334
all 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] MagicShel@programming.dev 57 points 1 month ago

How could this have ever been predicted, though? My flabbers are gasted.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 39 points 1 month ago

It's almost like the decision to make the lives of actual people less important has consequences.

[-] WalrusDragonOnABike@lemmy.today 23 points 1 month ago

Exclusive analysis finds the rate of maternal deaths in Texas increased 56% from 2019 to 2022, compared with just 11% nationwide during the same time period.

Curious what the percent change is for just states that didn't implement abortion-restricting measures is...

[-] Yomope@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 month ago

Curious about why maternal death growing nation wide is a not seen has a problem.

[-] WalrusDragonOnABike@lemmy.today 11 points 1 month ago

Who doesn't consider it a problem?

People who hate women and children.

You know, Republicans.

[-] Yomope@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago

Your quote state “compared with just 11% nationwide” that lecture chill me. It would be more honest to state “11% nationwide and it’s worst in Texas with 56%” This inversion is really a way to put that awfull stat under the rug

[-] Litany@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

People who don't know about it because it's not widely reported.

Texas isn't a small state, population wise. If the rate rose dramatically (55%) for Texas, and similar rates occurred in other abortion banning states, that would likely account for the 11%.

Anyway, more to the point than just that, the people who care about that nationwide growth already care and are clamoring about it. They've been clamoring about it since Roe v Wade was overturned. The other half of the equation could care less about women, and the rising rate is probably making them smile.

[-] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago

"We're saving innocent babies from the baby murdering liberals."

  • Christian conservative republicans.
[-] Beldarofremulak@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago
[-] MushuChupacabra@lemmy.world 18 points 1 month ago

That's by design.

[-] yeahiknow3 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Opinions on abortion are strong indicators of psychopathy. Nobody against legal abortion has a functional moral sense. Some are just incredibly morally stupid. Others are religious zombies. But they’re all dangerous and fundamentally animalistic. We can coexist with these creatures, obviously — we already do. But the widespread delusion that they’re just like us has been incredibly dangerous and possibly world-ending. It’s no coincidence they’re the same “people” who support pollution and celebrate ecological depredation.

[-] Drusas@fedia.io 1 points 1 month ago

Dehumanization isn't good no matter what side you're on.

[-] yeahiknow3 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Do you dehumanize bears when you acknowledge that they lack certain abilities? I like bears. They’re great! Doesn’t mean I have to pretend that they’re civilized or intelligent.

[-] Drusas@fedia.io 2 points 1 month ago

Do I dehumanize a creature which is not human? No, dehumanization doesn't work that way.

[-] yeahiknow3 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

By “human” you might mean

  1. an animal whose DNA falls within a specific probability distribution, or
  2. an animal that embodies various virtues or transcendental capacities, etc.

We should acknowledge that countless creatures meet condition 1 but not 2. So what?

[-] Drusas@fedia.io 2 points 1 month ago

Your second definition is usually referred to as "person", not "human".

[-] punkaccountant@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

Out of pure curiosity, is your statement linking abortion opinions and psychopathy based on any studies you can link?

[-] yeahiknow3 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I’m not sure if that research’s been done, but it would be highly surprising if psychopaths were not the ones in favor of limiting women’s reproductive freedom.

What I can tell you is that abortion rights are an “easy” moral issue. Every year or two there’s a survey among professional philosophers, who of course disagree on basically everything. However, the item with the most consensus is abortion. That’s because there are simply no good arguments against abortion rights. The only reason someone might be against reproductive freedom is… well… moral imbecility.

We already know that moral reasoning exists on a spectrum of competence. That some people are so bad at it that it’s pathological, and that some percentage of these people are also narcissistic enough to be called “psychopaths.” It’s a disorder; it’s on a spectrum, and anti-abortion zealots are on that spectrum.

[-] norimee@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

What a surprise! As if nobody ever said abortion bans kill women...

s/

[-] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago

I'm a practicing Christian. I also believe in abortion and birth control like I personally invented them. I worked with a gyne who performed them and it's such a nothing of a procedure. Every pathology report said the same thing "spongy hemorrhagic tissue with no fetal parts". The fuss is literally over a tiny bit of tissue.

Nobody should have to be pregnant if they don't want to, ever.

[-] FunderPants@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 month ago

Who could have possibly seen this coming.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

Its only a problem if influential white women die though.

Keep Texasing, Texas. You’ll get there.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

Everything is bigger in Texas applies here, I suppose.

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago

Pro life was never about being actually pro life, It's always been about pro religio, control and power.

For politicians it was about getting the crazy fundies to support said politicians.

For the fundies themselves it's just another step of them applying their religion and control onto everyone else. Their rules apply to you, because you too must be delusional and believe in their particular Easter bunny.

No fundie or politician ever gave a single frack about women dying due to the removal of abortions. No fundie ever gave a shit about the baby that was actually born and now needed help and funds to grow up. Funds? Money? Frack that shit, we aren't spending money on babies now, they're on their own.

I hate these people, they form the lowest ranks of what humanity has to offer, yet they want to be about to except their control and their rules Mon everyone, frack the consequences.

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

As conservatives cheer.

[-] ravhall@discuss.online 1 points 1 month ago

The state cat is the Leopard

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

NBC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for NBC News:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/texas-abortion-ban-deaths-pregnant-women-sb8-analysis-rcna171631
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

Awwwww that baby holding a finger looks soo cute

this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
334 points (98.8% liked)

politics

19096 readers
3316 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS