to continue with your argument: if the workers aren’t being born, the class war will get seriously real, and that’s the last thing those at the top of the wealth inequality pyramid want.
They were trying to explain the religious view. For those groups abortion is murder of an unborn child. It doesn’t matter that there’s no harm to the society - they see it as a harm to the child. Comparing it to murder was spot on, because that’s exactly how those people see it.
That’s his whole point though. To a lot of Christians, abortion literally is comparable to murder. It doesn’t make sense, but that’s just how they see it. That’s why the arguments up thread don’t work on them.
That sounds great and all, but the vast majority of anti-abortion Christians are pro murder. They hard core believe in the death penalty, and don’t care that innocent people have been murdered by the state. They would rather let children die of starvation rather than let even one person “take advantage” of the system. They have created programs to sterilize the poor and minorities, which is just abortion before the sex. They are hypocrites who only care about power and controlling others.
Growing up without the Catholic dogma and worldview thrust upon you from birth (and consequently playing a part of every action you ever make {unless you lose your faith}, and many thoughts you think) and trying to use the argument that abortion does NOT equal murder is like arguing with an alien. Because from a personal worldview lense, they absolutely do believe abortion = murder with every fiber of their being. It’s not enough to just say “no it’s not” or make really any argument that leads to that debate. It even affects the views of many ex-catholics who have religious trauma and have been through extensive therapy for it.
No, to you and I, abortion is not murder. But trying to argue that is equal to them arguing to people like us (I assume) that gay people are not just, existing and normal, and not making a conscious decision to be gay. They think it’s due to trauma and all gay people are mentally ill and can be cured. However there’s no curing necessary. But they’ll argue until they’re blue in the face that it is. It’s the same level of worldview solidification.
Some people must have crippling abortion addictions. The kind of people that are like “I love being pregnant” and then soon after “Stairs my beloved ❤️” repeated indefinitely.
The California Catholic Conference opposed the law, arguing the state is “engaging in ideological colonization against states and citizens that do not want abortion.”
“Denying the legitimate interest of other states to protect unborn children and public health is a dangerous precedent,” the association wrote in a letter to lawmakers earlier this year.
The absolute fucking gall of christians, holy shit…
I was born into Christianity and took religious classes in school. They never talked about the weapon blessings. I learned about it on the campaign of anno 1404. I looked it up and was shocked. Conveniently avoided that huh?
I can never fully decide whether I think they’re proud of their hypocrisy and cruelty, or whether they’re just too stupid to see it. They’re such shitty people that both are distinct possibilities.
And anyway, wtf is “ideological colonization”? The language these far right crazies keep coming up with keeps getting more and more like that fake legalese that sovereign citizens use to try to sound smart.
since when did these religious nutjobs want to “protect” anyone? Guns, and car accidents are major killers of kids, when I see some action there from these liars I’ll believe they’re just honest dumb people who think zygotes are people. Until then these crocodile christians can shove it.
Let the engine of capitalism generate wealth (as it does so better than any other economic system) … but then make sure that wealth is going to the people who generate it.
If the top is getting more than their fair share, redistribute it through government programs that benefit the workers and their families.
We need to do this nationwide so that tax cheats can’t just run away to a different state… And we need to do it at much higher level that recognizes the reality that no one has ever EARNED a billion dollars. They’ve only stolen it from their workers because of a rigged government and legal system.
And by the way, the rich should be super happy if we able to get this done, because the alternative is that we keep heading down the current path until the working class gets so poor that they can no longer feed their kids… and at that point, history tells us, the guillotines come out.
Capitalism, socialism, communism, etc. are just mechanisms for the distribution of finite resources. Allowing market forces to drive production is great for some things like consumer products, but not so great for things like healthcare, education, environmental protections, and kid’s lunches. Capitalism needs government restrictions more than capitalists like to admit.
Well the USSR did also have a huge industrial machinery. But one thing that seems to emerge as a lesson from its downfall is that it is really hard to steer an economy with quotas and plans from the top.
A good market usually gives better incentives for people at every level. The problem is getting a good market which is definitely not the same as the libertarian dream of a super free market. Without good regulations it’s really easy for markets to get captured or become exploitative.
Some thinks should never be privatised(like infrastructure). And I think lots of industries would benefit from a state run (mostly nonprofit) competitor.
Take a look at why communism failed: When resources are distributed by a central authority, it doesn’t matter how well intentioned they are, at best they can only approximate which goods will be valued most by which individual at any given time. People would end up with an abundance of stuff they didn’t want, and a deficit in things they needed.
In a free market, supply and demand are constantly adjusting on an individual level with every transaction. Can’t get flour at the price I want? Fine, I’ll get potatoes. Can’t get flour or potatoes? Maybe a communist government thinks rice would be a good substitute.
