How rightwing groups used junk science to get an abortion case before the US supreme court

[Phys251]

How rightwing groups used junk science to get an abortion case before the US supreme court

Anti-abortion researchers ‘exaggerate’ and ‘obfuscate’ in their scientific papers – but by the time they’re published, it’s too late

www.theguardian.com

This is what anti-choicers do. Lies, more lies, and dishonesty, even in front of SCOTUS, which itself is infested with dishonest right-wingers.

 

[HIP56948]

Right-Wing lies are just about as plentiful as Hydrogen.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Right-Wing lies are just about as plentiful as Hydrogen.

Ah....

Is there a right wing 'truth" and if so....what is it?

Seems to me the right wing shifts gears as needed

 

[NWRatCon]

Here's an irony: I just posted a somewhat related thread: How America Stopped Trusting the Experts.

We're living through a pandemic brought on by a pandemic of anti-science. The Supreme Court is promoting a similar approach in anti-history and anti-law. The result is a double-whammy: Loss of social protections and promotion of anti-social activities. From Tom Nichols' book, "The American public has little tolerance for nuance or complexity, and the recommendations on mask wearing were difficult to parse and changed over time." Malevolent actors jumped into the fray to obfuscate and deliberately misinform the public. This is a specie of the same phenomenon.

 

[NWRatCon]

Whenever we delve into these topics, I think it is imperative to distinguish between conservatism and whatever one labels the revanchism/authoritarianism being practiced by the radical right-wing ideologues in the country. There's another thread connecting the TEA Party to MAGA (duh), as well, but the point is this: whatever you call the MAGA movement, it is neither conservative nor particularly American. It is kind of a bizarre admixture of cultism, authoritarianism, anti-intellectualism (this thread) and a huge dollop of devolutionary stupidity.

Whenever I make such disparaging remarks, of course, our favorite trolls jump on to prove my hypothesis.

 

[Gordy327]

This is what anti-choicers do. Lies, more lies, and dishonesty, even in front of SCOTUS, which itself is infested with dishonest right-wingers.

Not the first time and likely won't be the last time either.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Here's an irony: I just posted a somewhat related thread: How America Stopped Trusting the Experts.

We're living through a pandemic brought on by a pandemic of anti-science. The Supreme Court is promoting a similar approach in anti-history and anti-law. The result is a double-whammy: Loss of social protections and promotion of anti-social activities. From Tom Nichols' book, "The American public has little tolerance for nuance or complexity, and the recommendations on mask wearing were difficult to parse and changed over time." Malevolent actors jumped into the fray to obfuscate and deliberately misinform the public. This is a specie of the same phenomenon.

Is there a parallel in history and would it involve Poland?

 

[weaver2]

How rightwing groups used junk science to get an abortion case before the US supreme court

Anti-abortion researchers ‘exaggerate’ and ‘obfuscate’ in their scientific papers – but by the time they’re published, it’s too late

www.theguardian.com

This is what anti-choicers do. Lies, more lies, and dishonesty, even in front of SCOTUS, which itself is infested with dishonest right-wingers.

There really is a major problem with the stuff the anti-abortion sites post. The Charlotte Lozier Institute manipulates their scholarly looking articles to make them seem to be saying things they clearly are not. I posted this chart of theirs while ago

T

The Lozier article "Reasons for Seeking Abortion never discussed reasons. It discussed the very small number of late term exceptions to abortions bans . But the visual impact of the poster accompanying the article very effectively conveys the idea that the vast majority of women get abortions for such frivolous and irresponsible reasons that they won't talk about their reasons. With no information from the women about their reasons the Charlotte Lozier Institutitute is forced to call all of these abortions elective and and unspecified .

The Lozier Institute creates these seemingly scientific articles with % and charts and references to support their claim that women don't have good reasons ending fetal lives ,so banning abortions will save lives and the only people that will suffer are irresponsible women. And they can flip out their chart and the % shows the measure of women's irresponsibility.

Then there are their outright lies about the data on long and detailed studies. They rely on the fact that not many people know how to read the information in a study and/or are too busy to read the whole thing.

 

[Helix]

They are legislating via test cases now, so expect this to continue, IMO.

 

[weaver2]

They are legislating via test cases now, so expect this to continue, IMO.

It's unfortunate that many judges especially in the higher courts have the same focus on the fetus-only as does the pro-life movement and simply don't, won't or can't take into consideration who is getting abortions, why they are getting them, what the results are if they are prevented from aborting and what are the measures that would really cut the abortion rate.

