• xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    15 days ago

    This is a form of class warfare: it isn’t the rich women - they can go out of state or country to get proper medical care if they need it… it’s poor women that are bearing this awful cost.

    • danc4498@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 days ago

      Oddly enough, it’s the poor that are making this happen to themselves by voting for these people. Religion is a hell of a drug.

  • umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    14 days ago

    this was predicted. this is probably how the people who made this happen intended it to be.

  • davidagain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    You’d think this would give republicans pause, or make them reconsider.

    Young women dying in dramatically increasing numbers.

    But it won’t.

    All these young women left to die on the altar of their misinterpretation of their religion and their uncaring principles.

    But no, it was a policy born in hate and the tragic imposed deaths of women are not an unfortunate side effect, they’re just misogyny in action. Working itself out.

    If they cared about babies, there would be more support for women, for early years interventions, and maybe they might also care about children dying in schools on the altar of their misunderstanding of their 2nd amendment and their uncaring principles.

    But no, they don’t care about children dying in schools either, and do you know why? Because caring about children dying in schools doesn’t involve telling women what they have to do and ruling their lives with oppressive freedom-denying laws.

    Caring about children dying in schools would involve some infringement on their UNDENYABLE RIGHT TO FEEL IMPORTANT with a gun and caring about women dying in childbirth would interfere with their UNDENYABLE RIGHT TO FEEL IMPORTANT with a rule about what women can and can’t do.

    • Flax@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      Are you implying being against abortion is a misinterpretation of the Bible? How?

      • davidagain@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        14 days ago

        Edit: I think that’s a genuine question from someone who is surprised by me calling it misinterpretation and has engaged with another perspective politely and unlike many people, is listening as well as expressing their point of view. I wish more people responded like that with a request for information and respectful discussion afterwards. Evidence shows that the “How?” was genuine. Hence my upvote.


        I don’t know any religious people who think abortion is great, but I don’t know any pro-choice folk who think it’s great either, they just think it shouldn’t land a woman or a health professional in jail and they don’t like that the maternal death rate is climbing so fast in Texas which had the first five-week abortion limit in the states.

        Before the republicans figured they could be really judgemental and condemnatory about it (what does your Bible say about that kind of behavior?) and use it as a wedge issue to drive religious folks away from the democrats, it was originally a catholic-only thing to be absolutely opposed to abortion for a long time, justified by a misinterpretation of the sin of Onan, which the catholics somehow took to be a lesson about semen not being allowed on the floor, when it’s quite clearly about family duty and not help to provide a kid for his brother’s young widow who would otherwise be childless - held to be shameful for her. He wasn’t kind. I think you could boldly interpret that story to be pro IVF but I don’t think you can interpret it to be anti-abortion and anti women’s choice unless you’re really baked-in misogynistic before you think about it.

        Yeah I know it says “do not murder” but the abortion bans are literally killing women with already dead foetuses because no health professional can afford to risk their career and freedom to take any step whatsoever to save their lives until it’s obvious enough that they’re at death’s door that the court couldn’t conclude otherwise. “She might have died later” isn’t compelling enough - “she was coding” is.

        I challenge you to find a bible passage explicitly condemning abortion. I can find you at least ten explicitly condemning judgementalism, but also condemning not caring for the poor, not caring for foreigners, walking by when others are suffering, not healing someone when you can. The modern republican party is so far from “What Would Jesus Do?” and worships the liar in chief, Donald J Trump.

        So yes, somehow a bunch of big american corporate churchgoers got convinced that being rich is a sign you are a good person, that stopping abortion is the main lesson from the scriptures and that caring about black people, foreigners, poor people etc is evil. Somehow “let the person who did nothing wrong cast the first stone… go, I don’t condemn you either” became “lock her up”. If you don’t think that’s a misinterpretation of your Bible, yours is different to the ones I’ve seen.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          14 days ago

          I actually agree with a good chunk of what you said. I thank you for not strawmanning me or making presumptions of being like how you described. The Bible advocates for caring for the poor, not judging hypocritically, for caring for the suffering and sick, and that I believe Trump is an antichrist and not Christian at all.

