• agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ohio is not an expensive place to move to comparatively, not yet anyway. I think this gives a lot of hope and options to people living around Ohio to move there for the safety and the grass. These two laws together, despite the GOPs best efforts, make Ohio an attractive option and the states gonna see growth as people and buisness take advantage of that.

    • jasory@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      34
      ·
      1 year ago

      The amount of people that move simply for abortion laws is miniscule. It’s such a small part of the lives of even the people that opt for abortions, that it is of little consideration.

      Marijuana on the other hand, might actually have an effect on the population because drugs are a major part of a lot of peoples lives.

      • Smoogs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        44
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes having your privacy and autonomy taken away, such a small part of a person’s life. Insignificant!

        • jasory@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          What are laws if not violations of autonomy and privacy?

          Intelligent people actually recognise that this is not a useful distinction between prohibiting abortion and any other action.

          So why can’t you?

        • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          24
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ask 100 people what their reasons for moving to a specific place are, I can almost guarantee none of them will mention abortion laws. Not that they aren’t important, but abortions are relatively uncommon among the population so most people don’t even think about them

          • AquaTofana@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            1 year ago

            I mean, it’s a large part of the reason I want out of Texas so badly. I have never been pregnant, nor do I ever plan to be. And I have an IUD. But I don’t want my money funding a place like Texas. I don’t want my money funding any place that’s anti-woman/anti-minority/anti-LGBTQ+/anti-immigration.

            I want my tax dollars and the money I spend in the local economy to go to treating human beings like human beings. Robust social programs and the like.

            Tbf tho, you did say miniscule, and I can only speak for myself and my husband - so literally no one. It’s just…politics can absolutely influence where a person wants to move to if they have the capabilities of making said move.

            • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Just give it a few more years, and your IUD will be against the law. If people aren’t wisened up or awake yet, that’ll kick em in the arse and trigger more flight to other states.

              • AquaTofana@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s exactly what I’m worried about in places like Texas/FL/MS/MO/etc etc. I’m also mid 30s so pretty damn close to being considered a “geriatric pregnancy” if I ever were to get pregnant. Hopefully that would be enough to get left alone and no one looking into me.

                However, my heart is broken for all the young women who are born here, or who end up here through life’s circumstances and have no choice for their own bodies. I found out about that high school in South Texas for specifically pregnant teen girls, and I was so fucking distraught over it (well I still am). The “pregnancy crisis” centers that are legally allowed to spread misinformation. Ugh, it’s so fucking much here.

                Then Bexar county voting down Prop A (which would have decriminalized abortion in San Antonio) earlier this year, and I just kinda gave up on this state.

                • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Seems pretty crazy to me that so much was bundled into 1 prop? I imagine there’s a reason that was the case, but that really makes it easy to fight it on other grounds instead of on each individual issue. They didn’t explicitly vote down abortion, they voted down all those things.

                  Maybe there’s still some hope for other states if Ohio’s single purpose measure passed?

                • jasory@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  12
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  “That’s exactly what I’m worried about”

                  You’re worried about something only supported by a fringe group (some conservative Catholics) and legal for your entire lifetime. Keep in mind that the only opposition that the general pro-life movement has is towards abortifacients, of which IUDs are not.

                  Just because something is vaguely similar doesn’t mean that it is necessarily affected by a policy. Banning slavery, doesn’t mean that you can’t make your children do chores.

                  “The 'pregnancy crisis’s centers that are legally allowed to spread misinformation” Everyone is legally allowed to spread misinformation.

                  Maybe your heart wouldn’t be so broken if your head wasn’t so broken. But who am I kidding, you likely don’t actually care about this to any actionable degree, just typed out a response since the topic was broached.

      • GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        While not the only reason, my partner and I moved to WA from a red state so that my partner would feel safe. I also know other people that did the same. So your first point is at least slightly incorrect, if not completely. Do you have a uterus that certain state governments want control over? If not, maybe you shouldn’t speak on this.

        • jasory@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          22
          ·
          1 year ago

          I know literally hundreds of women were this is not the case. The fact that I can only find them on a web forum that specifically selects for people that have your viewpoint (a far-left {no you’re not mainstream Americans no matter how much you want to believe it} website with a post that specifically targets people interested in abortion), is pretty strong evidence of how little it factors in.

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 year ago

            https://fortune.com/2023/08/09/healthcare-reproductive-rights-male-employees-companies-abortion-access-job-application-polarization-workplace/

            +8% in interest for a company if they offer abortion access.

            https://msmagazine.com/2023/01/23/employer-benefits-state-abortion-laws-young-women-employees/

            More than half of young women are making living and work decisions based on abortion access. 44% are thinking of moving or have moved to a state where abortion is protected. 10% have already declined jobs in states where abortion would be illegal. Oh, and 57% of women and 48% of men said their companies and leaders weren’t doing enough to ensure abortion access.

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2023/04/21/abortion-ban-states-obgyn-residency-applications/

            10.5% drop in applications.

            https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/22/abortion-idaho-women-rights-healthcare

            Which has led to some towns having no obgyn clinics at all.


            In short, the data sharply disagrees with your survey of the hundreds of women you know. Perhaps you should consider that the people you know aren’t terribly representative of the US as a whole, and you’re drawing terribly incorrect conclusions because of it. I think Ohio, the latest in a long list of Blue and Red states keeping abortion legal, suggests you’re completely incorrect on mainstream Americans. A commanding majority from Kansas to Ohio to Kentucky want to live somewhere where abortion is legal.

            The only question left is if you’re going to continue to plug your ears or if you’re actually going to accept that being against abortion puts you outside of mainstream Americans. I’m strongly suspect it’s the former, so I’ll preemptively wish you a pleasant time in finding out just how wrong you are. Repeatedly.

