Angry Bear
Relevant and even prescient commentary on news, politics and the economy.
  • US/Global Economics
  • Taxes/regulation
  • Healthcare
  • Law
  • Politics
  • Climate Change
  • Social Security
  • Hot Topics
« Back

Open Thread Should Abortion be Allowed in the US?

Bill Haskell | November 4, 2024 12:42 pm

Healthcare
Law
Politics

Or is it even a decision the United States should be making for a woman? People keep popping up on AB threads talking about such when it is not a topic of the thread.

Rules; Polite discussions or faced being trashed or tossed in spam. Be on topic. I will take down the post if there is no commentary.

Comments (14) | Digg Facebook Twitter |
14 Comments
  • Infidel753 says:
    November 4, 2024 at 3:35 pm

    That decision should be entirely up to the individual pregnant woman or girl.  No one else should be able to restrict her self-determination in such a primally personal matter.

    • Bill Haskell says:
      November 4, 2024 at 4:03 pm

      Infidel:

      Thank you for stopping by and commenting. Most definitely Joel, I, and others agree with you. The post is there to allow those who wish to talk about abortion the opportunity to express it. Some prefer to comment on posts which are not about abortion. So as an alternative to deleting them, I put this open-thread up for them.

  • Joel Eissenberg says:
    November 4, 2024 at 5:48 pm

    According to Tucker Carlson, abortions cause hurricanes. Who knew?

    “People are like, oh, well, we had another hurricane, must be global warming,” Carlson said. “No, it’s probably abortion, actually. Just being honest.”

    • Bill Haskell says:
      November 4, 2024 at 8:14 pm

      Joel:

      Sidestepping the issue

      • Joel Eissenberg says:
        November 5, 2024 at 4:48 am

        @Bill,

        Well, it is an “open thread.”

        • Bill Haskell says:
          November 5, 2024 at 6:20 am

          Not you, Tucker . . .

  • rc weakley says:
    November 5, 2024 at 10:17 am

    It’s complicated.  Professor Peabody can tell you that. 

    First there was the law of clans which was more survivalist than moralist and then along came tribal laws from the shaman healer who evolved into the shaman priest with the law itself then coming down from god serving as a quasi-moral authority.  Eventually God somewhat dropped the quasi from the moral as the law of kings began to displace gods as the higher power.  All this evolved upon the backdrop of prehistorical survival being redefined from sufficient genetic diversity for breeding pairs to have enough surviving offspring to mate without recessive genes severely effecting species mortality to being defined by the demand for larger armies to invade and displace competing super-clans (e.g., Europeans displacing indigenous tribes in the Americas).  This latter definition of survival as dominance has continued throughout recorded history, sometimes with separation of church and state but most of the time without or with minimal separation.  No amount of rationalism can entirely replace tradition without reasonable negotiation between opposing points of view that adapts rather than replaces tradition.  The traditional aspects of survival allowed for neither women’s reproductive health choices nor excess human population gradually making our planet uninhabitable for a majority of species.  However, from the dawn of human prehistory the separation between moral authority and civic authority has been either thin or nonexistent and all authority over the lives of human beings has rested in a very few hands assisted by a great deal of hand waving and smoke and mirrors working behind the curtain.  

    Aside from sociopaths, individual human beings all consider their own biases morally and factually based.  Sociopaths only account for between 3% and 10% of antisocial behavioral individuals.  The remainder of antisocial behavior is the result of fear, isolation, and stupidity.  We really need to learn to talk to each other, but people are not very good at talking openly and honestly.  Humanity has outsourced all the important decisions in life to an elite class that retains their special station by dividing the subordinate classes along natural demographic divisions and providing them with rationalizations supporting their own higher moral positions and demonizing all others with opposing points of view.  Historically, gods have always been purveyors of their own flawless self-righteousness, but Jesus of Nazareth, Siddhartha Gautama, and the Taoists all viewed self-righteousness as the major pitfall in mankind’s search for a higher understanding.  Originally, those ideas were not diametrically opposed because man had not yet begun to consider himself as God.

    • Joel Eissenberg says:
      November 5, 2024 at 10:21 am

      @rc,

      God is made in man’s image.