          I’d also like to note that I agree with Abortion if it’s simply removing a dead foetus. I see that as less of an abortion and more of removing a dead foetus that’s already dead.

          As for abortions in case of the pregnancy might kill the woman, those are exceedingly rare as is, but should still be allowed.

          Anyway, for the question at hand:

          I’ll skip out in the commandment showing murder is bad, but of course murder being bad is a necessary principle.

          We see a few instances in the Bible of unborn children being human lives. A notable example recorded by St Luke is John the Baptist. He leapt in the womb when Mary appeared carrying Jesus in her womb

          Luke 1:41-42 ESV

          And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, and she exclaimed with a loud cry, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!

          Jacob and Esau fought each other in the womb, so were clearly conscious

          Genesis 25:21-23 ESV

          And Isaac prayed to the Lord for his wife, because she was barren. And the Lord granted his prayer, and Rebekah his wife conceived. The children struggled together within her, and she said, “If it is thus, why is this happening to me?” So she went to inquire of the Lord. And the Lord said to her, “Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you shall be divided; the one shall be stronger than the other, the older shall serve the younger.”

          Instances of this are even recorded scientifically

          https://abcnews.go.com/Health/video-shows-twins-fighting-womb/story?id=17848740

          King David writes about children even being made by God in the poetry of the 139th Psalm

          Psalm 139:13-14 ESV

          For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well.

          So as the Bible doesn’t say “thou shalt not kill a foetus”, it is implying that foetus are human life. Worth noting that the Bible doesn’t explicitly mention the Triune nature of God as we define, but the nature comes from reading the Bible and revealed through them and what it shows about each Person of God. It also doesn’t explicitly condemn slavery but it’s frequently protrayed in a bad light. Jesus doesn’t demand worship, but is shown being God and receiving it. So it doesn’t have to be explicitly said. The Bible as a whole isn’t a book of laws or a legal code.

          • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            14 days ago

            The Bible literally gives instructions for abortions. Numbers 5:11-31. It has no moral issues with terminating a fetus, doesn’t call a fetus a person, doesn’t call it murder.

            None of your quoted examples negate the Bible’s explicit support of abortion in this passage.

            Even if the Bible did think fetuses were live humans, it also explicitly supports parents murdering their kids. Including the story of Abraham, and God killing Jesus. It’s totally cool with the Bible to kill kids, if the kid belongs to you and you get the vibe “God” wants it. God does it a LOT. Sacrificing your kid for war is considered pretty standard in the Bible as well.

            • Flax@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              13 days ago

              I’m sorry but… what?