            • jasory@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The data is asking leading questions. The mere fact that one has declined a job in a certain state does not follow that the reason was specific to a single law.

              Additionally you realise that Ob-Gyn services far more than abortion. If they are shutting down, it’s primarily due to aging populations in small communities, not abortion laws.

              FYI if you want to throw around statistics it helps to have some formal education in statistics that way you atleast know what kind of conclusions the data actually supports. Hint, it’s rarely what uneducated journalists think.

              • GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                I love that you brought up formal education regarding stats; you must be an expert since you kept track of the opinions and personal thoughts of “hundreds of women” you know.

                You’ve been told of personal experiences, and you’ve also been given multiple studies above. Are you really so insecure that you cannot be wrong even when presented with clear, cut and dry evidence? Is that insecurity what’s causing you to belittle the pain and turmoil that women in red states experience every day?

                I find it very interesting that you had no problem seeing the logic behind MJ legalization, but when women came into the picture you suddenly weren’t so sure.

                By the way, your “I know literally hundreds of women” line has still got it. Makes me giggle every time I read it.

                • jasory@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s simply a matter of selecting relevant statistics.

                  “Belittle the pain and turmoil”

                  Bit melodramatic aren’t we? People experience “pain and turmoil”, regardless of what state they live in. I love how pro-choice people have to portray abortion restrictions as modern-day Auschwitz, because they solely want to permit the active killing of human beings for any reason. That’s all this entire conversation is about, it’s not about accuracy it’s about the fact that it doesn’t endorse the narrative that abortion is critical to women’s lives. That’s the only reason anyone here has a problem with it.

                  “Makes me giggle everytime”

                  If you haven’t held personal conversations with hundreds of people in your lifetime, you’re just socially inept. This isn’t a difficult task, and nowhere did I claim this happened simultaneously. I was merely referencing the fact that out of hundreds of people I’ve interacted with, only a handful referenced marijuana laws (basically just hardcore potheads) and zero abortion laws as the primary reasons for moving. I even threw in gun laws, even though I’ve never actually known someone who primarily moved because of them.

                  • Womdat10@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Then where are your statistics? Besides, at the point where it is legal anywhere in the states to get an abortion, is before the infant has gained awareness, so it isn’t killing a human being, it is killing a being that isn’t alive yet. Also, abortion is quite critical to woman’s lives, it can in fact be a matter of life and death, or the ability to afford a home, or food, or it could be the matter of rape where the woman had no choice at all in the matter, and might even be a child. The point about your line being funny, is about the way you put it, not it being strange to happen.

          • GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I know literally hundreds of women

            Ah, so you don’t have a uterus. Got it!

            You cannot claim to know personal opinions of hundreds of women, this is exactly why you shouldn’t speak on this subject. There’s a term for this, called Dunbar’s number. You can only really be friends with a max of around 150 people. So, are you really going to say that of all of your friends, they’re all women (or at least 101 of them, to meet your hundreds mark), and you’ve talked to them (and listened) about their feelings around abortion? You asked each person if they would feel safer in a state with abortion rights and access as opposed to one without?

            Right now, it seems that you’re not a woman and you’re putting words into “hundreds” of their mouths. Exactly what right leaning people love to do.

            • jasory@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              14
              ·
              1 year ago

              “You cannot claim to know the opinions of hundreds of women… Dunbar’s number”

              Destroyed by a weakly defined social science term, that bears little application to the topic. One can easily exceed Dunbar’s number over a period of time spanning decades. If I ask hundreds of women privately their reason for moving, laws, specifically ones about abortion are going to play very little role. The primary reasons for moving are economic and familial, you know things that actually effect day-to-day life.

              Additionally if the opinions of multiple women contradicted mine (as a woman), would I really have a logical basis for asserting that my opinion is representative of the group of women?

              “right-leaning” You’re confusing criticism of a circle-jerk of unfounded nonsense as being right-leaning. If that’s the case then why don’t you want to be right-leaning?

              • GlitzyArmrest@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                That’s a lot of words to say you know nothing about what women actually care about. You seem to have latched onto Dunbar’s number and not the fact that you’re putting words in women’s mouths. Also, I highly doubt you’ve exceeded Dunbar’s number, ever. I’m sure that you speaking for women (when you aren’t one, clearly) really makes them feel safe enough for them to all share their most vulnerable thoughts with you.

                Also, you originally claimed that people care about MJ because they use it in their daily lives. Do you really think that access to reproductive healthcare is not a daily thought for many women?

      • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        drugs are a major part of a lot of peoples lives

        marijuana is and has always been effectively legal. think of how many people you know that smoke every day. how many of them have actually been busted? the laws against marijuana were never about stopping people from smoking marijuana. they’re about making something tons of people do illegal so that they can:

        1. investigate, harass and disrupt inconvenient people whenever they want to for suspicion of doing something the majority of people do

        2. tack on additional charges and jailtime in order to funnel more profits to private prisons and the major orgs that contract out prison slave labor

        • jasory@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          1 year ago

          “Marijuana is and has already been effectively legal”

          Absolutely. The war on drugs failed, not because of abuses of police or that it’s impossible to ban products. But because Americans love drugs and has always culturally permitted it’s use. The reason why countries like Singapore don’t have drug problems is cultural suppression, in addition to draconian laws.

          The rest of your comment is irrelevant conspiracism. Prison labor and private facilities comprise zilch to the US economy (billions sounds large until you realize that the US economy is on the order of 20 trillion), infact many people are released specifically because it is cheaper.

          Marijuana use additionally increased with cultural acceptance, it wasn’t illegalised when it would actually have been an effective way to hassle innocents.