    • rc weakley says:
      November 5, 2024 at 11:37 am

      @Joel,

      Yes indeed, sir, but He makes a divine scapegoat whatever one’s spiritual persuasion.  If facts were really that important to the daily lives of the general population, then we would not have so many different crazy beliefs.  It is inescapable that regardless of how little most of us share with each other in knowledge, values, and beliefs then we still share everything with each other in terms of our own human mortality and fallibility along with our connection to this earthly environment which is at once both rich with treasure and yet so very fragile in the balance of habitat suitable to higher life forms.

      • Joel Eissenberg says:
        November 5, 2024 at 11:43 am

        @rc,

        Indeed.

        As a tribal species, this is the cross we bear.

    • rc weakley says:
      November 5, 2024 at 11:41 am

      @me,

      IOW, in the beginning the lack of reproductive choice was not Social Darwinism, but rather good old fashioned evolutionary biological Darwinism.   However, always remember to not get hysterical about hysteresis because hysteresis will always have the last laugh.

  • J.P. McJefferson says:
    November 7, 2024 at 7:10 am

    In the spirit of the “Open Thread,” I digress from the abortion issue, and post the following. . .

    Constitutionally-Authorized Dictator

     

    I refer to the referenced article, “Trump’s new world order,” below, and would retitle it, “The Most Powerful Man In The World.” Imagine control of the Executive Office, the Senate, the House (either outright or by bribes or bullying), the U.S. Military, the Supreme Court, topped with total Immunity from laws. With icing included like unlimited funding via the government and/or personal or indirect through the likes of Elon Musk (the richest man in the world) and inroads to the control of major media & information distribution sources e.g. Fox News, “X”, and threats to major media outlets. And, the entire government (all agencies) headed and leadership-staffed by loyal followers.

     
    No imagining…. IT’S ALL REAL!!! He is truly a Constitutionally-authorized Dictator, a new form of democracy in America. Yes, we still have elections and an opposition party, BUT, would you want to run for office or participate in this system as an opposition player? Yes, we still have free speech & a somewhat free press, BUT, would you want to take on this power structure?
     
    I would refer readers to the AXIOS, November 7, 2024 publication, entitled, “Trump’s new world order”
     
     Axios AM special edition: Washington’s new world order, by Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen.

     

    • J.P. McJefferson says:
      November 7, 2024 at 10:08 am

      Constitutionally Authorized Dictatorship with the backing of the popular vote is where we are. . . What he does with his new found power I have no idea, but basically it’s whatever he wants… 
       

      • Joel Eissenberg says:
        November 7, 2024 at 10:22 am

        @JP,

        I’m guessing that at some point he declares martial law and cancels elections.

Featured Stories

Constitutionally

Ken Melvin

Money beyond borders: a book review

Joel Eissenberg

Taiwan: thinking the thinkable

Joel Eissenberg

Europe, Ukraine, and Iran; and Trump’s impaired emotional/cognitive relationship to negative consequences

Eric Kramer

Contributors

Dan Crawford
Robert Waldmann
Barkley Rosser
Eric Kramer
ProGrowth Liberal
Daniel Becker
Ken Houghton
Linda Beale
Mike Kimel
Steve Roth
Bill Haskell
NewDealdemocrat
Ken Melvin
Sandwichman
Peter Dorman
Kenneth Thomas
Bruce Webb
Rebecca Wilder
Spencer England
Joel Eissenberg

Blogs of Note

    • Naked Capitalism
    • Atrios (Eschaton)
    • Crooks and Liars
    • Wash. Monthly
    • ACA Signups
    • The one-handed economist
    • Hullabaloo
    • Talking Points
    • Calculated Risk
    • CEPR
    • Econospeak
    • EPI
Angry Bear
Copyright © 2026 Angry Bear Blog

Topics

  • US/Global Economics
  • Taxes/regulation
  • Healthcare
  • Law
  • Politics
  • Climate Change
  • Social Security
  • Hot Topics
  • US/Global Economics
  • Taxes/regulation
  • Healthcare
  • Law
  • Politics
  • Climate Change
  • Social Security
  • Hot Topics

Pages