Shackled and pregnant Wis. case challenges ‘fetal protection law’
… seems to me there needs to be fetal (and mother) protection from drug warrior busybodies.
In cases like Beltranâ€™s, â€œthe woman loses pretty much every constitutional right we associate with personhood,â€ said Lynn Paltrow
We’ve seen so many permutations of this, from mothers having their newborn taken away because of a false “poppy seed muffin” drug test, to responsible medical marijuana users having their children removed.
All without any evidence that the children themselves are being harmed, but rather the assumption by government bureaucrats that they know what’s best for the child.
Another in the long list of destructive drug-war side-effects.
[By the way, the comments at this article are not particularly instructive — tends to devolve into a bunch of the standard ignorant red vs. blue bashing.]
[Yes Pete, I hardly ever read comments at places like huffpo any more, for just that reason. Don’t they ever get bored with endless repetition of the same old arguments?]
MSM always assumes the inherent “rightness” of drug testing, rather than as a commerce-inspired evil.
“By the way, the comments at this article are not particularly instructive…”
This should be a disclaimer for almost any website or blog, present company excluded.
While the whole comments section idea sounds good in theory, I wonder how many fruitful discussions occur or how many newsworthy tips show up in comment space. I have called the comments section the cesspool of American political discourse and I see no reason to amend that harsh assessment just yet. Too often all you get is name-calling and the aforementioned red team v. blue team drudgery. Then of course there are the “free market” libertarian propagandists who always show up to tell you just don’t understand economics, which they still believe is a value-free science. Then the anarchists show up to moralize and tell everyone that they are slaves and pigs, but they are secretly anarchists deep inside, praise be Bakunin. But hey, where else do anarchists exist other than the internet (or demonstrations).
It all becomes like a politicized version of the Jerry Springer show after a while. The issue at hand becomes mere background music as the ideological twits shout over one another. One wonders if any of these people are as bold in person as their internet persona suggests. I tend to doubt it.
“By the way, the comments at this article are not particularly instructive — tends to devolve into a bunch of the standard ignorant red vs. blue bashing”
This should be a standard disclaimer on most news sites or blogs, present company excluded. I have called the comments section the sewer of American political discourse and I see no reason to amend that harsh assessment yet. How often does fruitful discussion occur? How often do news sites receive decent tips that can help reporters to follow-up on stories?
The whole thing just irritates me, but I guess some people need their 15 minutes of internet hate to get by. As you mentioned, you have the red team v blue team crap, which goes nowhere fast. Then the “free market” libertarian crowd shows up to chastise everyone for not understanding (their favored version of) economics, which they assure us is a value-free science. And sooner or later the anarchists show up to moralize and tell us we’re all pigs and slaves, although deep down we’re all anarchists like them, Bakunin willing. But hey, where else does one get to hear anarchist talking points other than the internet?
It kind of becomes like a politicized version of The Jerry Springer Show. As the ideological twits shout over one another and have inane flame wars the issue at hand becomes mere background music. Aside from a few blogs like Drug War Rant, which seems to attract people who have informed themselves and really care about improving society, I’m try to avoid comments these days. They’re primarily a distraction.
I strongly disagree with that assessment. I ALWAYS read the comments. Sometimes, I’ll even read the first paragraph, jog down and read the first few comments, then go back and finish the piece.
I actually find it is more informative to find out what people are thinking about an article than to read it sometimes. You get a clear picture of the general reading, and some analysis from other perspectives. Especially where I pretty much already know where I stand on the topic and have encountered the arguments before. It’s easy to skip over the trolls and the party faithful (Huff Post is the land of the O-Bots). They aren’t bringing anything of worth to the discussion anyway.
My apologies for sending nearly the same comment twice. I thought the first one got sucked into an internet black hole, but it was save after all.
The Greens got Bree back from their child protection services.
a few thoughts come to mind… cruel and unusual, terror, torture, trauma… a few other words come to mind as well…
Interesting how U.S. drug policy always seems to prefer violating someoneâ€™s human rights as part of a package deal. But whoâ€™s violating whom when hate is really the priority? In this case, thereâ€™s a ton of research that points to maternal stress harming fetal development. Itâ€™s called maternal-stress disorder. Clueless authorities who stress out pregnant women by threatening to arrest them, or take their child away, may be guilty of fetus abuse:
So why are the real fetus abusers walking the streets of this country, instead of being in jail where they belong? No doubt about it. Itâ€™s because of the drug war.
Ganjawar and Child Protection Racketeering
Pro Life? Not even anti abortionists…
â˜›Wall Street’s Spontaneous Abortionists
â˜›GOPerversion, another Prohibition! On Women…
Ethan Nadelmann â€@ethannadelmann
The NY Times has an important story today on how drug war fanaticism terrorizes pregnant women. http://nyti.ms/HciubF