MO State Senator objects to study of effects of MO's 72-hour abortion waiting period

[shira]

Cliff's notes:

• A University of Missouri non-scholarship graduate student (she pays her own tuition) is performing a self-funded study, based on responses to a questionaire given to women seeking abortions at one of Planned Parenthood's Missouri affiliates, on the effects of Missouri's new anti-abortion law, which imposed a 72-hour waiting period (plus other conditions) on women seeking abortions in the state.
• Republican state senator Kurt Schaefer doesn't want the study to be performed, because he suspects it's biased and will end up being of benefit to Planned Parenthood.
• Since the law was passed, the university has basically cut off all relationships between Planned Parenthood doctors and Missouri's school of medicine; but that's not enough for Schaefer.
• The university's position is that the study does not in any way run afoul of the state law, which forbids any state funds from being used for most abortions.

The full story is here.

How dare anyone check on the effects of MO's law on women seeking abortions. Free speech is one thing, but if free speech might help abortionists, then free speech has got to go.

 

[waggy]

The senator is a idiot. he has no say in what a student researches.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Fascism!

Oppression!

Persecution!!

That fascist and oppressive student is persecuting Schaefer!!

 

[Brainonska511]

And here we go on the other side (Compared to the Yale/Halloween E-mail thread) - conservatives trying to suppress academic freedom.

 

[Sonikku]

Only deeply religious Christian House Republicans can do a study like this without fear of bias.

 

[glenn1]

Why do you need an academic study to tell you what's obvious to everyone - laws meant exclusively to harass, delay, or inconvenience people exercising a right you disagree with are stupid regardless whether it's getting an abortion, purchasing a firearm, blue laws for alcohol sales, or anything else.

 

[trenchfoot]

Leave him be. Can't y'all see he's doing the Lord's work? Why, I know for a fact that that fella fully knows and understands that being a politician, he knows he's not supposed to mix his personal religious beliefs and politics as the Constitution of the United States so ordains.

But he's a soldier that has a higher authority to obey and the Constitution is merely a multi-function tool that he uses to shroud his true intent, gives him the power to disingenuously disobey the document itself, yet use it as a shield, sword and ministerial authorization to force others to obey those parts that suits his own way of thinking, Constitution and Bill of Rights be damned as one of the Devil's works.....well, just the parts that gets in the way of his crusading, you see.

Why, I bet in his mind he's doing that student a favor by saving that student from being sent to Hell as he surely understands she is doing the Dark Lord's work and wants to help her see the light that he sees in his dreams.

 

[kage69]

Why do you need an academic study to tell you what's obvious to everyone - laws meant exclusively to harass, delay, or inconvenience people exercising a right you disagree with are stupid regardless whether it's getting an abortion, purchasing a firearm, blue laws for alcohol sales, or anything else.

Because one of the two main parties in this country views science and female liberty with contempt, and crafts legislation in accordance with those views. When that kind of entrenched thinking butts heads with the real world, sometimes cold hard numbers are needed to drag others out of ignorance or apathy.

I find your reaction is fairly typical among republicans when this kind of thing happens; they don't appreciate their policies being scrutinized and shown to be at odds with facts, logic, common sense, previous statements/political promises, etc. The GOP doesn't need people getting more informed, that translates into them losing elections. Using your firearm example, look how the GOP fought to prevent the states from carrying out studies on death by firearm numbers. To the GOP, freedoms and science are subjective. Politics supersede facts. Everyone I know is fully aware of what PP is and what PP does; were you this incensed over Chaffetz's repeated face plants on C-SPAN when they were going after PP funding?

Any republican whining about bias regarding Planned Parenthood after that "hearing" either has shit for brains and/or a complete lack of self-awareness, Senator Schaefer included. He and his kind are a joke, and I look forward to their kind of politics continuing their trip around the drain.

 

[Mxylplyx]

Why do you share the GOP's contempt of information in an age of low information voters?

