All of them.
That’s not part of the new proposed bill. That’s current Georgia law.
And that’s what everyone here continues to miss (or ignore).
Good grief, don’t say ‘hysteria!’
That’s sexist.
(But thank you, thank you, thank you for stepping in. It makes me feel like I’m in a Kafka play when I’m the only one saying something completely obvious…)
Are you being completely obvious or completely obtuse?
[Quote=Hentor the Barbarian]
Go ahead. You’re the expert on Georgia law here. You tell me.
[/quote]
Is there some definitional gotcha ya that you are holding behind your back regarding spontaneous fetal death versus miscarriage? At one point you say that a miscarriage is not required to be reported, but now all spontaneous fetal deaths are? I think you’re being obtuse and evasive, regardless of the degree of endorsement you get from Zeriel.
I don’t have any problem with your statement that it doesn’t add a new reporting/investigation requirement. But I am confused by this:
Which ones are not, then? 'Cos if all of them are, that doesn’t look like it leaves very many that aren’t…
ETA: I mean forget about us making you feel like you’re in a kafka-esque situation (you have my sympathy, btw); trying to nail down what the law is as it stands is kinda kafka-esque in itself.
I have no problem with saying Bricker hasn’t been particularly clear on what he’s trying to say through the course of the thread–but ultimately, he’s right. The problem with this bill is just about everything BUT the part the OP was complaining about.
Hell, I’m about as politically opposite Bricker as it’s possible to get on this topic (since I’m an “elective abortions should be legal up to a very late point” kind of guy) but that doesn’t change the facts of the matter–and subjectively, if you don’t think “ABORTION IS NOW EXPLICITLY PROSECUTABLE AS MURDER AND WE CAN IGNORE SUPREME COURT RULINGS WE DON’T LIKE” (aka the first half of this bill) is far scarier than “Abortions are no longer an exemption to the required reporting of miscarriages and required investigation of miscarriages without medically determined cause” (aka the second half of this bill), I have to wonder at your sense of priority.
Fair enough. I’m all about refining my knowledge of an issue so I can know more specifically what’s bugging me.
I think I’ve sowed more confusion in my wake than I meant to, by cleverly not laying out, in every post, whether I was talking about current law vs. proposed bill.
But Zeriel’s post 165 is exactly what I’m saying.
Bricker and Zeriel are the kind of people who say ‘Nigger’ in private and think they’re clever is they use ‘welfare queen’ or ‘underclass’ in public.
And how the hell did you draw that conclusion?
You, especially, Bricker. Your snide dismissal of shit like “Hysteria” is just so much sexist Republican bullshit, just like all the other high-handed sexist shit you’ve pulled. There’s a certain cowardice to a guy who hides behind technicalities and anal retentive bullshit like you do, but this board skews Libertarian and fauxgressive when it comes to womens’ issues, and you do like to hide behind your arrogance. Being in the pit doesn’t excuse it. It’s still sexist. You’re too much of a coward, ultimately, to come out from behind your technicalities and your mincing words. You’re a sexist and a coward. You go rushing into defend conservatives at a moment’s notice, but pretend you’re fair and balanced. It’s sickening. You can get away with it here—the Straight Dope’s only fights ignorance when it doesn’t intrude on male fauxgressive privilege.
So you think calling a woman a shreiking hysteric has no sexist overtones? Because there are equivalent stereotypes for black people, for Jews, for any minority in the world that’s discriminated against. People no longer use blatant racism or sexism in public but they do use code words. Ever heard the phrase “Welfare queen”? Well, you can look it up.
Just to be clear, under the law of the state of Georgia expects someone who miscarries to fill out paperwork on the incident within in 72 hours?
If so, seems pretty cruel, cold, and invasive.
Not to Bricker. He’s more interested in arguing technicalities.
Agreed. I am, as I’ve said, ardently pro-life, and I find this requirement to be highly intrusive and inapprporiate.
But it’s been the law in Georgia for years. So no one can be heard to complain that this proposed legislation will create onerous reporting requirements: they already exist.
Well, it doesn’t create them, but it can certainly be argued that it (along with reactions such as this thread and the article that inspired it) calls a lot more attention to them.
Ahh well I’ll probably call you some bad words in the future, but not in this thread. Thanks for the clarification.
It really looks like the true thing to pit is fact the bill doesn’t fix this nasty mess. More of a lateral move.
Useage of loaded terms like ‘hysterical’ and others on women in discussions. I’m sure Bricker uses this kind of stuff in his day-to-day life as an attorney.
*It is very likely that the whole reason the Marginalised Person™ in question is debating with you is because they’ve made a conscious decision to speak out about these issues, despite the pain and heartache it can often cause them.Therefore, the “you’re being hostile” bomb can often lead to an increase of anger and/or hurt. Sometimes it just leads to greater emphasis and exasperation in the argument. It really doesn’t matter, because you can still use it against them by accusing them of being overemotional. You may wish to use the word “hysterical” instead. “Hysterical” is also a word laden with negative connotations, so it’s particularly effective. Using this one in discussions with women is highly advisable, as the opinions and feelings of women have historically been denied as mere “hysteria”, but it works against almost anyone. A great one to use with women as well is to ask them if they’re “PMSing”. Yes, it’s an oldie but a classic. *
Hysteria is basically a more cowardly way of being an asshole to a woman when you're too cowardly to ask her if she's menstruating or needs to get laid.
Ableist Word Profile: Hysterical | FWD/Forward
The woman that writes that particular blog is herself disabled.
The other implication of the term is that this over-emotional condition is a uniquely female condition and is caused directly by female reproductive organs being sad about not having a baby. While that’s not literally how it’s meant today, it still feels like a slightly nicer way of saying “you’re just upset because it’s that time of the month,” another way to marginalize and dismiss females based explicitly on their femaleness. It’s a way to say “that sounds like something a woman would say when she’s being super woman-y and influenced by being a woman.” And again, this is assumed to be a reason to discount the information or perspective offered and to exclude that person from the conversation. THAT IS SEXIST.
I'd assume that on the SDMB, with its stated goal of fighting ignorance, various forms of discrimination would be frowned upon, yet apparently only if they're the big bad slurs does anyone actually care, and even then only if they're used on certain groups. I believe I've seen arguments here that pussy or cunt are not offensive if used in the English way, or that the former refers to cats, or whatever the up-to-the-minute excuses are. I'm sure somebody will whine about censorship, PC, or something of the sort next.
You’re getting pretty hysterical about this whole thing, aren’t you?
It may be interesting to note where and by whom “hysterical” was first used in this thread.
Did he call a woman a shrieking hysteric, though? The post I read had him characterizing your behavior as “shriek[ing] hysterically.” I won’t try to argue that it was polite (or even defend the accuracy of the characterization), so please don’t hurt me; however, a) his post characterized the behavior, not you personally, and b) nothing in that post even demonstrates that he even knew your gender when he typed it.
I find it quite plausible that Bricker is capable of characterizing a Der Trihs screed as hysterical shrieking, too. Would he get a pass from you on that?