829
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] capital@lemmy.world -5 points 2 days ago

You risk your own and others situational awareness when you paint everything as a race issue.

I grew up in Texas in a deep red county.

They believe abortion is literally the same as killing a healthy 2 year old. Straight up. THAT is the basis for their opposition to abortion, plain and simple.

You are dumbing down the discourse by being so focused on race.

[-] Senal@programming.dev 17 points 2 days ago

"This stops them from killing babies" and "This also predominantly affects the group I don't like" aren't mutually exclusive ideas

[-] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 13 points 2 days ago

It's both. Unfortunately, a lot of people are incredibly racist without even knowing that they are racists. They are just doing whatever they've always been doing, "and now, all of a sudden, that's racist." It's like when people are defending slavery because it was "normal at the time." It was still racist! It is now and it was then.

You're getting down voted, but you're right. The actual lawmakers are probably more racially motivated. But based on my experience growing up in Alabama, most of the regular "pro-life" voters seem motivated by a genuine belief that abortion is murder.

[-] Kalysta@lemm.ee 3 points 2 days ago

Until they need an abortion. Then they’re fine with it. Ask anyone who works at an abortion clinic how many times people out there protesting come in for abortions

[-] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Yes because they don't actually believe that they are killing a living human. That's why they will get it done for themselves or their mistresses.

[-] capital@lemmy.world -2 points 2 days ago

I could see the race thing being more true for the politicians but even then I think it’s less of a thing than most people on Lemmy think.

If we stop to think about it a moment I think that becomes clear.

Do we think Ted Cruz would rather have a black Republican neighbor or a white Democrat? I truly think he’d rather have a black Republican neighbor. I believe the same is true for everyone I grew up with in Texas.

IF we accept that (big if, admittedly) it can’t be a race thing. It would have to extend to a cultural thing.

[-] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Are you from an area that mainly espouses colorblindness as its racism?

A month ago, I was sent a picture of a black lynching by a Nazi. It's 100% about race for a lot of people.

[-] capital@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Note that I didn’t say racism didn’t exist anymore. I said it wasn’t the driving principle behind their position on abortion. And that hyper fixation on race does a disservice to them and others by often missing the point.

I would also say “color blindness” isn’t racism, if that’s what you meant. Maybe I misunderstood you?

I largely agree with Coleman Hughes on this point but I frankly don’t expect anyone here to honestly engage with his position.

[-] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Well, I've already explained exactly why it's a continuation of native American genocide and how race is 100% a driver for these organizations en masse, even though other races are also affected.

It's not a hyperfixation on race to acknowledge racial issues and address them.

I guessed you were from an area with colorblindness as it's main racism, I am as well. That's because you're in an area that is still colonizing land from Natives, so it's important to reduce their claims. One way to do this is to erase their heritage and ethnicity by forcing language, names, holidays, foods, etc that aren't part of their history. Suppressing claims of racism automatically is colorblindness and part of how colorblindness is racist.

https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Native-Indian-Culture-Color-Blind-Racism-F3YRAC73VU5YW

Another form of racism placed onto Native Indian people is color-blind racism. This form of racism rationalizes “racial inequality as the outcome of nonracial dynamics” (Robertson 120). Color-blind racism takes the standards created by the dominant discourse and applies them to all ethnic groups, putting them on an even level plain field without recognizing historical or social context of each group. Therefore, according to color blind racism, the effects of casualties and stereotypical of Native Indians such as alcoholism, poverty, etc. is essentially their fault and they should be the ones to start change. However, these the casualties of Native Indian culture was changed by racial oppression implemented by the dominant discourse. Therefore, Native Indians cannot be the ones to change of societal perception when they were not the ones to implement it.

https://www.pbs.org/education/blog/unlearning-kindness-color-blindness-and-racism

The pressure to assimilate and narrow the gaps in our proximity to Whiteness goes hand and hand with so-called “color blindness,” or claiming not to see race. At best, this ideology is misguided because it’s predicated on the false assumption that if we do not talk about or acknowledge race and racism, then these issues will go away. It should go without saying that this is asinine, yet so many well-meaning White people wear their alleged color blindness as a badge of honor.

At worst, it is a White supremacist tool used to intentionally gaslight BIPOC and give White people a justification for turning away from the experiences and voices of BIPOC. Color blindness requires BIPOC to “grin and bear” everyday instances of racism. We are expected to do this all in the name of making White people more comfortable with benefitting from their ancestors’ ill-gotten gains, as well as current inequalities. This is the “polite” brand of racism that prioritizes White supremacist notions of decorum, comfort, and acceptable forms of social expression over dismantling racism and alleviating the suffering that it causes.

[-] LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

No, you're missing pieces of the puzzle. Modern day abortion bans are a piece of legal child trafficking via adoptions.

Latina girl tries to get an abortion. She shows up at a fake abortion clinic because she's ESL and those clinics are deceitful. She gets guilt tripped into giving her baby up for adoption.

The fake abortion clinic just so conveniently works with an adoption center that only adopts out to Christian families that can pay them about $20k-$40k for a kid. This money doesn't go to the birth mother. Most of these adopting families are white.

Then these Christian organizations go on to lobby for less social safety nets, less abortion access, less birth control access and education, thus driving more desperate girls to their clinics.

Race plays a part - this is continued genocide happening primarily against Native American Latinos who lack the same legal protections as Native Americans from here in the US, even though those borders didn't exist before we put them there. Those are very similar groups of people who share some ancestry and used to trade with each other.

Yes other races are damaged by this too. It's just not in the same way. It's okay to be intersectional instead of just giving up thinking about race altogether.

Here's an example of one of these adoption agencies: https://christianhomes.com/

Almost everyone supports abortion in rapes cases and risk to life cases - it is very rare that someone literally thinks it's the same as murdering a toddler if you actually ask them about those "fringe" cases.

It's more that people are reactionary and don't want to actually think and so they just parrot whatever is comfortable to them.

this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
829 points (98.7% liked)

News

22916 readers
3562 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS