Tangle - Your response to my abortion pieces.

Episode Date: December 6, 2021

Every now and then, I like to put together a newsletter of reader feedback on a specific edition. I do this for a few reasons: One, I think it's really interesting to let Tangle readers see the kinds of emails and replies I get. Two, I think it's important to keep sharing the opinions and views of people who aren't me. And three, I think it's important to share those opinions even — and especially — if they are ideas I didn't think of, or don't agree with, or otherwise feel like they add something of value I wasn't providing.You can read today's newsletter here.It's the holiday season, and there are worst gifts than the gift of knowledge.Want to open new political doors to a friend or family member? Give a gift subscription to Tangle.Want to give a gift to us, the Tangle team? Become a subscriber.Want to give a more tangible gift — like a mug, hoodie, sticker, or new item of clothing? You can check out our merchandise store.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here.Our newsletter is written by Isaac Saul, edited by Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, Ari Weitzman, and produced in conjunction with Tangle’s social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo.The podcast is edited by Trevor Eichhorn, and music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.--- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tanglenews/message Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca.

From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle Podcast, a place where you get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking without all that hysterical nonsense you find everywhere else. I am your host, Isaac Saul, and my throat is feeling a little bit scratchy today, so I apologize if I don't sound as smooth and perfect as I know I sound on most days. Today we are going to do something interesting, a little bit different. I think this is the first time we've done this on the podcast, although I've done it in the newsletter a few times in the past. We're doing a reader feedback edition. This is just a collection of feedback to last week's coverage specifically on abortion. I'm going to talk about why we're

doing that in a little bit. Before we do, a few house cleaning items and then as always our quick hits. First of all, I want to issue a correction. Last Thursday, I wrote in the newsletter that Justice Elena Kagan warned about the stench on the court that would exist if its interpretation of established law simply changed based on personal preferences of the sitting justices at the time. In fact, it was not Justice Kagan. It was Justice Sonia Sotomayor who issued that warning. This is the 48th Tangle correction in its 122-week history. It's the first correction since December 1st, which capped off, unfortunately, an unusually sloppy month. My apologies. We had a few errors last month, which is more than we usually do in a single month. But, you know, they come in bunches typically for some reason. I track corrections

and I place them at the top of the podcast and our newsletter in an effort to maximize my transparency with you, the readers. OK, so that's the bad news. The good news, amazing. I don't know what to say. Thank you. Last week, we said we were going to donate 50% of all new subscription revenue and tips to Heavenly Harvest, an organization that feeds the hungry up and down the East Coast. Incredibly, so many readers stepped up either by subscribing or giving a tip that we managed to donate $1,720 directly to the cause. Thank you all so much. As many of you know, this is one of my favorite charities. I've interviewed the founder. They do really good work. The food is kind of shelf-stable meals that are delicious.

I was gifted some when I first donated them just to experience the product. I ate them happily. They were just good. Anyway, you guys continue to inspire me and the product. I ate them happily. They were just good. Anyway, you guys continue to inspire me and impress me. I'm so grateful for this community that we're building. And if you want, there's a screenshot of proof of our donation in today's newsletter, which is standard practice for me. So you can go check it out. Again, $1,720.

Thank you all so, so much. All right, with that, we are going to jump into our quick hits section. First up, Democrat Stacey Abrams announced she is running for governor in Georgia. She lost to incumbent Brian Kemp, the Republican, by 1.4 points in 2018. Number two, Bob Dole, the longtime Republican leader, presidential nominee, and former senator, has died at the age of 98. Number three, CNN anchor Chris Cuomo was fired by the network after misleading them about the role he played in helping mitigate sexual harassment allegations against his brother, former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo. Number four, parents of the 15-year-old Michigan boy who allegedly shot and killed classmates have

been charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter for failing to warn teachers about the threat and for purchasing the gun for their son. Number five, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced a first-in-the-nation vaccine mandate with a weekly testing option for all private companies in New York City. All right, that is it for our quick hits section, which brings us to today's main topic. Okay, today's topic is reader feedback. Every now and then, I like to put together a newsletter of reader feedback on a specific edition. I do this for a few reasons. One, I think it's really

interesting to let Tangle readers see the kinds of emails and replies that I get in my inbox. Two, I think it's important to keep sharing the opinions and views of people who aren't me. And three, I think it's important to share those opinions even and especially if they are ideas I didn't think of or don't agree with or otherwise feel like they add something of value that I wasn't providing. Last week, we published three pieces related to abortion. One was a history of abortion law. The other was specific to the challenge before the Supreme Court. And on Friday, we ran a subscribers-only edition from Sophie Trist, a fascinating essay where she explained her, quote, consistent life ethic. If you aren't a subscriber and didn't read it, I encourage you to go subscribe and do that. You can find it on our website.

As you can imagine, hundreds of responses came into those editions. I've chosen to publish a few below, mostly focused on Thursday's piece about the Supreme Court challenge. I've tried to choose the replies that represented the wide range of feedback we got, and I'll also include a few positive responses just to create a little bit of hope that even this isn't a topic too taboo for Tangle, even if I take an unambiguous position in my take like I did last week. Unsurprisingly, many readers asked to remain anonymous, which is a wish that I have granted. Instead of our usual right-left dichotomy, I've also tried to parse these responses between those that were pro-choice and pro-life, as the traditional nomenclature divides them, though,

as always, I encourage you to see the nuance and ambiguity in these responses as most people don't neatly fall into either side. Given that I took a pro-choice stance on Thursday in my take, I've given the pro-life side a little bit more space today. After today's piece, we'll have covered abortion in three of our last six newsletters and podcasts, which is a lot. So we'll be taking a break from the issue for a while, probably until the Supreme Court's decision comes down in the spring or summer. That's with the exception of some reader questions that I'm sure are going to come up. We'll be back to regular programming tomorrow,

but for now, I hope you enjoy today's podcast. All right, first up, we'll start with some of the feedback that I think kind of falls into the pro-choice camp. One anonymous reader said, there is no other scenario in our society in which we hold it acceptable for the state to force an individual to use their body in the defense or upholding of another person's right to life. We don't require an individual to risk themselves in an attempt to save someone caught in a dangerous scenario like an industrial accident or drowning, excepting trained professionals who have accepted that burden willingly. We would consider it abhorrent to force healthy individuals to give blood, bone marrow, kidneys, or lungs to save any of the many people who die each year from a lack of available supply. We consider it abhorrent to harvest organs from

the dead for the same purpose unless we have a clear record of their consent to do so from before their passing. Case in point, most people consider organ trafficking to be one of the most heinous crimes in the modern world. Structurally, those scenarios are extremely similar to pregnancy. There is an innocent life, which is a right to life that requires the use of another person's body in effort to stay alive. And the other person does not wish to provide that for a host of different reasons. Another anonymous reader said that they were a little disappointed that at no point in this entire description did you talk about what abortion actually is, what it actually isn't, and what birth, if you get there, looks like. It's amazing how many people don't know, including fathers.

Many people don't understand what an abortion procedure can entail. There are several options depending on the situation. And many people, including liberal women who have been pregnant, are not aware that many miscarriages end in a legal abortion to protect the mother from future medical danger. That procedure wouldn't be considered a medical emergency in that moment, but it can quickly turn into one, which is why making it only available in cases of risk to the mother poses a legal problem for women trying to prevent risk to their health. And just so we're clear on how pervasive this issue is, one in four pregnancies end in miscarriage. That's 25% of pregnancies that can result in abortion, depending on the circumstances, for a reason no other than the baby is gone.

Also, not mentioning the realities of birth while discussing abortion leaves the conversation incomplete, especially when adoption is regularly mentioned as an alternative in legal arguments. It fails to recognize that birth is not a simple or unharmful process, nor is it entirely safe. Women's bodies are literally torn apart, often ripping from their vagina to their anus. They wear diapers for incontinence and bleeding for a considerable time, and incontinence could continue throughout their life. Their breasts will produce milk, and not ejecting that milk at regular intervals, which, as I recently learned when my friend gave birth is usually tied to closeness to the baby

through an exchange of hormones, so it can be messed up without that baby present. This can result in a serious infection leading to fever and in some cases hospitalization. Additionally, over 50,000 pregnancies every year result in severe or life-threatening conditions. I know several of them personally, fortunately all of whom were white, white-collar, and had paid family leave to deal with the aftermath of their emergency. Black and brown mothers are statistically not as fortunate or safe. Everyone has a right to believe whatever they believe, but to do it with ignorance as to what the procedure entails

