Shermann's take on abortion

[Shermann]

Occum's Razor is a problem-solving principle which leads us away from complicated or convoluted explanations and solutions, and towards simpler, more straightforward ones. It is an epistemological approach and not a rule. It is not guaranteed to provide the right answers, however it maximizes the chances of finding truth and minimizes the chances of committing logical errors.

This principle can be applied to any problem, including the problem of policymaking. Democratic policies arguably are better aligned with this common-sense strategy than their Republican counterparts, as seen in the following examples:

- Gun proliferation correlates with gun violence, therefore the number of guns should be reduced
- Carbon dioxide acts as a pollutant at industrial scales, therefore emissions should be reduced
- Many have limited access to healthcare, therefore this access should be increased
- The United States ranks poorly in terms of wealth inequality, therefore wealth redistribution is required

Trumpians might argue that building a border wall is a simple, common-sense solution to the problem of uncontrolled immigration. However, upon closer inspection, this policy is revealed to be neither of those things.

These types of issues often negatively impact innocent people and disadvantaged groups. Being on the wrong side of them is obstructionist towards real progress and can therefore be seen not merely as illogical, but also immoral. Therein lies the major optics problem for Republicans. It is possible to defend the seemingly complicated or the convoluted. However, when this is the scenario with issue after issue, it takes a bit of a MAGA-apologetic tap dance to pull of (or distract from). That brings us to the right-wing talking point. Not all Republicans are capable of improvising these intricate twists and flourishes when challenged at the water cooler, so these scripted explanations (and distractions) are conveniently provided for them to stick to.

That leads us finally to the abortion issue. Republicans are desperate for issues where they can claim the moral high ground and position themselves as the sole champions of victims' rights. The abortion "debate" is largely manufactured around the mythological concepts of souls and God's plan and employs pseudo-scientific assertions of the significance of early heartbeats among other things. Republicans get to be the heroes of the unborn, and Democrats are the illogical, unrelatable villains. The "victims" never actually speak for themselves. It's all unfalsifiable and the perfect issue to create talking points around. There aren't many issues like this, and this strategically valuable ground will never be surrendered.

Abortion is a big thorny issue that has meant different things to different people over time, but I believe this is the crux of the politics behind it today.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

1. And most of the staunchest anti-abortion people

are enthusiastic about the death penalty.

[Arthur_Frain]

2. It's a thoughtful analysis.

With a lot of merit.

But you can be sure the Christians in the room believe fervently what you tossed one line to blithely

“ mythological concepts of souls and God's plan “

and any attempts at reasonable compromise are lost. For all of the reports of Americans leaving churches in droves, I still run into tons of fundies everywhere I go.

And like every religion, once you achieve critical mass it becomes a cult more obsessed with saving itself than anyones soul. Honestly you can’t do anything with people like that until you de program them.

[Shermann]

3. You've touched on another reason this issue is a winner for the right

The right's position has a built-in defense mechanism. Any attempt to tear it apart logically like I've done can be dismissed out of hand as being "anti-religion".

[Arthur_Frain]

6. There you go

Even if you manage to fix our attempts at messaging, it’s too much of a red meat issue for the fanatics in charge of the religion/churches.

Even ameliorating their position a tiny bit is viewed as a loss by them, and the cons don’t lose gracefully or well.

[Qutzupalotl]

4. A couple of moths ago I shut down a winger who accused me of being

“way out of the mainstream” for saying a baby is a baby after it's born, and before that it's a fetus or embryo.

I could have referred him to a dictionary, but instead I said, “If you don't like abortions, don't have one. But don't tell women what to do with their bodies or they'll vote you out!”

He didn't reply after that.

[Genki Hikari]

5. As if anyt of them know what is or isn't "mainstream."

What you needed to say next is, "So if you were in a building that's on fire, and you enter a room where you have two things on a counter, what would you save: A live baby, or a petri dish marked, 'embryos?' Because that's the difference between a baby and what exists before a baby is born."