This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Your timeline has errors. As reported in the article,
So 8 live births after abortion (LBAA) occurred “under his watch,” while 0 survived. This is before any amendments to the law. But the article is incomplete; it didn’t include survivorship numbers for the pre-Walz years. Fortunately, those are included in the linked documents:
Oh. It turns out that infants from their mother’s womb untimely torn don’t have a very good survivorship rate, even before Tim Walz gets involved. The linked reports break these down into more detail, too. Recurring phrases include “anomalies incompatible with life” and “APGAR score of 1.” Roughly a third received “comfort care” measures. We aren’t talking about squalling toddlers left out for the wolves. These are dying or brain-dead infants who cannot be saved by “reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice.”
One other thing I noticed in the 2015 report is that all of its LBAAs came from hospitals, not abortion clinics. Is it possible that the kind of late-term abortion which results in a born-alive infant is particularly dangerous? Say, when the health of the mother is most at risk?
It’s beside the point. Kirk posted his rant about how Walz treated eight children like trash. His data actually showed that Minnesota doctors perform triage in the rare, rare cases where infants are born alive after abortions. You filled in the gaps.
Doesn’t that deserve a fact check?
I made a comment early about how this all seems cargo cultish to me. Thank you for doing the work to collect the data on how many angels fit on the head of a pin in Minnesota in any given year, but I'm personally not interested in quibbling over the million-baby-skulls-a-year sized Baal-pit in which I as an American voter have been playing for the last couple generations.
This may sound to some readers like a woman saying "I'm not interested in quibbling over the government telling me what to do with my body" - I am also writing for you. Please consider that the dead babies are real. Those 10's of millions of lives snuffed out are real. Their right to life came from God. The "right" to an abortion was made up by communists.
I've considered it, and would like to politely suggest that He stop furnishing tiny, fragile clumps of cells with their own souls.
I can laugh about it with you and also gesture toward every other time we've tried to be clever with God
It's only funny and endearing if the end result is not a pile of a million dead baby skills a year
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Where are you getting this from? Is there some other report I'm missing where the doctors actually tried to save the baby's life? In none of the reports provided (2015-2022) is triage even mentioned, unless you count palliative care as triage.
In this case, absence of evidence is evidence of absence. When mitigating factors are present, such as the infant being pre-viability or otherwise unhealthy, they are mentioned. Legally they are required to mention such factors. So when, as is the case with about a third of these infants, no such issues are mentioned, we can be confident that they did not exist at all.
This is proof that abortion clinics (and hospitals) did not attempt to save healthy post-viability infants.
Or that abortion clinics are most likely to be staffed by ideological allies willing to round up in their reporting. If an infant is born breathing but obviously unhealthy, round that to not breathing; it was only breathing for a few minutes after all.
I agree that you can’t tell “heartbeat stopped two seconds out of the womb” from “heartbeat stopped in the trash can” based on this report. I don’t believe that justifies assuming the latter. The legal requirement for “reasonable” medical care is just as strong as the one for reporting mitigating factors.
It might be possible to track down birth and death certificates for these individuals. I’m sure they exist, but I have no idea if we have access to a vital records database.
Let me first state a few things I think we agree upon:
Keeping all of this in mind, I find it highly unlikely that abortion clinicians don't fudge the numbers.
You'll note that a few of the babies in the documents listed did not have any pre-existing conditions listed and also were not provided any care at all. These are living, breathing babies, capable of experiencing pain, who were left to die without so much as painkillers to ease their passing. I wouldn't trust someone capable of doing that to report something extremely inconvenient and damaging to the movement that owns their soul.
Putting all of that aside though...
Okay, and some of the infants were reported as having no mitigating factors and receiving no medical care at all. Lacking more information, I think we can assume that the legally mandated report is accurate, and that abortion clinicians would report factors favorable to their decision not to help the child if such factors existed.
Lacking more information I think we can assume that the information provided by abortion clinicians paints them in a maximally favorable light.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Damn it. Some day I will get a table to render correctly.
Edit: you gotta have three dashes in each column on your second line. So
|a |b|
|-|-|
| | |
is no bueno.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link