The senator did not seem to understand that the ruling on embryos would lead to fewer children being born, not more.

One of the most maddening aspects of the Republican plot to control women’s bodies is that, in many cases, these people couldn’t pass a ninth-grade biology class (and oftentimes, it’s more like fifth grade). Yes, from claiming an ectopic pregnancy can be reimplanted to suggesting that the anatomy of a human female is no different from that of, say, a dog or a horse, the conservatives trying to take away reproductive rights and bodily autonomy often have no idea what the f–k they’re talking about. And Alabama senator Tommy Tuberville is obviously no exception.

When asked on Thursday if he had “a reaction to the Alabama Supreme Court ruling on the fact that embryos are children,” Tuberville said, “Yeah, I was all for it. We need to have more kids, we need to have an opportunity to do that, and I thought this was the right thing to do.” Informed that IVF is a method by which people are able to have children when they otherwise could not, and that some clinics have paused the procedure as a result of the ruling, Tuberville responded, “Well, that’s for another conversation. We need more kids. We need people to have the opportunity to have kids.”

After another reporter asked what he had to “say to the women right now in Alabama who no longer have access to IVF, and will not, as a result of this ruling,” a clearly stumped Tuberville answered: “That’s a hard one. It really is. Really hard. ’Cause, again, you want people to have that opportunity…. We need more kids.”

  • qarbone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    There needs to be a “federal tutor” position that collates, issues, and grades tests given to the idiots voting on these laws. If you fail, your vote doesn’t count.

    No, a senator shouldn’t have to know differential calculus nor a govenor, endocrinology. But they should be able to source people who can supply them with the right answers.

    • Chef@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      9 months ago

      What you are describing was the original definition of “lobbyist.” They were supposed to be experts from their field who would assist and inform legislators in crafting related laws and regulations.

      What they became was a legalized bribery machine.

      • qarbone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Ah, there we go. I was sure it would be corrupted in some way to be shitty. I was banking on bullshit complaints about the nature of correctness, whenever some idiot failed the test. But buying it out directly is smarter.

    • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      They have access to such people any time they want. The problem is that experts never seem to tell them what they want to here.

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      While I understand where the sentiment is coming from, the country has a really racist history with tying voting to tests. Literacy tests were illegally used to stop black people from voting in the wake of the civil war, because black people were (at the time) fresh out of slavery and largely illiterate.

      Black people had recently been given the right to vote, but states went “ah but you need to either own land (which was only white people, because the freshly freed slaves couldn’t afford to buy land,) or pass a written test (which was designed so literate white people could pass, but illiterate black people couldn’t) first.” It was a blatant way to disenfranchise the new black voters and prevent them from having a voice and representation in congress.