              Numbers 5:11-31 ESV

              [11] And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, [12] “Speak to the people of Israel, If any man’s wife goes astray and breaks faith with him, [13] if a man lies with her sexually, and it is hidden from the eyes of her husband, and she is undetected though she has defiled herself, and there is no witness against her, since she was not taken in the act, [14] and if the spirit of jealousy comes over him and he is jealous of his wife who has defiled herself, or if the spirit of jealousy comes over him and he is jealous of his wife, though she has not defiled herself, [15] then the man shall bring his wife to the priest and bring the offering required of her, a tenth of an ephah of barley flour. He shall pour no oil on it and put no frankincense on it, for it is a grain offering of jealousy, a grain offering of remembrance, bringing iniquity to remembrance. [16] “And the priest shall bring her near and set her before the Lord. [17] And the priest shall take holy water in an earthenware vessel and take some of the dust that is on the floor of the tabernacle and put it into the water. [18] And the priest shall set the woman before the Lord and unbind the hair of the woman’s head and place in her hands the grain offering of remembrance, which is the grain offering of jealousy. And in his hand the priest shall have the water of bitterness that brings the curse. [19] Then the priest shall make her take an oath, saying, ‘If no man has lain with you, and if you have not turned aside to uncleanness while you were under your husband’s authority, be free from this water of bitterness that brings the curse. [20] But if you have gone astray, though you are under your husband’s authority, and if you have defiled yourself, and some man other than your husband has lain with you, [21] then’ (let the priest make the woman take the oath of the curse, and say to the woman) ‘the Lord make you a curse and an oath among your people, when the Lord makes your thigh fall away and your body swell. [22] May this water that brings the curse pass into your bowels and make your womb swell and your thigh fall away.’ And the woman shall say, ‘Amen, Amen.’ [23] “Then the priest shall write these curses in a book and wash them off into the water of bitterness. [24] And he shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that brings the curse, and the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain. [25] And the priest shall take the grain offering of jealousy out of the woman’s hand and shall wave the grain offering before the Lord and bring it to the altar. [26] And the priest shall take a handful of the grain offering, as its memorial portion, and burn it on the altar, and afterward shall make the woman drink the water. [27] And when he has made her drink the water, then, if she has defiled herself and has broken faith with her husband, the water that brings the curse shall enter into her and cause bitter pain, and her womb shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away, and the woman shall become a curse among her people. [28] But if the woman has not defiled herself and is clean, then she shall be free and shall conceive children. [29] “This is the law in cases of jealousy, when a wife, though under her husband’s authority, goes astray and defiles herself, [30] or when the spirit of jealousy comes over a man and he is jealous of his wife. Then he shall set the woman before the Lord, and the priest shall carry out for her all this law. [31] The man shall be free from iniquity, but the woman shall bear her iniquity.”

              There’s absolutely no mention of abortion here- in fact, verse 28 makes it clear that she “shall be free to conceive”, so it shows that she wasn’t even pregnant to begin with. It’s clearly talking about a woman becoming infertile if she cheats on her husband, and nothing to do with an abortion or terminating a pregnancy. I don’t know what conclusions you jumped to in order to even think this was about abortion

              Also - parents murdering their kids - you realised that God explicitly stopped Abraham from murdering Isaac? It was about if he’d remain faithful to God even after his prayer is answered. God did NOT want Isaac to die, thus he provided a sacrificial ram.

              With Jesus - Jesus wasn’t merely a human kid - Jesus is God himself. Jesus is the same God who created the earth and everything in it. Jesus is the same God that we betrayed. Yet He died for us. What Abraham sacrificed was merely a ram, while God sacrificed Himself for us. Because God is perfectly merciful. He made the perfect sacrifice for what WE did. He lived the life we should have lived and died the death that we deserved. You cannot see this story and sum it up in “god supports us killing our kids”

              • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                13 days ago

                What a bad translation, almost like it was deliberately translated badly. “Thigh fall away,” lmfao what nonsense. Btw in the quoted text below, when they say “impure,” “impurity,” they mean pregnancy.

                https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers 5%3A11-31&version=NIV

                ‘If a man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him 13 so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), 14 and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure—or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure— 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest.

                Then the priest shall put the woman under oath and say to her, “If no other man has had sexual relations with you and you have not gone astray and become impure while married to your husband, may this bitter water that brings a curse not harm you. 20 But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and you have made yourself impure by having sexual relations with a man other than your husband”— 21 here the priest is to put the woman under this curse—“may the Lord cause you to become a curse[b] among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell.

                22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”

                “‘Then the woman is to say, “Amen. So be it.”

                If she has made herself impure and been unfaithful to her husband, this will be the result: When she is made to drink the water that brings a curse and causes bitter suffering, it will enter her, her abdomen will swell and her womb will miscarry, and she will become a curse. 28 If, however, the woman has not made herself impure, but is clean, she will be cleared of guilt and will be able to have children.

                For the last 2 points - so you admit killing your own kid for God is seen as a virtue in the Bible, so much so that the 2 most important sons, Abraham and Jesus, both go through an event involving a parent killing them. And then there’s literally dozens of events in tbe Bible of God killing kids. God loves child murder.

                • Flax@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  13 days ago

                  I’m sorry… Am I reading this correctly?

                  Did you just say the ESV was a bad translation and just cite the… NIV???

                  Either you are really stupid or you HAVE to be a troll. If it’s the former, the NIV is notoriously a bad translation, with it’s main aim being to simplify the text with the translator’s own interpretation. The benefit is that it’s easier to read, but that’s it. The NIV is the only translation which uses the term miscarry. Even the NRSV, a secular translation, says

                  Let the priest make the woman take the oath of the curse and say to the woman—“the Lord make you an execration and an oath among your people, when the Lord makes your uterus drop, your womb discharge;

                  “thigh” is a euphemism for womb. That’s well known. So “womb” is a valid translation even though literally it says “thigh”. But it’s still clearly talking about a non pregnant woman becoming infertile. And the fact that the only thing you can use to justify your point is the NIV translation of it which shows you have no point at all

                  [21] וְהִשְׁבִּ֨יעַ הַכֹּהֵ֥ן אֶֽת־הָֽאִשָּׁה֮ בִּשְׁבֻעַ֣ת הָאָלָה֒ וְאָמַ֤ר הַכֹּהֵן֙ לָֽאִשָּׁ֔ה יִתֵּ֨ן יְהוָ֥ה אוֹתָ֛ךְ לְאָלָ֥ה וְלִשְׁבֻעָ֖ה בְּת֣וֹךְ עַמֵּ֑ךְ בְּתֵ֨ת יְהוָ֤ה אֶת־יְרֵכֵךְ֙ נֹפֶ֔לֶת וְאֶת־בִּטְנֵ֖ךְ צָבָֽה׃

                  Still nothing here implying the miscarriage, and this is the Westminster Leningrad Codex. Is the Hebrew a bad translation, too? 🤣

                  For your last “rebuttal”, you forgot again that Jesus is God - He sacrificed Himself for all of humanity. Abraham was following God and didn’t sacrifice his son. The point was his loyalty- not the child sacrifice. Nothing’s virtuous about it.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    13 days ago

    “Well then I guess you shuttle have learned to keep your legs shut!”

    • my most angry and outspoken conservative relatives and acquaintances, always bringing the subtlety and shades of grey.
    • Soup@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      This is the only logical answer for this. Otherwise- their deaths mean nothing.

      • dubious@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 days ago

        the logical answer is something else entirely. definitely don’t hold your breath for the state to make them accountable.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 days ago

      They were never pro-life. They were never even pro-birth. They’ve never argued for anything like free pre-natal care. If something is wrong with your baby and you and your baby are going to die, that’s god’s will, so don’t you dare get an abortion.

      They are not pro-anything. They’re anti-abortion. That’s as far as it goes whether they admit it or not.

  • SSTF@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    What is going on here? The laws came into place in September 2021, but mortality was already climbing from 2019-2021. What was going on those years to cause this? Then a sharp decline in mortality between 2021 and 2022 for two of the three groups.

    • punkaccountant@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      13 days ago

      According to the cdc website pretty much everywhere in the u.s. went up during 2020-2021 and things started coming down 2022-2023. In fact it looks like the average across the u.s. was pretty much back to “normal” by 2023. But what we see here is that while things declined again for TX in 2022, they still remain quite elevated above 2019 while the u.s. average went back to pre-pandemic average, which would tell me that something else is going on in TX unrelated to the pandemic.

      • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 days ago

        For a more interesting question, why did it go down for everyone except white women, and increased for white women? That’s weird enough that it feels like there’s a reason, but I have no clue what it might be.

  • TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    It’s pathetic these clowns call themselves pro-life without vomiting. Their platform is based entirely around murdering pregnant women. They don’t care how many times you explain this is essential healthcare, they are happy to let these women die because in their mind they deserve it for daring to try and save their own life with an abortion. It will be so sad and predictable when they find out the women in their life get ectopic pregnancies too, I wonder how much their lives are worth to these dishonest ghouls.

    • Flax@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      Less than 1% of abortions are due to it being a risk to the woman’s life. Catch a grip.

      • TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        12 days ago

        Thats not the fucking point. The point is if you pass a law saying its illegal unless the mother is dying, you cant be fucking surprised when mothers die. You are so selfish, you can’t even picture how this might impact someone else. You just repeat your rhetoric, and pat yourself on the back even though your response has nothing to do with what I was talking about. Tell me, how many lives does your belief cost? How much needless death is acceptable for you? You are talking about killing thousands and thousands of women, thats why you are hiding behind percentages, because it lets you mask the raw number of deaths. Will your opinion completely change when someone you love is killed or put at risk? Dont answer any of those, just tell what 1% of these supposed abortion numbers happens to be. Tell me exactly how many women you think deserve to die you fucking coward.

        • Flax@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          12 days ago

          Just checked my numbers. It’s less than 1% for rape, and 4% for health reasons. But my point still stands that this is a fringe case.

          1000050749

          It is worth noting though that the health reasons given are quite broad and do not all necessarily mean the mother was going to die if she gave birth.

          Concerns about personal health included chron- ic and life-threatening conditions such as depression, advanced maternal age and toxemia. More commonly, how- ever, women cited feeling too ill during the pregnancy to work or take care of their children.

          Source:

          https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/article_files/3711005.pdf

          • TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 days ago

            “Edge case”

            Jesus fucking christ. It’s truly insane how opinionated and ignorant you are. You live in a fantasy world powered by confirmation bias. This is a very common problem and it’s genuinely pathetic how bad your attempt to lie about that. You can’t even find a real medical academic source to lie about. It breaks my God damn heart to see how little propaganda it took to make you incapable of introspection. I’m sorry I grossly over estimated your character and respect for human life. Please go celebrate your totally justified murders in private.

            • Flax@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              12 days ago

              I literally showed you a source showing that it was at 4% and most of them weren’t even in life and death scenarios. And I’m the one living in a fantasy world?. If this was actually purely about Human life, then we’d have a significant drop in abortions.

  • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    The Republicans in power can see in the statistics that more black and brown people are dying, so they don’t care. Less people voting against them.

    • capital@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      You risk your own and others situational awareness when you paint everything as a race issue.

      I grew up in Texas in a deep red county.

      They believe abortion is literally the same as killing a healthy 2 year old. Straight up. THAT is the basis for their opposition to abortion, plain and simple.

      You are dumbing down the discourse by being so focused on race.

      • Senal@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        “This stops them from killing babies” and “This also predominantly affects the group I don’t like” aren’t mutually exclusive ideas

        • capital@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          14 days ago

          They literally don’t care about skin color here. Not one iota. Murder is murder and this is that (to them).

          • Senal@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            13 days ago

            I grew up in Texas in a deep red county.

            In a country notorious for it’s systemic and institutionalized racism, you grew up in a section that votes predominantly for the party that is notoriously racist ( In general, not in comparison to any other party ) and would claim that race has no part in a decision that is known to have racial divides in applicability.

            That might be the greatest feat of mental gymnastics i’ve ever seen, truly.

            On the off-chance you genuinely mean what you say:

            That you and the people you know don’t care about race is laudable, but it doesn’t seem to be broadly applicable to the rest of the state or country ( and in the case of republicans their party )

            • capital@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              13 days ago

              This shouldn’t be hard to believe.

              These are largely white people voting to stop their largely white neighbors from getting abortions.

              Are you under the impression their position toward abortion would be different if the entire state or country were 100% white? I assure you it would not be. And if that’s true, it cannot be based on race.

