Support us on Patreon to keep GamingOnLinux alive. This ensures all of our main content remains free for everyone with no article paywalls. Just good, fresh content! Alternatively, you can donate through PayPal, Liberapay or Buy us a Coffee. You can also buy games using our partner links for GOG and Humble Store.

A second bundle (yes there's two) supporting people in the USA following the overturning of Roe v. Wade is live on itch.io with the Worthy of Better, Stronger Together for Reproductive Rights bundle. The other is the Indie Bundle for Abortion Funds covered in a previous article.

June 24th, 2022 was a harrowing day for civil liberties. In the United States, basic human rights are being stripped away. It is a stark reminder that even after 50 years of legal protection, equality can be so easily lost. To say nothing of the dangerous precedent this decision sets for other civil rights protections, we believe that the right for a person to pursue safe and legal abortions is more than enough reason to stand up and take action. This decision does not only effect those capable of becoming pregnant. It is a determination of what rights we as a society choose to hold sacred. It is a question of  who is deemed worthy of protecting. The fabric of our society is woven by every single member, to erode a single thread unravels us all. We must all take a stand and demand that our rights and bodily autonomy are federally recognized

This is a charity bundle as well with all proceeds being split between these two charities:

You can pay $10 (or more) to support it and gain access to 169 different items spread across games, tools and more including some gems like:

  • The Away Team
  • Aground
  • Not Actually A DOS Game
  • Sally Face

The bundle is up for the next 11 days.

Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
21 Likes
We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. We are currently affiliated with GOG and Humble Store. See more here.
About the author -
author picture
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly came back to check on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly.
See more from me
49 comments
Page: «5/5
  Go to:

tonyrh 6 Jul
Reading the posts above made my head hurt.


Last edited by scaine on 6 July 2022 at 6:04 pm UTC
Quoting: TherinSWell, here.

Quoted from: https://www.healthline.com/health/when-does-a-fetus-develop-a-brain#anatomy

Around week 5, your baby’s brain, spinal cord, and heart begin to develop. Your baby’s brain is part of the central nervous system, which also houses the spinal cord. There are three key components of a baby’s brain to consider. These include:

Cerebrum: Thinking, remembering, and feeling occurs in this part of the brain.
Cerebellum: This part of the brain is responsible for motor control, which allows the baby to move their arms and legs, among other things.
Brain stem: Keeping the body alive is the primary role of the brain stem. This includes breathing, heartbeat, and blood pressure.
/end quote

It looks like the argument about the point at which a baby is considered alive is after the 5 week mark, which is about 1 week after pregnancy symptoms develop (I think. I'll never have children so I don't pay attention to that).
This could be a serious argument. But it is misleading. Yes, pieces of the brain do exist at this point. But they are not functioning. They do gradually start to from this point, but function begins in the brain stem, which is not a site of consciousness; early fetal movement is caused by brain stem activity. Front brain stuff doesn't start to be active until quite late.

Of course, as I said before, one could argue about this. People could, for instance, argue with abortion providers or with women who need abortions. But the TherinS of the world instead want to jail them. They figure that while Conservatives can make up their minds about this, women needing abortions cannot, they should be ruled by Conservatives. Because that's freedom.
denyasis 6 Jul
Quoting: scaine
Quoting: SalvatosAnd just like that, another debate is aborted without consideration for its potential because someone didn't feel like carrying it on

Debate?? This is just people spewing opinion. No-one is going to change minds on this stuff. Not only isn't this place to do it, I know that words won't change people's blinkered opinions on this stuff.

I mean, half the replies I started reading, thought "christ on a stick", skimmed the rest for personal attacks, then tried to forget. Everyone who has access to this site... they're all (myself included) so unbelievably privileged, we have no right to voice our opinions on this subject. We lack the context and (hopefully) life experience of being able to contribute to this "debate".

Thank you for moderating this. I agree no one is going to change their mind on this from this conversation alone, but the cumulative effect of these conversations all over do have an impact as does seeing people who are (likely) not affected at all by this standing up for those that are; it can mean a lot for others in this community.