But if it’s money in my hand, maybe I know I’ve got some other carbs and starch, and if I can’t get flour or potatoes, my money would best go to medicine or shoelaces… the point is, I’m setting my own priorities, and they aren’t always related or predictable.
Maybe I really want shoe laces, but they aren’t worth $6 to me. Maybe I’d pay 50 cents for them, otherwise, I’d rather use butchers twine, for a fraction of the cost, and just resign myself to retying my shoe.
Capitalism allows people to be nimble and adaptive. Communism was a: you take what you get, and that’s IT.
So people were getting things they didn’t value, and highly valuing things they couldn’t get, and it was just … inefficient.
They won't be happy about it. You are right, they should be. But, they don't have that kind of perspective.
Being rich isn't about money, it's about ego. They think they could solve this with better outcomes and efficiency themselves, even though they will never actually do it.
It's why union busting is so popular from otherwise "good" companies run by "socially minded" executives. It's why companies will continue to amass wealth to the point where it negatively effects customers ability to purchase their products. It's why rich individuals continue to amass wealth when it doesn't really improve their quality of life, they could just stop working.
Because to them it's just a contest. They just need to show they are better than someone else; first one person, then another, then another, real world outcomes and everyone else be damned. They will take it as far as they're allowed until no one is left and everyone's lives and the planet are catastrophically ruined.
Damn - Why does everything have to become a hustle or business opportunity? Why couldn't a wholesome accidental friendship just stay that way?
God I hate the influence hustle culture has had on the internet.
Because capitalism is an economic system that squeezes every last cent out of people for the sake of "efficiency".
Not everyone is affected equally (woo, human biases) but it hits every group eventually. Sadly people often find need to obtain money somewhere to justify their own existence. The usual sources tend to grind you down to a sad shadow if your former self, so people often look for alternatives.
It’s not in order to justify our existence, but to merely be able to exist. There are zero guarantees of having our basic needs met; we need money to even have a chance.
Yes, but in order to be able to exist, one needs to justify their existence in a capitalist system. If you do not, you're considered dead weight and not worth having. My wording was intentional.
One doesn’t need to “make money in order to justify ones existence”.
Rather, one must justify one’s existence in order to make money.
And while I won’t argue the rather merciless nature of that system, I would add the perspective that this isn’t a trait unique to capitalism, but rather any system of finite resources.
I think you confuse yourself with your own wording. Monetary value is justification in a capitalist system. It is how everyone is judged. If you can not make that money, you are considered a burden, no matter how much non-monetary value you may provide.
The system doesn't really care how you do it. That is the realm of human bias.
Yes, but there is intentional scarcity in a capitalist system.
We have more than enough technological development to solve most scarcity issues in the world... the problem is theyre not economically viable. Which is to say, they're not profitable enough. You don't (immediately) get more out of it than you put in. All you get is the safety and well being of the people in the system. Which is not the primary concern in a capitalist system.
I think social media has enabled anyone to make a quick buck if you’re put in a position to do so. These two capitalized on their popularity on social media, and people, for one reason or another, will pay to be a part of it.
I’ll take a wholesome hustle over a corporation pushing hustle culture any day. It’s become clear that most Americans require a second income, so at least they’ve found a market to inspire others.
Because tree falling in forest doesn’t make a sound or something like that. You ever only hear about the ones that are promoted for clicks on the internet. I’m sure the are hundredths of grandpas that texted the wrong person, became friends and never bragged about it on Instagram.
"The California Catholic Conference opposed the law, arguing the state is “engaging in ideological colonization against states and citizens that do not want abortion.”"
Oh fuck right off. What’s that? You don’t like it when someone has an ideology forced on them?
I would think that if they are sent by USPS then the states would not be able to legally intercept them. USPS is not responsible for enforcing state laws and there are some pretty serious laws protecting the privacy and integrity of your parcels and mail.
In 2023, Hinton announced on Thanksgiving that he and Dench had gone from “family” to business partners, launching an alkaline black water called BlackMP.
I upvoted this only so that more people might see this went from wholesome to scummy side hustle. Maybe next year we won’t hear about these people at all anymore. 🤞
I’m sorry, what? A pregnant woman can’t leave the state without husband’s permission? Also, what happens if she’s a single mum, or she’s not married? Or a widow or husband is deployed… I mean… what?
Other commenter was being sarcastic. But it’s the road they appear to be heading.
At the moment if a pregnant woman leaves the state they may suspect it’s for abortion purposes. Neighbours can even report if they think someone may have aborted.
In The Handmaid’s Tale, right before Gilead takes over the US, women have to have their husbands sign off on their birth control refills. Then they all get fired from their jobs and all their money in the bank gets transferred to their husbands.
I know it’s a tired cliche to keep bringing up the Handmaid’s Tale, but it just doesn’t seem that far out there anymore. Especially the part where everyone just goes along with the changes and learns to live with them. Margaret Atwood based everything in the book off of real events in wold history. So there’s that.
