3 ms·
That they're not alive humans, and those states that have higher maternal mortality and lower standards of care for children, also have stated that the wish to
by olliej 5y ago
That they're not alive humans, and those states that have higher maternal mortality and lower standards of care for children, also have stated that the wish to ban access to and coverage of birth control. That's something where abortion doesn't even come into it, it's purely about controlling women at that point.
I also feel sorry for those women who did try to do the right thing but nonetheless got pregnant, who will now be forced to take massive bills on because the states forcing them to give birth fail to provide the most basic care.
The before you get to the women who get pregnancy that puts the mother's life at risk, or who gets a cancer diagnosis and now can't get treated because it would cause an abortion, and of course the children raped by priests.
In terms of being "sexually irresponsible", the states that a pro-controlling-women generally provide at best inaccurate safe sex information. It's been well established in numerous countries at this point that stop abortion is achieved by comprehensive sex ed (which also cuts STDs/STIs, a variety of cancers, ..) and easy access to birth control.
But again, these states have all declared that they care mostly about forcing women to have babies, and not at all about reducing abortion.
Of course the changes these states are planning on will increase the number of people who die during abortions, increase the amount of poverty, and won't stop abortions among the rich in those states because they can always easily fly a neighboring state that respects women's rights.
While the conservative states still let women travel without chaperones of course.
- curiousgeorgio 5y ago> That they're not alive humans Science (and God) would disagree with you there, but I suppose you're entitled to your own opinion – wrong and barbaric as it may be.
- jleyank 5y agoYou can speak for $god? Wow. Good internet connection!
- curiousgeorgio 5y ago> You can speak for $god? Don't have to. He's been pretty clear about it already (bible, modern prophets, etc). If faith isn't your thing, science confirms the living humanity of the human fetus. Most of us also have an innate sense that killing one of our own is wrong, full stop. No amount of social or political rhetoric added to the conversation ("but health care...", "my rights...", etc) will change the fact that it's wrong.
- olliej 5y ago$god absolutely is not - modern profits [sic] are far from widely accepted, and the christian conservative south has traditionally considered black people to not be human, as a matter of god. That's part of the reason for all the burning crosses. No amount of your nonsense will make forcing a medical procedure on someone, for profit no less, is wrong. I could also save peoples lives by harvesting organs from people, why should I not be able to require that life saving operation?
- curiousgeorgio 5y agoIf you dare challenge your current preconceptions, I'd suggest reading what real modern prophets have recently said about the topic: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2021/04/26andersen?lang=eng https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference...
- throwaway543593 5y ago> churchofjesuschrist.org Yeah, think I'll pass on that one.
- throwaway543593 5y agoAre you sure the Bible condemns abortion? https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%205%3A11-31&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%205%3A1...
- Zigurd 5y agoHow could anyone trust you to respect women in the workplace? HN is a sausage fest, which is why you get these male insular views here, but the majority of university graduates are now women. Your attitude is an impediment to recruiting them. If you doubt that this guy is harmful to the workplace environment, keep reading down this thread.
- throwaway543593 5y agoGod is a myth. Also, could you please cite your sources?