The Rehumanize Conference is about to start! Especially looking forward to Secular #ProLife's 4pm presentation "Deconstructing Three Myths about Abortion." #Rehumanize2021
We'll be live-tweeting all the abortion-related content, which also includes a "Global Perspectives on Abortion" panel, former PP worker turned whistleblower Mayra Rodriguez, SFLA's Apologetics 101, and (most timely) "Pro-Life Victories in the Law."
@RehumanizeAimee kicking it off with an introduction to radical inclusivity. "Our diversity is a strength, not a weakness."
If the Texas heartbeat law stays in place long enough, Texas will likely see an increase in effective contraceptive use and decrease in unintended pregnancies. This correlation has been observed with abortion restrictions before. Sources below.
"A state’s antiabortion attitudes, which likely contribute to the enactment of restrictive abortion laws, are a major factor in inducing greater use of highly effective contraceptive methods." Social Science Research, January 2012 sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
"Fewer abortion providers increase the likelihood of women using the pill." The Social Science Journal, March 2014 sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
Your resident lawyer Kelsey here. I am going to try my best to explain the Supreme Court's order in the Texas case, subject to revision when I've had more sleep. 🧵
First, it helps to understand what *typically* happens in abortion cases. A pro-life law is enacted, abortion industry interests sue, and the lower (district and circuit) federal courts enjoin (block) enforcement of the law while it works its way through the system.
The Supreme Court does not get involved in the proceedings until much later, if ever.
You can think of this pattern as creating two types of precedent.
🧵 1/ "Religious people are pro-life, so if you're pro-life you must be religious." This is a bad argument. Let me count you the ways.
2/ First, this is a very common logical misstep called "affirming the consequent" or "converse error." We see a conditional statement ("If you're swimming, you're wet") & incorrectly assume its converse ("If you're wet, you're swimming") must also be true. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming…
3/ In this context, the conditional statement is "If you're religious, you're pro-life" & the converse is "If you're pro-life, you're religious." You can't assume the converse based on the conditional statement.
🧵 1/ A quick example of the problems with confusing correlation and causation, from this 2020 study: "Unintended pregnancy and abortion by income, region, and the legal status of abortion: estimates from a comprehensive model for 1990-2019" thelancet.com/journals/langl…
Higher UIP drive up abortion rates. Stricter abortion laws drive down abortion rates.
3/ So we would expect countries with high UIP and lax abortion laws to have the highest abortion rates and countries with low UIP and strict abortion laws to have the lowest abortion rates.
Colorado's incredibly lax abortion laws are extreme by both national and international standards: only seven countries in the world allow unrestricted abortion after 20 weeks, including such champions of human rights as Vietnam, North Korea, and China.
This is the company Colorado currently keeps, dramatically out of step with the views and ethics of most of its population.
Late-term abortion is not rare and it's not performed exclusively (or even primarily) for dire medical reasons.