The California Catholic Conference opposed the law, arguing the state is "engaging in ideological colonization against states and citizens that do not want abortion."
Are ... are they trying to say CA doctors are mailing abortion pills to people who didn't ask for them? What does this statement mean? Maybe what they meant was something like: "We do not believe women have a basic right to control their body, whether those women are Catholic or not, and that control should rest with the government of the state they reside in."
No. They are saying that CA doctors are mailing abortion pills to states where abortion/abortion pills have been outlawed. In other words the citizens of TX voted against abortion on a large scale, and CA is performing ‘ideological colonization’ by mailing to anyone in TX who does want them, since the majority do not.
Quite a thing for the Catholic church to bring up ideological colonization though… 🗿
I don’t see how the CA doctors are in any way colonizing anything.
They’re not. At least not in the majority rational view. That’s just some old mad folks in the Catholic church thinking so and feeling the need to say something.
There’s actually a LOT of interesting info on the article…For example they ban Facebook from giving info to law enforcement from other states about Cali related abortion pill mail/doctors even if it’s a legitimate judge signed subpoena. I believe that covers investigations including conversations between two individuals about getting an abortion. California is really saying “Get fucked Texas and similar states. We The People say so.”
I understand, that's why I was trying to translate their statement into reality-based words. I thought you were defending their position based on your response.
ah, I thought you were trying to understand if the Catholic church folks that made the argument thought they were being mailed to random people so I was just explaining what I thought they meant. We’re on the same page.
I think I somehow missed this part, in the very end of your first comment, and if I hadn’t missed it I probably wouldn’t have commented… but hey, it sparked a good discussion.
whether those women are Catholic or not, and that control should rest with the government of the state they reside in."
So these children are driven to work due to poverty right? So isn’t the answer to try to address that rather than to say “stop using cocoa harvested by child labor?” Like I’m totally pro-non-child-labor-cocoa, but wouldn’t the kids just get other jobs then?
their parents also work harvesting cocoa. The reason they are poor despite being working a lot is that they are not paid enough for their work… by Mars (or Nestle, Mondelez, etc)
That is why I’m buying chocolate made in Africa, rather than chocolate made from beans from Africa. That way the value is generated there and not here.
It’s not about child abuse, it’s about not making enough money so they need their children to help out. If they get a fair salary, they don’t need to exploit their kids for labor.
Yes, and this is a vestige of the destabilization of African nations by white colonial powers to have and sell enslaved people. What boggles my mind is that paying a living wage to workers would increase the price of Mars chocolate slightly if at all (corporate profits could eat the difference) but the people with the power to make those decisions are like “nope! We could get even more profits by paying less for raw materials!” so they seek and/or create even more disenfranchised workers. Doesn’t get more disenfranchised than a 5 year old that has to go to work to help the family make ends meet, but I’m sure the corporate overlords are cooking something up as we speak.
I can’t take an article where catholics are accusing others of ideological colonization seriously. I hate cringy atheists as much as the next guy but these morons genuinely need to fuck off already. Thank god I don’t live in NA anymore, seems it’s all just going downhill.
Because it’s the California Catholics I’m going to assume it’s part of the larger trend of Latine folks saying that queer culture and feminism and other social causes in Latine communities is a result of “gringo colonialism”
Some of these psychos go from zero to death threats with so much as a mention of that blasted X, which Latine queer communities came up with first!
There’s some poor latine enbie with a flair for math stuffs living in a permanent state of traumatized horror because of these machismo lunatics.
The “religious” version of the edgy atheist is the satanic temple, who since the overturning of Roe has made abortion one of their sacred sacraments. They’re good at muddying up the laws regarding religious freedoms that some states only want to offer to christians.
As far as I can tell, they don’t really believe in Satan and are open about that. It seems that they just use the idea of Satan to point out the hypocrisy in Christian politics when they say they’re for religious freedoms.
John Oliver did a great show on chocolate around Halloween time. It showed just how much child labor goes into producing chocolate for the world, when almost no one really spends any time thinking about where it comes from.
The CNN clip in that video, is even better: the reporter gives the guys a bar of chocolate, and they go all “ohh, it tastes so great!”. Then he asks them if they’ll give any to the children, to which the guy answer “they can have the wrappers”… at which point the reporter produces out a second bar saying “don’t worry, give them this”… still, I don’t recall the kids getting any.
I enjoyed the part with the other journalist where he was on the phone with someone who hung up when the reporter pointed out that kids could stop working if their parents made more money. Insane that he was defending that practice.
The idea that we require children to go to school but don’t feed them healthy food automatically when they’re in class is insane. We’ve got money for all the fighter jets but can’t feed kids.
Hunger is a terrible motivator for kids in school. How the hell are they supposed to know what The Scarlet Letter is talking about when they haven’t eaten?
cbsnews.com
Top