thank you. Back before Roe, evangelicals were pro-choice because they hated catholics.
If it is like going back to the before times, well people don't realize how long ago that was. It's not, 'the way things used to be' unless you're :smoothskin: years old.
Plus the big change is that it's an evangelical issue which it never used to be, so it's not even the before times, it's new.
Anyone who listens to Why Theory pod heard about the...not....infamous abortion episode of Maude. It's funny for an old sitcom and the interesting thing is how casual and grounded they thought of abortion back then.
Maude decides not to have a child because she's too old. That's it!
Because they're doing a "both sides" episode, the other character says that he enjoys kids and it might be a boy to carry on the family name. That's it.
Imagine how hard that episode would have to go now. The most controversial thing would be the fact that Maude is a well off woman with a healthy pregnancy and normal husband. These days she'd have to be a destitute woman of color- ya know make it clear she actually needs it.
Anytime I argue for abortion rights I paint a picture of how bad the worst details are going to be. The very nature of abortion has changed. Now I am having to justify it to some invisible 3rd party super ego in the room.
The craziest thing is Walter Cronkite covering Roe. Abortion isn't even big enough to be a human rights issue. Again it's a practical and technical issue.
See how they think Roe gives "doctors the right to choose". That is so how not we think about it.
This isn't anything like the before times because abortion has come to stand in for something a lot heavier and darker. Thank you for coming to my :posting:
deleted by creator
thank you. Back before Roe, evangelicals were pro-choice because they hated catholics.
If it is like going back to the before times, well people don't realize how long ago that was. It's not, 'the way things used to be' unless you're :smoothskin: years old.
Plus the big change is that it's an evangelical issue which it never used to be, so it's not even the before times, it's new.
Anyone who listens to Why Theory pod heard about the...not....infamous abortion episode of Maude. It's funny for an old sitcom and the interesting thing is how casual and grounded they thought of abortion back then.
Maude decides not to have a child because she's too old. That's it!
Because they're doing a "both sides" episode, the other character says that he enjoys kids and it might be a boy to carry on the family name. That's it.
Imagine how hard that episode would have to go now. The most controversial thing would be the fact that Maude is a well off woman with a healthy pregnancy and normal husband. These days she'd have to be a destitute woman of color- ya know make it clear she actually needs it.
Anytime I argue for abortion rights I paint a picture of how bad the worst details are going to be. The very nature of abortion has changed. Now I am having to justify it to some invisible 3rd party super ego in the room.
The craziest thing is Walter Cronkite covering Roe. Abortion isn't even big enough to be a human rights issue. Again it's a practical and technical issue.
See how they think Roe gives "doctors the right to choose". That is so how not we think about it.
This isn't anything like the before times because abortion has come to stand in for something a lot heavier and darker. Thank you for coming to my :posting: