And they ripped out funding for pediatric cancer research. $250 million.... or around 0.05% of president Musk's net worth. Why do repubs hate kids with cancer?
Yeah, those people living in the (checks notes) mountains in (checks notes again) inland North Carolina knew the risks of not getting Hurricane insurance!
Why can't the government take care of it's people instead of making them rely on private insurance? It's the government. They should be doing things like taking care of their citizens during times of crisis.
They want to strip away everything that reduces infant mortality, so that people start having more kids again since so many of them will die young.
Then later they give it back, and since they already took away the right to abortion... Boom, population explosion and a bunch of poor kids are born to later be exploited in factories and wars.
You already know that in an abortion, no one is typically killing the fetus (which btw is less of a human than a chicken egg is human), they're just removing it from the body it's parasiting off of. Not the mother's fault it can't survive, and I'm pretty sure you're for curing cancer or tape worm which also contain more human dna than a fetus does.
Besides, in many cases the fetus is already dead or terminal anyway.
And even if this was codified under law as murder, it wouldn't be the mother doing it, but a licensed professional, much like police, soldiers or wardens.
Thats's a lot of mental gymnastics to insert yourself into someone's health care and sex life. That's kind of weird...
Republicans have spread this myth that women use abortion like birth control. Just like the myth of the black welfare Queen, spitting out kids just to draw a check. It's all bullshit and they know it, they just hate poor people.
Okay, I don't agree with the emotional concept that a fetus is a person innately, but I can at least understand where that type of thinking comes from. Claiming it's a fully-developed human is just demonstrably wrong. You're entitled to your opinion, but feelings aren't facts. I sincerely hope this is a sad attempt at trolling.
This isn't feelings, it's science buddy
What YOU'RE saying is opinion & your "opinion" can also be applied on comatose people as well
Next time, curb your gaslighting & try Family planning
Claims science, states no actual science, strawmans up an example that isn't related to the original in any way. claims gaslighting with no actual reference to gaslighting behavior.
No slurs or personal attacks, but i feel like you're going for the subtle approach so you probably don't need those right now.
Hmm, so this is up there, i feel like it's missing something though, can't quite place what, but i'll keep an eye on the replies in case i spot it.
Anyway, 8/10 shitpost, good job, no notes.
While i have you, it sounds like you are a person familiar with how science works and will give me an actual answer rather than deflect.
What is your solution for fetal anomalies that will inevitably lead to stillbirth or death in the first few hours of life? What is your solution for pregnancy abnormalities that put the life of the mother at serious risk? What is your solution for women who are desperately trying to escape monstrously abusive relationships that got pregnant from marital rape or coercion?
I feel like you're expecting a rational discourse with someone who so far has gone with "BaBy MurDerErS" and "YEah,bUt SciEnCe is On My sIDe" ( without actually stating how ).
They aren't addressing unwanted pregnancies, medical complication, sexual assault and things outside their carefully crafted headcannon, on purpose.
You're gonna get handwaving at best, probably some strawman example, righteous indignation with no explained basis perhaps a personal attack.
I would not at all be surprised if they were bordering on the belief that victims of sexual assault can just "decide" to not get pregnant.
That's the level of critical thinking you're working with here, i'd manage my expectations if i were you.
I unfortunately attend a religious university for medical school (not by choice, mind you), so I am quite familiar with the mindset displayed here from people with substantially better education.
Proper screening & Gene therapy & more funding into pediatrics
Also, If the mother is at risk then maybe a point could be made, but let's agree to be honest here
You're not talking about those rare cases are you
As for rape & coercion, Women have welfare & you should be seeking to punish the criminal & not kill an innocent child
Oh & in many countries that are not US, we have Pre-Natal protections
Screening means termination of non viable fetuses or carrying to stillbirth. Gene therapy is only available for one disease in humans and it isn't a fetal anomaly. There are malformations that are not compatible with life that are random chance and not something you can predict through genetic analysis.
In America, the leading cause of death of pregnant women is intimate partner homicide. The 2 most lethal times in an abusive relationship are when the victim is trying to leave or the victim is pregnant.
Many women are pressured or coerced into unprotected sex by male partners and most courts wouldn't prosecute those cases as rape because the woman eventually "consented" under browbeating and duress.
The majority of abortions are sought by women who already have children and are not able to afford or to care for another child and the pregnancy was unplanned. Many other abortions are for serious health problems with the mother or the fetus. Functionally no one is getting abortions as birth control or "recreationally". It is an unpleasant procedure and women who go through with it do so for important, valid reasons, and your beliefs have no place getting between a woman and the physician caring for her.
A fetus is objectively not fully formed. What do you think its doing in the womb for all those months, just hanging out? When abortions happen its just a bundle of cells that cant think, breathe, or live on its own.
Cancer is a bunch of cells. By your logic it is immoral to treat cancer. Cancer has human DNA. Cancer can also live independent of the human that spawned it.
Then how come they can't survive without leeching off a host? 80% of pregnancies spontaneously end in miscarriage. That doesn't sound viable or fully developed to me. If it could survive outside the womb, you'd have a point. But it can't, so you don't.
You know who was actually fully-developed? All the women who have died due to pregnancy complications thanks to draconic laws that take away their rights over their own bodies. I'll hold you responsible for murdering them.
You clearly don't know biology do you & are you capable of sustaining yourself I you were left in a jungle ?
BTW, it's around 13.5 percent but regardless it's not 80% (that's a lie)
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2020)
National Center for Health Statistics. (1999). Trends in Pregnancies and Pregnancy Rates.
JAMA Network. (2020)
I hold you responsible for the billions of deaths of unborn children, because of your stupidity & selfishness & inhumanity
BTW, it's around 13.5 percent but regardless it's not 80% (that's a lie)
Sure, if you only measure after 6 weeks.
For women of reproductive age, losses between implantation and clinical recognition are approximately 10–25%. Loss from implantation to birth is approximately one third [39, 46, 48, 49].
A recent re-analysis [39] of data from three studies [46, 48, 49] concluded that, in normal healthy women, 10–40% is a plausible range for pre-implantation embryo loss and overall pregnancy loss from fertilisation to birth is approximately 40–60%.
Says the person claiming a fetus is a fully developed human.
are you capable of sustaining yourself I you were left in a jungle ?
Millions of people live in the jungles of the world. How many fetuses live outside wombs? Oh right, none. Because there's a difference between having the skills to survive in the jungle, and being a fully developed human capable of independent biological survival.
Have you ensured that every single one of your gametes resulted in a child? Then you're a genocidal hypocrite.
No. A fully developed human would be post-pubescent. Until then you are either a fetus incapable of living outside your mother’s body, or a baby capable of independent life with some sort of care.
I actually donate & visit Orphanages & teach them science
Oh I am part of the solution buddy, way more than you since you're a deadbeat childkiller along with the rest of this community
How hard is it for you to plan for pregnancy ??
Because female contraceptives have a riddiculously high success rate
Oh fuck right off with that bullshit. Abortions are a medical procedure. Women have died because they can't get them. Or should we just let fetuses that die in utero rot inside the womb and kill the poor woman who lost her baby through no fault of her own?
That's just one example off the top of my head.
Nobody wants to or is killing children. That's some hyperbolic bullshit.
Fair, but I would suggest that married couples who want more than one child should be allowed to choose to have as much sex as they want until they're ready to have that next child. Of course, anti-abortion crusaders never think about the fact that it isn't just those dirty sluts getting abortions. Married people have sex too.