              What’s more is this argument that their position on abortion is informed by statistics is laughable. These are low information voters. You seriously think they even know the stats? Why in the world would anyone think that?

              • Senal@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                12 days ago

                Are you under the impression their position toward abortion would be different if the entire state or country were 100% white? I assure you it would not be. And if that’s true, it cannot be based on race.

                I’ve no idea, all i was stating is that dismissing race as a part of the decision making process (consciously or unconsciously) in a place known for outcomes based on race could be considered dumbing down the argument.

                What’s more is this argument that their position on abortion is informed by statistics is laughable. These are low information voters. You seriously think they even know the stats? Why in the world would anyone think that?

                Entirely laughable, which is why nobody has claimed this.

                I was saying these people are what makes up the statistics.


                As an entirely made up example:

                “10% of the population don’t like the taste of potatoes” doesn’t mean 10% of the population base their decisions about eating fries on reading the statistics.

                claims such as “All the people i know like potatoes , so potato preference can’t possibly be related to the amount of fries eaten” just doesnt make any sense.


                and to be clear I’m not claiming all positions are race based, just that it’s enough of a factor that pretending it doesn’t have any impact at all is some gold medal mental gymnastics.

                • capital@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  12 days ago

                  I’ve no idea

                  I think knowing that these voters base their position on abortion on the belief that it is murder hurts your position so it’s better not to answer. Or you just don’t know them that well and really have no idea.

                  Entirely laughable, which is why nobody has claimed this.

                  The argument that these voters’ position on abortion (and therefore their votes) are based on race necessarily requires that they are aware of the statistics. If the claim is they vote this way because it disproportionately harms minorities, how do they know it disproportionately harms minorities?

                  But I’m glad we agree that they do not know that.

      • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        It’s both. Unfortunately, a lot of people are incredibly racist without even knowing that they are racists. They are just doing whatever they’ve always been doing, “and now, all of a sudden, that’s racist.” It’s like when people are defending slavery because it was “normal at the time.” It was still racist! It is now and it was then.

      • OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 days ago

        You’re getting down voted, but you’re right. The actual lawmakers are probably more racially motivated. But based on my experience growing up in Alabama, most of the regular “pro-life” voters seem motivated by a genuine belief that abortion is murder.

        • Kalysta@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          14 days ago

          Until they need an abortion. Then they’re fine with it. Ask anyone who works at an abortion clinic how many times people out there protesting come in for abortions

          • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 days ago

            Yes because they don’t actually believe that they are killing a living human. That’s why they will get it done for themselves or their mistresses.

  • ignirtoq@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    Before my comment I want to make clear I agree with the conclusion that abortion bans are clearly killing women at statistically significant rates.

    That said, the stats reporting here doesn’t make sense:

    Among Hispanic women, the rate of women dying while pregnant, during childbirth or soon after increased from 14.5% in 2019 to 18.9% in 2022. Rates among white women nearly doubled — from 20% to 39.1%. And Black women, who historically have higher chances of dying while pregnant, during childbirth or soon after, saw their rates go from 31.6% to 43.6%.

    There’s no way 14.5% of Hispanic women in Texas who got pregnant died some time during pregnancy, during child birth, or soon after. That would be unprecedented for any time since the advent of modern medicine. And the chart above this paragraph does not agree with it either. It’s a chart of deaths per hundred THOUSAND live births, and the numbers for all racial groups are all under 100, so less than 0.1%.

    The way it’s stated also doesn’t suggest it’s a percent increase because it says it rose from 14.5% to 18.9%. I can’t figure out what they’re trying to say, but they should definitely have been more careful with presenting the numbers.

    • JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      I’ve literally heard religious people say that women are supposed to be willing to die for their babies. If a woman wants to live and aborts a septic pregnancy she’s a bad, immoral person.

      It’s super fucked up how much conviction they have when they say it too. Women are basically just a disposable womb to them. I always feel gross when I’m near someone saying that kind of shit.