# Republicans: A War On Science and how you are letting them win **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 5, 2012, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-a-war-on-science-and-how-you-are-letting-them-win/636856 "2012-10-05T22:39:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2012, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-a-war-on-science-and-how-you-are-letting-them-win/636856/261 "2012-11-20T23:24:47Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Those veering off into crackpottery have secured far more influence in Europe than they have in the US. Where, specifically? > [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > And after the war, our relatively laissez-faire approach helped create the largest middle class in the history of the world. But that resulted mainly from the fact that capitalists/entrepreneurs and American workers truly needed each other, since shipping jobs out to China was impossible. How are you defining “middle class”? If it’s any worker not involved in primary or secondary industry, then changing proportions would depend on more efficient technique (a result of the technicians, or intellectuals of the bourgeois - not the entrepreneurs). Arguably, production could decline if importing were more efficient too (as long as another country has a comparative advantage in whichever aspect of production). Also, we’d need to compare a country with similar starting criteria which didn’t have a lassez-faire approach, for [whichever period](http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/top-tax-rate.png). ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2012, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-a-war-on-science-and-how-you-are-letting-them-win/636856/262 "2012-11-21T01:55:40Z")
> [@gamerunknown](#): > > Where, specifically? 1. How should I know? I posted that a month ago! 😃 2. Full quote: > [@Measure for Measure](#): > > Both sides have their loons. But lefty loons have de minimus traction. Take the thread that Bricker linked to. There have been serious studies and serious scientific concerns about the use and spread of GM pollen. Now some of those fears have been addressed by Monsanto and apparently some of the studies have been challenged. But that’s a normal scientific process. Those veering off into crackpottery have secured far more influence in Europe than they have in the US. I was talking specifically about genetically modified food. There are plenty of woo-woo websites in the US on the subject, but they gain no legislative traction. In Europe however, there have been substantially more curbs on GMO. Admittedly, these 2 European websites aren’t the worst I’ve seen: > **[Archive-It Wayback Machine](https://wayback.archive-it.org/)** > **[GMWatch Home](https://gmwatch.org/en/)** > > Latest news on GMO food, GMO crops, GMO labelling and genetically modified organisms Anyway, my point was that the GMO debate has generally has a better grip on scientific reality, alarmism aside. Anybody who wants to defend (or attack) the Europeans on this point is welcome: I see now that I was hasty to ascribe cranky motives to their regulation. Another link thrown in for the heck of it: > **[Genetically modified food controversies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food_controversies)** > > Consumers, farmers, biotechnology companies, governmental regulators, non-governmental organizations, and scientists have been involved in controversies around foods and other goods derived from genetically modified crops instead of conventional crops, and other uses of genetic engineering in food production. The key areas of controversy related to genetically modified food (GM food or GMO food) are whether such food should be labeled, the role of government regulators, the objectivity of sc... ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-a-war-on-science-and-how-you-are-letting-them-win/636856/263 "2012-11-27T19:33:56Z")
The [Fark headline](http://www.fark.com/go/7455168) for this story is telling: > [@](#): > > A new website full of manipulated ultrasound images and scary, medically inaccurate claims about the risks of abortion has been launched by group of virulently anti-choice right-wing religious nut jobs. Otherwise known as the Arizona state government Sure enough, [Salon reports](http://www.salon.com/2012/11/27/arizona_launches_misleading_abortion_website/): > [@](#): > > (T)he Arizona Department of Health Services launched “A Woman’s Right to Know,” an informational [website](http://www.azdhs.gov/phs/owch/informed-consent/index.htm) that uses manipulated ultrasound images and scary (read: medically [inaccurate](http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/safety_of_abortion.html)) claims about the risks associated with abortion to keep women from having the safe, legal medical procedure. State Rep. Kimberly Yee (R. AZ) and other Arizona lawmakers have not been shy about the intent of the website, either. As Yee [told](http://azdailysun.com/news/local/state-and-regional/website-details-abortion-risks/article_b5fe246f-8260-59e0-bfdb-a3c1c6ad9bdf.html) the Arizona Daily Sun, “the medical drawings, which are in full color and much more detailed than any ultrasound, may give some prospective parents additional reasons to reconsider their initial decision to terminate the pregnancy.” > > The website was implemented as part of Arizona’s H.B. 2036, an aggressive anti-abortion law passed this year that mandates invasive ultrasounds and bans abortion after 20 weeks (based on medically [dubious](http://www.salon.com/2012/07/30/fetal_pain_nonsense_prevails_in_arizona/) claims of “fetal pain”). The provision restricting abortion at 20 weeks has been blocked while the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals determines if it violates Roe v. Wade, which doesn’t consider a fetus viable outside the womb until 24 weeks. The ruling, expected as early as today, will decide the fate of Arizona’s law. Meanwhile, [similar laws](http://www.guttmacher.org/sections/abortion.php?scope=U.S.%20specific) exist in 22 other states. > > Medically inaccurate and emotionally manipulative claims about abortion are standard practice among so-called [crisis pregnancy centers](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_pregnancy_center), which are religiously-affiliated (and sometimes federally funded) organizations that use shame and fear tactics to pressure women out of having abortions. Now this brand of anti-choice rhetoric and pseudoscience is being incorporated into a growing body of legislation and embraced by government health officials. So the tax payers in Arizona are funding a website built and maintained by the state which has inaccurate scientific information on it. The party of ignorance: This time, everyone pays for that ignorance. At least everyone in Arizona. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2012, 7:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-a-war-on-science-and-how-you-are-letting-them-win/636856/264 "2012-11-29T07:48:39Z")
Also, [as the Atlantic Magazine points out](http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/11/arizona-government-website-misdirects-women-abortions/59368/) the Arizona website gives misleading information about the risks of abortion. They list fatality risks in strong language, but offer no comparison to the risks of carrying a baby to term. In the US, both risks are small, but giving birth is much riskier than having an abortion, in a relative sense. This is propaganda posing as medical advice shoved down the throat of the Arizona Department of Health Services. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republicans-a-war-on-science-and-how-you-are-letting-them-win/636856.md?page=13)