ABC warned viewers before airing a disturbing political ad during 'The View' broadcast that depicted abortions and compared the show's cohosts and other celebrities to Nazis.
    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
      18·
      1 month ago

      Hey now. Communists also prohibited abortion - specifically in Romania in the 1950s under President Nicolae Ceaușescu.

      The following thirty years saw a flood of children showing up in foster homes and orphanages. Romania became a hotbed of infant human trafficking as overseas “adoption” agencies trafficked newborn children out of the country. Women pursuing illegal abortions underwent crude and dangerous procedures which periodically ended in sterility or mortality for the pregnant woman. And the surge in uneducated, unemployed youths never grew up to provide any kind of long term dividend to the Romanian economy as Ceaușescu intended. Instead, they became the vanguard of the opposition movement (a heavily fascist one, at that) which ultimately brought down the government and ushered in years of civil war and horrific bloodshed.

      The modern Romanian state still carries the scars of a policy that put pregnancy before human decency and economic growth ahead of quality of life.

      • underisk@lemmy.ml
        9·
        1 month ago

        that you felt the need to post “but the communists!” after someone points out that Nazi’s did the same thing the people who created this ad would do is extremely telling.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
          10·
          1 month ago

          that you felt the need to post “but the communists!”

          It’s more the need to cite a well-documented instance in which an Abortion Ban ended up creating generations of human misery. The partisanship isn’t the point. It was a shit policy when the Germans did it. It was a shit policy when the Romanians did it. It was a shit policy when the Irish did it. It’s a shit policy now that the Americans are doing it.

          Any government that puts the numerical lives of its people ahead of the well-being of its people will produce a large population of dissidents as a matter of course.

          • underisk@lemmy.ml
            3·
            1 month ago

            tell me something man, if you pointed out that the south was in favor of slavery because some shithead was accusing someone of being a confederate soldier for opposing slavery, then I came along and started saying OHOHOHO DID YOU KNOW THAT ACTUALLY PLENTY OF LIBERAL REGIMES PARTICIPATED IN HISTORICAL SLAVERY SCHEMES THAT DID UNTOLD GENERATIONAL DAMAGE, what would you think of me, as a person?

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
              7·
              1 month ago

              OHOHOHO DID YOU KNOW THAT ACTUALLY PLENTY OF LIBERAL REGIMES PARTICIPATED IN HISTORICAL SLAVERY

              Largest slave market in the United States was located on Manhattan Island, thanks to a combination of the Dredd Scott decision and the Fugitive Slave Act. It was that immediate proximity to slavery which inflamed the abolitionist movement in the run up to the Civil War. And it was the burgeoning financial sector at Wall Street that allowed the slave trade to persist even after intercontinental slave trafficking had been (officially, although we still managed to turn a blind eye to a bunch of slave smuggling) prohibited.

              what would you think of me, as a person?

              Oh look, someone who knows their history. Not just some “North Side Good / South Side Bad” historical revisionist.

              • underisk@lemmy.ml
                1·
                1 month ago

                i do not think its historical revisionism to say that the South was the Bad Side in the american civil war. there may have been other motivations beyond slavery for either side but the primary disagreement was over that one pretty specific issue! i feel pretty confident saying that slavery is unequivocally bad, even if people who technically could be considered my political predecessors did it!

                and i used the example of liberal regimes specifically because I know there’s hundreds of examples of it being true, it wasn’t an attempt to paint what you said as false. it was an attempt to highlight the weird, almost non-sequitur defensive nature of the response. like someone saying that pie is good and then posting a response about how apples are actually a source of CYANIDE!!!

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  2·
                  1 month ago

                  there may have been other motivations beyond slavery

                  I pointed to slave markets in New York and you’re rolling out revanchist neo-confederate talking points.

  • Retreaux@lemmy.world
    24·
    1 month ago

    Absolutely fucking ghoulish, never heard of this clown but I hope he siphons votes from the weirdo.

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.worldEnglish
    18·
    1 month ago

    It’s weird how terms used by the right wing can become so twisted, words such as “Constitution”. Also, “freedom”, “liberty”, “patriotism”…

  • Capt. Wolf@lemmy.world
    11·
    1 month ago

    So after a bit of digging, this is not really ABC’s or the FCC’s fault. There’s an equal opportunity statute that requires networks to show paid political ads from legitimate candidates unedited and uncensored. They’re not allowed to reject them either. Obviously it’s meant to keep networks from tampering with the candidates political message and to give everyone a fair shot at campaigning, these assholes are just clearly taking advantage…

    • ThrowawayOnLemmy@lemmy.world
      15·
      1 month ago

      Ooh. This fuckin guy. Leader of the constitution party. Pretty sure Channel 5 talked with him a bit. This dude is solely focused on abortion and pushing a total ban on it. I only ever see him attacking Democrats. He tried to run an ad during the super bowl but the FCC said no because it was too graphic.

      • Chickenstalker@lemmy.world
        2·
        1 month ago

        Go investigate his family. There’s a big chance that they have had abortion and this guy is projecting to cover his guilt/sin.

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      2·
      1 month ago

      Wow, that was something very unusual. I don’t fear this changing anything now that I know that neither Ds nor Rs were involved.

    • geekwithsoul@lemm.eeEnglish
      4·
      1 month ago

      They didn’t have a choice - they’re required by law to broadcast ads from candidates that meet a certain minimum

    • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
      2·
      1 month ago

      They had disclaimers before and after explaining that they legally can’t reject political ads, which is a good thing. He’s just a rotten person with warped sensibilities.

  • SolarMonkey@slrpnk.netEnglish
    5·
    1 month ago

    Is there a link to the video (or a way to watch it, anyway) that doesn’t require signing in to YouTube? I’m not about to make an account with them for this video, but it wouldn’t play through invidious either, and I’m not sure if there are other options.

    • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.netEnglish
      4·
      1 month ago

      The best option now that google has killed invidious is FreeTube combined with the Libredirect add-on.

      • SolarMonkey@slrpnk.netEnglish
        2·
        1 month ago

        I’ll take a look, thanks.

        I don’t think I’m capable of self-hosting something like this (I was using invidious public instances), but who knows.

        • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.netEnglish
          2·
          1 month ago

          It doesn’t require any setup, at least it didn’t for me. I just installed it and it worked 😄

          • SolarMonkey@slrpnk.netEnglish
            2·
            1 month ago

            Oh, good deal, I saw there was a github thing for it which usually means it’s way beyond my capabilities 😅

            Thanks!