Hrmmmm.

Hey, social authoritarians in the GOP don't want any studies done about firearm related deaths either, what a coincidence!

It's almost like they and their supporters resent having their bullshit, dogma driven nonsense examined. Hrm, I wonder why.

They "believe" things, which makes them immune to facts based analysis. See Ben Carson and pyramids.

 

[theeedude]

 

[1prophet]

Cliff's notes:

• A University of Missouri non-scholarship graduate student (she pays her own tuition) is performing a self-funded study, based on responses to a questionaire given to women seeking abortions at one of Planned Parenthood's Missouri affiliates, on the effects of Missouri's new anti-abortion law, which imposed a 72-hour waiting period (plus other conditions) on women seeking abortions in the state.
• Republican state senator Kurt Schaefer doesn't want the study to be performed, because he suspects it's biased and will end up being of benefit to Planned Parenthood.
• Since the law was passed, the university has basically cut off all relationships between Planned Parenthood doctors and Missouri's school of medicine; but that's not enough for Schaefer.
• The university's position is that the study does not in any way run afoul of the state law, which forbids any state funds from being used for most abortions.

The full story is here.

How dare anyone check on the effects of MO's law on women seeking abortions. Free speech is one thing, but if free speech might help abortionists, then free speech has got to go.

You have freedom of speech but you don't have freedom from the consequences, oh wait.:sneaky:

On a more serious note what's to prevent Republican state senator Kurt Schaefer from having his own "unbiased" study supporting his views?

 

[shira]

You have freedom of speech but you don't have freedom from the consequences, oh wait.:sneaky:

On a more serious note what's to prevent Republican state senator Kurt Schaefer from having his own "unbiased" study supporting his views?

Well, I assume that any study performed would be subjected to peer review, and studies that don't conform to accepted practices would be weeded out.

Of course, Schaefer could argue that scientists performing such peer reviews have their salaries paid, at least in part, by the government. Therefore, he would conclude that no scientists should be allowed to peer-review any abortion-related studies whose results might benefit Planned Parenthood in any way whatsoever.

Come to think of it, ANY study MIGHT have results that could benefit Planned Parenthood in some way. For example, a study on the long-term outcomes of adolescent girls receiving the HPV vaccine might reveal that such girls have fewer unplanned pregnancies (and fewer abortions), a result that might cause donations to Planned Parenthood for HPV programs to increase. So no scientists would be allowed to peer-review ANY study.

In fact, no study like that hypothetical one should be allowed in the first place, since it would be almost impossible to undertake without at least some government funding and because the risk of a "unacceptable result" (one that could benefit Planned Parenthood) can't be risked.

Actually, this rules out all research in all scientific disciplines, since the use of even a little government money is unacceptable for research purposes that have any chance (no matter how small) of benefiting Planned Parenthood. And since ANY research carries this risk, we can't allow research.

Edit: Sorry, Senator Schaefer, but we can't perform your pet study, performed by your crack team of Creationist scientists, to prove that the Earth is only 4500 years old, because we can imagine a scenario where that research could benefit Planned Parenthood.

 

[kage69]

On a more serious note what's to prevent Republican state senator Kurt Schaefer from having his own "unbiased" study supporting his views?

Good question - there are plenty of gullible social authoritarians who will likely eat it up, and let's not pretend these fools take issue with funding their dogma based fishing experiments with tax payer funds. So no, little preventing it.

C'mon Senator Kurt Schaefer, be the next Chaffetz. Show us how you too can waste both time and money while trying to prop up legislated religious dogma in lieu of doing your damn job.

With how often repubs show themselves to be ignorant of the facts and numbers behind an issue, you'd expect them to be pretty gung ho about changing that perception, to want to do something about it, maybe not be laughed at so much.

 

[kage69]

Heh.

Works as long as you convince yourself most republicans know what shame is any way... :biggrin:

 

[glenn1]

Because one of the two main parties in this country views science and female liberty with contempt, and crafts legislation in accordance with those views. When that kind of entrenched thinking butts heads with the real world, sometimes cold hard numbers are needed to drag others out of ignorance or apathy.

I find your reaction is fairly typical among republicans when this kind of thing happens; they don't appreciate their policies being scrutinized and shown to be at odds with facts, logic, common sense, previous statements/political promises, etc. The GOP doesn't need people getting more informed, that translates into them losing elections. Using your firearm example, look how the GOP fought to prevent the states from carrying out studies on death by firearm numbers. To the GOP, freedoms and science are subjective. Politics supersede facts. Everyone I know is fully aware of what PP is and what PP does; were you this incensed over Chaffetz's repeated face plants on C-SPAN when they were going after PP funding?

Any republican whining about bias regarding Planned Parenthood after that "hearing" either has shit for brains and/or a complete lack of self-awareness, Senator Schaefer included. He and his kind are a joke, and I look forward to their kind of politics continuing their trip around the drain.

What's your point? Run all the studies you want, they will remain constitutional rights no matter what. It doesn't matter how much you hate guns and want to limit people from them. Or the right hates abortion and wants to limit people from them too. In the end stop acting like a freaking helicopter parent and treat others as the grownup citizens they are and stop screwing with their rights to do the things they want to do; if them doing so scares you that's too fucking bad.

 

[kage69]

What's your point?

That "it" is not as obvious as you say "it" is. That and your take on it smacks of intellectual laziness, or at least the defense of it. Information on a public issue like this can be agreed with or disagreed with, research and discourse is good! It shouldn't be suppressed, and certainly not by hypocrites with vested political interests in the matter. Maybe if we have more studies and more engagement about them there just might be fewer dumbshits in the mix ruining things for others?

Run all the studies you want

Except the ones that cover "obvious" stuff though, right?

they will remain constitutional rights no matter what.

Let's hope so, although I've known too many spittle covered "pro-life" evangelicals to be as confidant about that as you. If this right was as bedrock as you maintain, abortion services wouldn't be under such attack throughout the country. In fact, given the bureaucratic lengths the "pro-life", onward christian warrior types have gone to in order to prevent abortion access, I think your certitude is a little naive here. Infringement on the rights we're discussing is an ongoing, current affair. Would you maintain that abortion rights are being upheld in Texas? What about gun rights in say, NY?

It doesn't matter how much you hate guns and want to limit people from them.

I hope you're speaking generally with this diversion, as I am far from a gun hater. There's a Ruger GP100, sans grip, sitting in an ultrasonic bath next to me as I type this. While I hear and even agree with the tone of what you are saying here, the crux of the issue is studies, information, being suppressed along political lines, what matters is who is afraid of the facts, and why. Guns, and the studies that states are now prevented from conducting, were mentioned as an example of the kind of partisan boneheaded thinking this Schaefer is exhibiting.

In the end stop acting like a freaking helicopter parent and treat others as the grownup citizens they are and stop screwing with their rights to do the things they want to do; if them doing so scares you that's too fucking bad.

I'm not sure how wanting to conduct a study, or to have access to its findings, on a public health issue counts as "helicopter parent" like neurotic obsession. I think I'll take this to mean you don't agree with this law, and that you acknowledge that the story here is not that a female student wants to conduct a free study, but that a Senator is scared enough of it's findings to think it shouldn't even be conducted.

And I agree.

 

[glenn1]

I don't have a problem with studying the effects of abortion waiting laws, but the answer is so obvious (bad and pointless) that I'd put the study in the category of "water is wet" or "sun rises in the east" for value. Ditto for NY or elsewhere firearm laws. That being said I think people have the right to vote for and live under stupid laws if that's what they really want.

Nice choice of armament there. Next time you want to shoot something for accuracy rather than just big holes come on over.