Three plaintiffs testified about the trauma they experienced carrying nonviable pregnancies.

  • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t believe a woman aborting a fetus is ending it’s life any more than refusing to feed someone starving on the street.

    Wouldn’t it be more akin to feeding your own 2 month old? Do you think parents have an obligation to feed their child?

    Awful analogy. Your intention in softball is to hit the ball.

    In my scenario, I clearly didn’t.

    here are 175,000,000+ women in this country. 0.1% of that is 175,000. That’s a lot of women you’re saying intentionally got pregnant.

    The way the %'s work with contraceptives is if someone is consistently sexually active and reasonable pregnancy age. Simply taking a % of total women in the united states is a huge misstep in your calculation. Woman past the age of 40 have 1/6 of the chance of pregnancy as a 30 YO, is it fair to represent the 175m woman as prime pregnancy age? only 65m are between age 15-44. 30% of people haven’t had sex in the last year. So right off the bat, you drop 175m women to some 40m. It would reduce further if you included women who don’t have consistent sexual activity.

    If you have a good argument, you don’t need to misrepresent facts.

    You say you believe in having exceptions for specific cases like rape. I’m guessing you would put nonviable pregnancies in there too. The thing is, almost every single abortion performed fits into an exception category.

    According to some quick sources I googled, only 12% of abortions are because of health complications.

    Okay, but that argument isn’t in a vacuum. By forcing the decision, you’re choosing which life you respect more.

    Once again, the vast majority of abortions are ‘choosing between the life of the mother and kid’ - it’s simply that the baby is ‘undesirable’ to the mother. I don’t think killing my twin brother simply because I don’t desire him is a morally acceptable situation.

    Then why aren’t republicans fighting to stop people pulling the plug on life support?

    Because of medical POA’s, or other legally recognizable authority given by the person on life support, to another individual. I’ve given my parents the right to decide what happens to me in such an event. A baby doesn’t given that consent, to my knowledge.

    Banning abortions with exceptions is already a won battle.

    It’s clearly not. In some states, women can get abortions freely until birth. To some that matters, to me I see it as a states rights issue and they can have that if they’d like.

    No republican is talking about…

    I agree. there are a billion issues we can talk about and I think they’re too stuck on stuff like abortion and would like them to focus on other problems too. That doesn’t change the fact that me being pro-life doesn’t mean i simply want to enslave women.

    • Shikadi@wirebase.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Damn it Lemmy deleted my reply.

      I had a whole lot to say, but I’ll just reply to the last point, at this point we’re disagreeing on the same things on repeat anyway.

      I agree. there are a billion issues we can talk about and I think they’re too stuck on stuff like abortion and would like them to focus on other problems too. That doesn’t change the fact that me being pro-life doesn’t mean i simply want to enslave women.

      I wouldn’t go as far as saying slavery, especially since we do have forced prison labor protected by the constitution. But it is stripping women of many of their rights. I don’t think holding pro-life beliefs is a bad thing, or makes you a bad person. I do think holding the belief that the government should enforce your religious beliefs on others is pretty awful though. I’m making the assumption that it’s religious, because I have never heard of someone thinking a fetus is a human before it has a brain who wasn’t also religious. Apologies if I’m wrong on that. But I firmly, strongly, without a doubt believe that a woman should have the right to make the choice for herself, and that your beliefs shouldn’t prevent her from having her own beliefs, or her doctors from having their own beliefs.

      I realized something recently, too. Conservatives aren’t anti-government like they claim they are. They’re anti “not-their-government”. Conservatives don’t care if state governments stomp all over the constitution, they only care if the Federal government does. As a leftist, I don’t want any government stepping on anyone’s rights, state or Federal, and I believe the rights guaranteed by the constitution are above state law.

      • MasterOBee Master/King@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Dang I’ve had that a few times, it sucks. I thought we actually were getting a bit closer.

        I responded to a lot of your points with statistics, and other solid arguments, I don’t thinbk it’s fair to continue a convo at this point where my criticisms to your points are all ignored now (due to a deleted comment, not blaming you), and instead reducing the conversation to that very last subjective point.

            • Shikadi@wirebase.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              My Lemmy instance has been down for like a week

              Wouldn’t it be more akin to feeding your own 2 month old? Do you think parents have an obligation to feed their child?

              I wouldn’t say that, because there’s a guardianship responsibility there. When the choice has been made to have a child, there is legal responsibility.

              In my scenario, I clearly didn’t.

              I still don’t get the analogy. People have sex to have sex, not to get pregnant. Animals have sex too, and they’re likely unaware of the consequences. It’s natural. It feels good. It brings people closer together. If you’re batting at softball and don’t want to hit the ball, swing somewhere random?

              The way the %'s work with contraceptives is if someone is consistently sexually active and reasonable pregnancy age. Simply taking a % of total women in the united states is a huge misstep in your calculation. Woman past the age of 40 have 1/6 of the chance of pregnancy as a 30 YO, is it fair to represent the 175m woman as prime pregnancy age? only 65m are between age 15-44. 30% of people haven’t had sex in the last year. So right off the bat, you drop 175m women to some 40m. It would reduce further if you included women who don’t have consistent sexual activity.

              I used simple numbers out of laziness/simplicity. But you’ve also simplified your numbers. The probability applies to every time birth control is used, not just how many people use it. So let’s say it’s 30,000,000 instead of 175,000,000. If all of them had sex with protection exactly once you would be taking away the rights of 30,000 women. Average sex frequency is about once a week, which boosts that number to 1,560,000. Let’s say the average is heavily skewed, cut the number in half, every year you’re taking the choice away from 780,000 women who did not intentionally get pregnant.

              According to some quick sources I googled, only 12% of abortions are because of health complications.

              Okay, but that argument isn’t in a vacuum. By forcing the decision, you’re choosing which life you respect more.
              

              Once again, the vast majority of abortions are ‘choosing between the life of the mother and kid’ - it’s simply that the baby is ‘undesirable’ to the mother. I don’t think killing my twin brother simply because I don’t desire him is a morally acceptable situation.

              If the mother doesn’t have the means to take care of the kid, that kid is going to have an awful life, and so is the mother. If there is a man supporting the woman and he’s threatening to leave, it’s an even worse situation. You act as if the choice is as simple as “Oh, I don’t really feel like having a kid right now” but in reality it’s "Do I want a chance to live a comfortable life with food and housing, or do I want to bring a baby into the world right now and be struggling for the rest of my life, both to support the baby, take care of the baby, and raise it. Growing up in poverty fucking sucks, because Republicans keep gutting aid to these people. Your take on “It’s simply that the baby is ‘undesirable’ to the mother” is an incredible over simplification that leads me to believe you’re either affluent or have no idea what it takes to raise a child.

              It’s clearly not. In some states, women can get abortions freely until birth. To some that matters, to me I see it as a states rights issue and they can have that if they’d like.

              I was surprised to find that there are states that don’t have term limits. My personal position is the government doesn’t have any business interfering with this, so it’s not a state right one way or the other. People used to also debate the death penalty as a state right, and many republicans said “The federal government should ban abortions” while simultaneously saying “States should be allowed to choose the death penalty”. I’m not saying you feel that way, but I strongly believe it’s not any of your business to choose what decision a doctor and a patient make about their own lives, and it goes against everything conservatives claim they stand for.

              No republican is talking about…
              

              I agree. there are a billion issues we can talk about and I think they’re too stuck on stuff like abortion and would like them to focus on other problems too. That doesn’t change the fact that me being pro-life doesn’t mean i simply want to enslave women.

              I already replied to this in the previous comment