 

[Helix]

It's unfortunate that many judges especially in the higher courts have the same focus on the fetus-only as does the pro-life movement and simply don't, won't or can't take into consideration who is getting abortions, why they are getting them, what the results are if they are prevented from aborting and what are the measures that would really cut the abortion rate.

They're currently making IVF effectively impossible in some states because they don't understand the process.

 

[NWRatCon]

It's unfortunate that many judges especially in the higher courts have the same focus on the fetus-only as does the pro-life movement and simply don't, won't or can't take into consideration who is getting abortions, why they are getting them, what the results are if they are prevented from aborting and what are the measures that would really cut the abortion rate.

They're beyond fetus now. Plan B doesn't even involve a fetus. Contraception doesn't either. IVF doesn't. Implantation is when conception occurs. Until then, it's a ball of cells, if even that. This is not based on science. Or medicine. Or even common sense. Or the Constitution.

 

[weaver2]

They're beyond fetus now. Plan B doesn't even involve a fetus. Contraception doesn't either. IVF doesn't. Implantation is when conception occurs. Until then, it's a ball of cells, if even that. This is not based on science. Or medicine. Or even common sense. Or the Constitution.
View attachment 67500528

I'm irritated by this faux science type of propaganda but I'm not surprised. What is surprising is that there are so many judges that seemingly don't understand science either and agree with the propagandizers like the Charlotte Lozier Institute.

Aside: Charolotte Lozier was the first woman doctor certified in the US. A talented, energetic women's rights advocte who is probably spinning in her grave because her name is attached to an organization dedicated to denying women's rights.

 

[year2late]

There really is a major problem with the stuff the anti-abortion sites post. The Charlotte Lozier Institute manipulates their scholarly looking articles to make them seem to be saying things they clearly are not. I posted this chart of theirs while ago

View attachment 67500439T

The Lozier article "Reasons for Seeking Abortion never discussed reasons. It discussed the very small number of late term exceptions to abortions bans . But the visual impact of the poster accompanying the article very effectively conveys the idea that the vast majority of women get abortions for such frivolous and irresponsible reasons that they won't talk about their reasons. With no information from the women about their reasons the Charlotte Lozier Institutitute is forced to call all of these abortions elective and and unspecified .

The Lozier Institute creates these seemingly scientific articles with % and charts and references to support their claim that women don't have good reasons ending fetal lives ,so banning abortions will save lives and the only people that will suffer are irresponsible women. And they can flip out their chart and the % shows the measure of women's irresponsibility.

Then there are their outright lies about the data on long and detailed studies. They rely on the fact that not many people know how to read the information in a study and/or are too busy to read the whole thing.

Seriously....frivolous?

They make it sound like a woman is gong to miss her weekly mani pedi appointment if she becomes pregnant.

Many are struggling to make ends meet. Most have children they are already caring for.

Some are trying to pull themselves out of poverty or be able to move to a safer neighborhood - the pathway is education for improved career choices.

Many have poor insurance. Sure they can get emergency medicaid for their pregnancy (will be dumped later on if they earn more than $1400/month (I think that is the amount), but consider how they will access care. Not every obstetrician will accept medicaid. They may have to go to a clinic that will accept them. Meaning travel-likely with child in tow.
Then they will miss work due to pregancy and childbirth. They are probably living paycheck to paycheck - making difficult choices every day. Do I pay for electricity or water this month.

Frivolous my ass.

They are either absolutely ignorant or intentionally avoiding reality.

 

[weaver2]

Seriously....frivolous?

They make it sound like a woman is gong to miss her weekly mani pedi appointment if she becomes pregnant.

Many are struggling to make ends meet. Most have children they are already caring for.

Some are trying to pull themselves out of poverty or be able to move to a safer neighborhood - the pathway is education for improved career choices.

Many have poor insurance. Sure they can get emergency medicaid for their pregnancy (will be dumped later on if they earn more than $1400/month (I think that is the amount), but consider how they will access care. Not every obstetrician will accept medicaid. They may have to go to a clinic that will accept them. Meaning travel-likely with child in tow.
Then they will miss work due to pregancy and childbirth. They are probably living paycheck to paycheck - making difficult choices every day. Do I pay for electricity or water this month.

Frivolous my ass.

They are either absolutely ignorant or intentionally avoiding reality.

They didn't actually use the word frivolous. However, they really didn't need to since the implications was pretty obvious. They have whole rooms full of writers dedicated to warping statistics and twisting sentences and they are not ignorant.