and what pregnancy entails for a woman is as wrong as it is pervasive. It leaves room for lies, presumptions, assumptions, and interpretation as to what it is pervasive. It leaves room for lies, presumptions, assumptions, and interpretation as to what these laws actually mean. I wish, in addition to the thorough legal description, more people sat down and explained what all this legalese is actually about. We never talk about it, and we should. An anonymous reader in Southern California said, I personally would not have had an abortion had I become pregnant before I was ready, but I also do not want to infringe my personal choice on others, and that is what we are seeing today. And yes, abortion should be choice in support of woman's full autonomy. I grew up with a mom who saw a friend die from a

botched abortion. I had a best friend who at 16 had an abortion and went on to college and become a mother of two, but if she had had that child at 16, I'm not sure that would be her life today. I also have an acquaintance who was raped by her father as a 12-year-old girl, got pregnant, and had an abortion, but did not tell her mom the truth about who the father was until she was in her 40s. These draconian laws are seriously not going to protect children like her, and just because she, as a child, had a functioning uterus does not make her ready to be a mother, and nor should any society force that upon her. I appreciate your willingness to share your opinion on this, but frankly,

I do strongly believe that this is the matter for women to decide. The fact that Congress is made up of only 26% women does not directly reflect the population made up of 50% women. Allie in Santa Fe, New Mexico said she wanted to add one more nuance to your thoughts around why lower income women will be disproportionately affected. I'm exactly 15 weeks pregnant right now, so I find these current events especially troubling and personal. My pregnancy was planned, and I couldn't be more thrilled. But if my pregnancy weren't planned, there are a lot of very realistic scenarios in which I would likely have no idea I was pregnant. I can't feel the fetus at all, and I won't be able to for five or so more weeks. My pregnancy symptoms, weight gain, insomnia,

fatigue, declining cognitive function, overwhelming sadness, and feelings have been almost identical to those of depression, of which I have a history. If I were on contraception, I would be very unlikely to think that I might be pregnant, and the time between periods might be expected depending on the contraception I was on. If I don't have good insurance and can't afford health care, I would probably not go to the doctor for these symptoms. For one, many Americans will avoid even necessary health care right now because of the cost, and second, I would probably just write off the symptoms as depression anyway. By the time I suspected I might be pregnant, it might be far past the 15-week mark, making 15 weeks itself a poor choice for picking along that nuanced gradients you mentioned to balance bodily autonomy and the state's interest to protect life.

But, like you also mentioned, the 15-week argument is probably moot anyway, since the court looks like it will overturn the constitutional protection altogether. But, if we did have to pick along the gradient, I think considering when interpregnancy is beyond doubt that a woman of any means will know she is pregnant is the only way to actually protect choice and constitutional liberty. Second, my body has already and will continue to change permanently. Regardless of who is responsible for my child after the birth, I don't see how the state forcing a person to endure nine months of pregnancy symptoms and the irreversible changes to their body could possibly be viewed as anything but a violation of their constitutional right to liberty. As you know, I'm an athlete. A huge part of who I am as a person and where I derive meaning and joy in my life comes from my participation in team sports and activities. My hips are bigger now and will continue to grow in a way that will permanently change my athletic ability for the worse. I'm uncoordinated right now. It's pretty sad and comical at the same time if you know me. Even the healthiest of pregnancies, which I'm lucky to say mine has been so far, can be nightmarish in symptoms, not to mention

everything you have already addressed like the possible severe health outcomes. I know that you mentioned a lot of this already, but just wanted to share from the perspective of someone who is 15 weeks pregnant today. I can't focus on work or really anything because this is so upsetting. The idea of the state forcing me to undergo what I am currently going through by choice feels like the most severe violation of my rights I can imagine and the most horrible of reminders that constitutional liberty in this country will very shortly not apply to women. That is, the state will very explicitly decide that it does not view women as human beings. All right, that is it for the feedback from the pro-choice side. Again,

I apologize. My voice is going a bit. I'm trying my best here. That brings us to many of the pro-life arguments I received. All right. The first one is from Therese in Valparaiso, Indiana. She said, the reason we disagree here as I am a pro-life person is because I think we have different conceptions of what the word inherent means.