Thank you again for moderating it.
Salvatos 6 Jul
Quoting: scaineEveryone who has access to this site... they're all (myself included) so unbelievably privileged, we have no right to voice our opinions on this subject. We lack the context and (hopefully) life experience of being able to contribute to this "debate".
Only people without Internet access can have opinions on abortion or politics?
scaine 6 Jul
View PC info
  • Contributing Editor
  • Mega Supporter
Quoting: Salvatos
Quoting: scaineEveryone who has access to this site... they're all (myself included) so unbelievably privileged, we have no right to voice our opinions on this subject. We lack the context and (hopefully) life experience of being able to contribute to this "debate".
Only people without Internet access can have opinions on abortion or politics?

Ah, is that what I said? Not really, but you're right, it was poorly worded. I was suggesting that this law change will affect the least privileged people. Those with no recourse. People so far from our existence that it's crass to have strong views about "what it must be like" to have this change forced.upon them.

Hopefully that's a clearer explanation of what I was trying to say.


Last edited by scaine on 6 July 2022 at 6:08 pm UTC
F.Ultra 6 Jul
View PC info
  • Supporter
Quoting: denyasis
Quoting: F.Ultra
Quoting: TherinS
Quoting: GBGamesAnd yet the rhetoric keeps getting repeated, and it sounds so innocent and earnestly about freedom when in fact it is often double-speak for driving the opposite outcome.

In a country that claims to value freedom as a whole, it makes no sense to say "And we'll turn it to the states to let the people decide if YOU get to have the same freedoms." We, in fact, tried that, and it turned out to be a terrible idea.

Unfortunately, that is the POINT of free states allowing its citizens to vote how they want thier state run, within the confines of some basic rules set in place at a Federal level. No one is being forced to remain in thier state (there's 48 easy to travel to) or being prevented from traveling to another state.

If one city decides jaywalking is legal and another decides its punishable by jail time, then don't jaywalk in the illegal areas. Nothing is keeping you from walking all you want, but jaywalking is viewed differently in the two cities. If the population of one city wants to make jaywalking legal, then vote into office the officials who will make that legal.

This decision is, in SPIRIT, no different than the example of jaywalking. The people can now vote for/against it as they wish and majority rules.

So hypothetically, what about repealing the second amendment and let each state decide on guns, gun control and even total gun ban?

Up until the most recent Supreme Court Decision, gun control was largely left up to local jurisdictions. Even down to the city level. Some cities banned handguns. Others required registration of firearms or set rules of the discharge if guns. States still set age restrictions, prohibitions, carry requirements, and licensing. What's legal in one city is not in another with regards to guns. If you have a license to carry in your state, it does not mean another state will honor it. If you are allowed to carry in your state without a license, you'll still need one to carry in a state that has a license requirement.

...Not confusing at all....

Over the last 20+ years, a lot of restrictions have been removed, often by courts or legislatures, but it's still very much locally controlled. The most recent decision combined with the ideological makeup of the court does throw into question how many of those regulations will still exist in the future, but for now, each state can regulate guns independently to some extent.


Sorry for the double post.

To some extent yes, but I'm talking total control. AKA allow all the blue states (and some more) to 100% outlaw guns and enforce extreme border checks to make sure that no gun from "allow states" could flow through. Just curious how the "states rights" advocates would stand behind that.

But it's quite moot anyway since we all know that once the GOP gets majority control and a new president the whole issue of states rights will be dropped like a hot potato and abortions will be outlawed on a federal level. That have been their stated goal since long ago and all the talk about "states rights" right now is only empty semantics.
Quoting: F.Ultra
Quoting: denyasis
Quoting: F.Ultra
Quoting: TherinS
Quoting: GBGamesAnd yet the rhetoric keeps getting repeated, and it sounds so innocent and earnestly about freedom when in fact it is often double-speak for driving the opposite outcome.

In a country that claims to value freedom as a whole, it makes no sense to say "And we'll turn it to the states to let the people decide if YOU get to have the same freedoms." We, in fact, tried that, and it turned out to be a terrible idea.

Unfortunately, that is the POINT of free states allowing its citizens to vote how they want thier state run, within the confines of some basic rules set in place at a Federal level. No one is being forced to remain in thier state (there's 48 easy to travel to) or being prevented from traveling to another state.

If one city decides jaywalking is legal and another decides its punishable by jail time, then don't jaywalk in the illegal areas. Nothing is keeping you from walking all you want, but jaywalking is viewed differently in the two cities. If the population of one city wants to make jaywalking legal, then vote into office the officials who will make that legal.

This decision is, in SPIRIT, no different than the example of jaywalking. The people can now vote for/against it as they wish and majority rules.

So hypothetically, what about repealing the second amendment and let each state decide on guns, gun control and even total gun ban?

Up until the most recent Supreme Court Decision, gun control was largely left up to local jurisdictions. Even down to the city level. Some cities banned handguns. Others required registration of firearms or set rules of the discharge if guns. States still set age restrictions, prohibitions, carry requirements, and licensing. What's legal in one city is not in another with regards to guns. If you have a license to carry in your state, it does not mean another state will honor it. If you are allowed to carry in your state without a license, you'll still need one to carry in a state that has a license requirement.

...Not confusing at all....

Over the last 20+ years, a lot of restrictions have been removed, often by courts or legislatures, but it's still very much locally controlled. The most recent decision combined with the ideological makeup of the court does throw into question how many of those regulations will still exist in the future, but for now, each state can regulate guns independently to some extent.


Sorry for the double post.

To some extent yes, but I'm talking total control. AKA allow all the blue states (and some more) to 100% outlaw guns and enforce extreme border checks to make sure that no gun from "allow states" could flow through. Just curious how the "states rights" advocates would stand behind that.
I saw a similar suggestion recently: All those states should remove tax exempt status from churches, and see how enthusiastic "states' rights" advocates were about that.
Salvatos 7 Jul
Quoting: scaine
Quoting: Salvatos
Quoting: scaineEveryone who has access to this site... they're all (myself included) so unbelievably privileged, we have no right to voice our opinions on this subject. We lack the context and (hopefully) life experience of being able to contribute to this "debate".
Only people without Internet access can have opinions on abortion or politics?

Ah, is that what I said? Not really, but you're right, it was poorly worded. I was suggesting that this law change will affect the least privileged people. Those with no recourse. People so far from our existence that it's crass to have strong views about "what it must be like" to have this change forced.upon them.

Hopefully that's a clearer explanation of what I was trying to say.
Yes, thank you. I still feel like that's a broad assumption to make about everyone who visits the site, because even lower middle class people could have a very challenging time e.g. taking time off work to travel to another state or country to get the necessary procedures, not to mention the social fallout, especially in states that offer bounties for intel on women who get abortions.
F.Ultra 7 Jul
View PC info
  • Supporter
Quoting: Salvatos
Quoting: scaine
Quoting: Salvatos
Quoting: scaineEveryone who has access to this site... they're all (myself included) so unbelievably privileged, we have no right to voice our opinions on this subject. We lack the context and (hopefully) life experience of being able to contribute to this "debate".
Only people without Internet access can have opinions on abortion or politics?

Ah, is that what I said? Not really, but you're right, it was poorly worded. I was suggesting that this law change will affect the least privileged people. Those with no recourse. People so far from our existence that it's crass to have strong views about "what it must be like" to have this change forced.upon them.

Hopefully that's a clearer explanation of what I was trying to say.
Yes, thank you. I still feel like that's a broad assumption to make about everyone who visits the site, because even lower middle class people could have a very challenging time e.g. taking time off work to travel to another state or country to get the necessary procedures, not to mention the social fallout, especially in states that offer bounties for intel on women who get abortions.

It can get way worse than "social fallout". In Texas there is "Texas Senate Bill 8" that allows any private citizen in Texas to sue anyone who may have helped facilitate an abortion.

And

QuoteThe National Association of Christian Lawmakers, an antiabortion organization led by Republican state legislators, has begun working with the authors of the Texas abortion ban to explore model legislation that would restrict people from crossing state lines for abortions, said Texas state representative Tom Oliverson (R), the charter chair of the group’s national legislative council.

Now the Biden administration have said that they would fight any such attempts since it would violate the federal interstate commerce rights, and that is probably why they have moved on to instead allow private citizens to make civil suits since that would no longer be the state violating the interstate commerce rights.
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Reward Tiers: Patreon. Plain Donations: Liberapay or PayPal.

This ensures all of our main content remains totally free for everyone with no article paywalls. We also don't have tons of adverts, there's also no tracking and we respect your privacy. Just good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
Login / Register

Or login with...
Sign in with Steam Sign in with Twitter Sign in with Google
Social logins require cookies to stay logged in.