In my mind, when I say all people have inherent value, I'm referring to a quality that is independent and unchangeable, meaning no circumstances or incidental qualities such as incapacitation, crime, family lineage, disability, wealth, political opinion, can affect its existence or amount. This value is equally present among all members of the human race. The inherent value is the source of what we conceptualize as human rights, the entitlement to universal respect and dignity. The government's purpose is to acknowledge, recognize, and defend these rights, which manifest as the right to vote, right to fair trial, etc. I would say the right to protection

from lethal violence is also one of these resulting rights. When a governing body does not recognize or defend these rights, it's oppression. In such a case, people still have and deserve these rights as a result of their inherent value, but the rights are being violated. Your later sentence lists off some incidental qualities such as consciousness, pain, societal value, etc., and says these qualities are not comparable between a fetus and a born person. I agree with that. However, I disagree with the. However, I disagree with the conclusion that this means these two cases are also different in inherent value and

therefore different in legal recognition. If these highly variable attributes affected the inherent value that is the source of human rights, then human rights would also be variable, but we know this is not the case. People who contribute a lot to society do not have more of a right to vote than someone who cannot work due to disability, for example. Their rights are the same because their inherent value is the same. Therefore, fetuses and born humans both have the equal right to protection from violence regardless of their incidental differences. Based on Charles Yu's award-winning book, Interior Chinatown follows the story of Willis Wu, a background character trapped in a police procedural who dreams about a world beyond Chinatown. When he inadvertently

becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages 6 months and older,

and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at flucellvax.ca. Another anonymous reader said, I think you should be cautious about following the mainstream media standards on rape and incest exceptions. While it has become popular for left-wing outlets to announce the lack of such exceptions as the top-line information for every rule and restriction, there is a world of difference between excluding these exceptions in a six-week abortion ban, which I oppose in fact, and excluding them in a 15-week ban in a state where abortions were not previously available after 16 weeks.

and a 15-week ban in a state where abortions were not previously available after 16 weeks. Many laws, like Mississippi's, are carefully crafted to avoid the need for such exceptions by allowing ample time for anyone to get a legal abortion, especially those who fall in these unfortunate categories. Like most frequently cited opinion polls on abortion, the 84% statistic you cite is not specific to the details of Mississippi's law, which, as you explained very well earlier this week, has a huge impact on the results of these sorts of polls. While popular opinion should not impact how or whether the court reads the Constitution, the question of how and whether people really feel about those things is more effectively answered at the ballot box, especially in the future if Roe is overturned. Another anonymous reader from Huntington, West Virginia wrote in to offer

their perspective on contraceptives. I will start with the emotional argument of the fact that as a young woman, I do not feel empowered by contraception whatsoever. I feel objectified by it. There are ways to avoid pregnancy when necessary without contraception, but part of the gift of womanhood is motherhood. Not everyone wants to be a mother. I understand, but we are tied to it in a way we can't control. And maybe that's a good thing. I question the recently developed baseline assumption that living selfishly is better for the human soul than living selflessly. The sexual revolution successfully divorced sex from reproduction in our minds, but not

in actuality, beginning with the social acceptance of contraception. With contraception in our minds, we should be able to have sex and not reproduce. It's a right, an expectation. It's liberating. Why? No other animal on the planet operates under those guidelines. Man's sexual appetite has been allowed to grow rampant, stripped of all its natural boundaries. Look at how women are portrayed in advertisements now, sexy and ever available for consumption. Under the philosophy of contraception, as a woman, I've gone from life-bearer to liability. I must become like a man and be liberated from my potential motherhood, which ironically is somehow considered pro-woman, but seems much more anti-woman to me. Another anonymous reader said, I still think it is odd to spend this much time discussing

something without including much discussion of what exactly it is. Similar to our ignorance on Another anonymous reader said, features of the fetus that is killed when an abortion is performed at the 20, 14, or 13-week mark. These kinds of numbers litter discussions on abortion, and I don't think most people are forming any kind of picture in their head for what is being discussed the way we do for your example of a fertilized egg. The CDC data you link to mentions that 42.3% of all abortions in 2019 were early medical abortions, and if you go the extra click for this less important fact, early medical abortions, and if you go the extra click for this less important fact, 49% were surgical. What actually happens with each of these methods? Is it paranoid that I just feel sick when I see something like that CDC page listing the stats for the second most common method of abortion, medical, while leaving off the most common, surgical? To me, it seems obvious that the only reason to do that is to manipulate the reader's impression because surgical doesn't

sound so much like the fetus evaporates in a benign puff of smoke. Nothing depresses me more about our chances as a nation than this kind of corruption of institutions to put narrative ahead of honesty. The particular it's not directly a lie character makes it worse for me because it's the sort of thing that smart people can easily justify to themselves. Another anonymous reader from North Dallas, Texas said, I am not sympathetic with the abortion for some obvious reasons. My mother had me out of wedlock after my biological father insisted on an abortion. He left my mother for not wanting to abort and I never met him. Truth is, my mother was scared of abortion. It is not an easy peasy thing and the woman suffers either way, but as a result, I had a chance to live.

I do think she suffered some shame and taunt from the family for having me out of wedlock, but eventually my family got used to me, and I don't think my mother ever regretted that she had me. Somehow, she was unable to conceive ever again, and I ended up being her only child. Thus, I am not sympathetic with abortion, but I agree with you that there is no easy fix. Thus, I am not sympathetic with abortion, but I agree with you that there is no easy fix. I believe that abortion existed and will exist whether it is done legally or illegally or with the use of homemade remedies. What the government does by making abortion illegal is recognizing the value of the fetus. It would not in any way diminish abortions, but there are ways of minimizing it, difficult ways if we are willing to do it as a country.

Audrey from Cambridge, Massachusetts said, I do have a few issues with what you said in your take today, specifically with your belief in there being a gradient of life. Certainly the fetus does not have the same inherent value as a born person, including the fetus's mother. That's why the popular thought experiment about having to save either a petri dish of fertilized eggs or a five-year-old obviously should be answered by saving the five-year-old. However, where we disagree is what factors determine life. I happen to believe that consciousness, sense of pain, societal value, personality, self-determination, or worth have nothing to do with whether a person is living or not. In my view, a person is living at the moment of conception because at that point a zygote is created that has a unique set of human

DNA and is showing the commonly agreed upon signs of life in an organism, namely cell growth and specialization. As such, I fundamentally disagree with the notion that at some point the woman's personal choice should be valued over the life of the fetus. I don't think at any point personal choice and convenience take precedence over life itself. I might be convinced of abortions to save the life of the mother, at least in cases where preterm delivery is not a viable option. This is an exception that I'm still weighing for myself. But abortions for any other reason ultimately conflict with life as the superseding right, at least in my eyes. Finally, a reader named Alan wrote in and said, I do not think that the federal government has a constitutional leg to stand on. The federal government should leave it to each state to enact laws regarding access to abortion.

I feel that a woman should have the right to safe health care as much as a man does, but I dare to say that most abortions have nothing to do with health and more with lifestyle. I have always told my sons, if you are not ready to raise a child, don't have sex, whether they did or did not is anyone's guess. My biggest problem with both sides is that they pick and choose their stance on the value of life. Pro-choicers will take a stance for abortion and against vaccine mandates and the death penalty and use the same argument that the pro-lifers do except opposite sides. One will say abortion should be safe and available to all and don't kill a criminal, and the other will say kill the criminal but don't abort a fetus. One will say

you must get vaccinated and my body, my choice, and the other don't make me do anything to my body that I don't choose to do but let me make choices whether you get an abortion or not. The death penalty should be brought back but abortions are murder. The death penalty is murder but abortion is not. All right, so that is it for the reader feedback in today's edition. Thank you all, as always, for writing in. I got hundreds of responses. These are literally just a few.

Many were equally or even more compelling, but some people didn't want their replies to be published and others just didn't respond to me in time to allow me to. So I just want to say thanks again. It was a lot to think about and a lot to chew on. All right, before we go and give you a have a nice day section,

I want to just remind you that it's the holiday season and there are worse gifts to give than the gift of knowledge. If you want to open new political doors to a friend or family, you can give a gift subscription to Tangle. There's a link in today's newsletter. If you want to give us a gift, the Tangle team, you can become a subscriber. If you're not already, just become a subscriber yourself. Read Tangle.com backslash membership. If you want to give a more tangible gift, like a mug or hoodie, sticker, a new item of clothing, we have a merchandise store. Not everybody knows this, but we do. It's awesome. Our logo is very sweet, if I don't say so myself. We have

tons of cool swag in there. You can buy something, great stocking stuffers, new hoodie, t-shirt, whatever, check out our merchandise store. The link is in the newsletter and in today's episode description. All right, that brings us to our have a nice day story. And this one, guess what? It's actually some reader feedback. So all the feedback to last week's coverage was not critical. In fact, I was surprised to see just how many positive replies came in, even from folks who openly disagreed with where I landed on what my personal position was. To show that this conversation is possible, I just wanted to share a few of those responses as our Have a Nice Day story today. First up, Tyler from Kentucky said,

I am someone who was adopted from birth into a completely separate family from my biological parents as a result of a pregnancy between two college students. Every time this topic comes up and I hear the discourse surrounding it, I feel a heavy lump in my chest and the thought of I could have been one of those aborted fetuses creeps to the front of my mind. As a result, while I have drifted more left in many regards as I've read, grown, and learned and considered myself very centrist for American politics, this is a topic I've never wavered or moved on. So, in full disclosure, when I read your tweet stating you were announcing your stance as pro-choice, I was prepared to criticize this newsletter. That said, I honestly can't do so. This was a very well-balanced, fair, and thought-provoking newsletter that does as good a job as I can imagine tackling both sides on the issue and clearly stating an independent opinion. My personal stance on the topic of being very

staunchly pro-life comes from that personal connection mentioned above, but also from a very religious viewpoint. I don't plan to debate any points you make or bring up any items of my own for you to refute. I don't see any value in that. This is truly a topic in my mind that falls under a category of there are extremely intelligent, scholarly, and thoughtful people who have ended up on both sides of this divide. Therefore, any person's stance is probably 85% a result of their own personally held beliefs. Meanwhile, Nate from Cannon City, Colorado said, thank you for writing on this topic. I appreciate your willingness to understand both sides on this issue. I'm sure it also feels a

little dangerous to your business as it is easy to tick people off and they currently may unsubscribe. I would call myself pro-life, but that doesn't change my appreciation for Tangle. You are not the final answer for me. I am responsible to decide what I believe. I doubt that I would be able to articulate anything pro-life that would change many people's minds. From my perspective, followers of Jesus should be most concerned about this issue, and not only abortion, but also the other things you mentioned, such as families struggling, women unable to make it through pregnancy for various issues, fatherless homes, etc. Followers of Jesus, motivated by true love and grace, taking action in significant ways is what

needs to happen, not changing laws. Again, thank you for tackling this difficult subject and others. Your commitment to wading through difficult issues is one of the main reasons I recommend Tangle to family and friends. Finally, last but not least, Noah from Portland, Oregon said, this stood out to me as a remarkably insightful piece. I especially appreciated your take. It is honest and fair. I am pro-life. I also take all of your criticisms and concerns about what the future after Roe looks like seriously. The way that richer women will still be able to procure abortions reminds me of how so many rules and policies work, affecting the most vulnerable without harming or impeding the most powerful

in any meaningful way. I don't have a solution to this. I simply recognize the problem too. don't have a solution to this, I simply recognize the problem too. All right, everybody, that is it for today's podcast. Once again, thank you guys all so much. I just want to say for the second or third time, this was a really difficult issue for me to cover over the last week. It's a scary issue to write about because I know people feel so strongly. And I know I have some pretty well-defined kind of quote-unquote partisan beliefs on one side, but really appreciate everybody coming on this journey with me. I think we are probably going to take a break

from this topic for a little bit, mostly because I try and diversify the newsletter and cover all sorts of different stuff. And we've given this a lot of coverage in the last week. But again, I really appreciate how everybody handled themselves throughout this. And it just, yeah, it makes me super grateful for this community. All right.

So that's it. And we'll be back tomorrow with a standard newsletter, unless something crazy happens between now and then. So I'm looking forward to it. See you then. Our newsletter is written by Isaac Saul, edited by edited by bailey saul sean brady ari weitzman and produced in conjunction with tangle's social media manager magdalena bakova who also helped create our logo the podcast is edited by trevor eichhorn and music for the podcast was produced

by diet 75 for more from tangle subscribe to our newsletter or check out our content archives at www.readtangle.com. We'll see you next time. When he inadvertently becomes a witness to a crime, Willis begins to unravel a criminal web, his family's buried history, and what it feels like to be in the spotlight. Interior Chinatown is streaming November 19th, only on Disney+. The flu remains a serious disease. Last season, over 102,000 influenza cases have been reported across Canada, which is nearly double the historic average of 52,000 cases. What can you do this flu season? Talk to your pharmacist or doctor about getting a flu shot. Consider FluCellVax Quad and help protect yourself

from the flu. It's the first cell-based flu vaccine authorized in Canada for ages six months and older, and it may be available for free in your province. Side effects and allergic reactions can occur, and 100% protection is not guaranteed. Learn more at FluCellVax.ca.