twa Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 Just now, thegreaterbuzzette said: https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-mortality-surveillance-system.htm#ratio Per this.....more women die from pregnancy related complications than from abortion related complications. Life is hazardous. I agree it is safer to kill others than to risk living with them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thegreaterbuzzette Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 2 minutes ago, twa said: Life is hazardous. I agree it is safer to kill others than to risk living with them. That's what you took from that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 13, 2019 Author Share Posted June 13, 2019 5 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said: https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-mortality-surveillance-system.htm#ratio Per this.....more women die from pregnancy related complications than from abortion related complications. 17x more.... That was the basis for the Roe decision. The SC ruled that state's laws against abortions claimed to be to protect the woman. But that in the first trimester, abortion was safer than staying pregnant was. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 1 minute ago, thegreaterbuzzette said: That's what you took from that? well I took that a numbers person was playing games...but that's just my nature 3.978 million births in 2015 vs ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thegreaterbuzzette Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 1 minute ago, twa said: well I took that a numbers person was playing games...but that's just my nature 3.978 million births in 2015 vs ? It's not # of births vs # abortions that lead to the higher # of deaths. It's a ratio. It is used to level the playing field when comparing figures. This is why it's a "per 100,000". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 Just now, thegreaterbuzzette said: It's not # of births vs # abortions that lead to the higher # of deaths. It's a ratio. It is used to level the playing field when comparing figures. This is why it's a "per 100,000". yes....if you reduce people to numbers, or deny they are even people. Like I said, tis safer to kill them if you worry about such things.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thegreaterbuzzette Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 17 minutes ago, twa said: add reducing lives to numbers is just math, denying life is denying life. Ok, so save all the lives. What programs you supporting and funding for proper sex education, affordable/accessible birth control, community health clinics, expanding affordable childcare options, welfare/WIC increases, therapest/social services/CPS funding to help investigate insest and pedophilia? 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thegreaterbuzzette Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 5 minutes ago, twa said: yes....if you reduce people to numbers, or deny they are even people. You do realize you were the one the inquired about what the #s were 1st right.....and we simply provided an answer to your inquiry..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 5 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said: Ok, so save all the lives. What programs you supporting and funding for proper sex education, affordable/accessible birth control, community health clinics, expanding affordable childcare options, welfare/WIC increases, therapest/social services/CPS funding to help investigate insest and pedophilia? Quite a few thru the govt, and I do some on my own. 3 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said: You do realize you were the one the inquired about what the #s were 1st right.....and we simply provided an answer to your inquiry..... actually I mentioned rates in response to Burgold's use of rates.....details Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thegreaterbuzzette Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 14 hours ago, twa said: Quite a few thru the govt, and I do some on my own. So are you shouting just as loud for those as you are for anti-abortion? Where is that conversation? 14 hours ago, twa said: actually I mentioned rates in response to Burgold's use of rates.....details Burgold brought up infant mortality as an effort to show that there are strong considerations for the health of the child post birth than just insisting birth. Plus your above statement indicates that you too acknowledge the horrible infant mortality rates so you are in agreement that those numbers are in fact relevant and important.....so you cant just pick and choose when analytics are important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 11 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said: So are you shouting just as loud for those as you are for anti-abortion? Where is that conversation? Burgold brought up infant mortality as an effort to show that there are strong considerations for the health of the child post birth than just insisting birth. Plus your above statement indicates that you too acknowledge the horrible infant mortality rates so you are in agreement that those numbers are in fact relevant and important.....so you cant just pick and choose when analytics are important. I see the need to quit killing people as more urgent .....most that see them as human lives would. That they might die if we let them live is a piss poor position to start from. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 I started the Chernobyl series. Which led to me re-reading the Wikipedia article on the Chernobyl disaster, as it had been a while and I forgot. Theres an entire section about abortions and the number of abortions that were performed in Europe on healthy pregnancies, simply due to false fears of radiation fall out and what it might do to the child during pregnancy. One report had it as as high as 150,000 abortions. Very sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thegreaterbuzzette Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 4 hours ago, twa said: I see the need to quit killing people as more urgent .....most that see them as human lives would. That they might die if we let them live is a piss poor position to start from. So you can’t walk and chew gum at the same time? wouldn't the public education, health, and criminal resource items I listed do more than substantially cut down on abortions? why can’t you not find value in all humans, and not just ones not yet born? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 13, 2019 Author Share Posted June 13, 2019 4 hours ago, tshile said: I started the Chernobyl series. Which led to me re-reading the Wikipedia article on the Chernobyl disaster, as it had been a while and I forgot. Theres an entire section about abortions and the number of abortions that were performed in Europe on healthy pregnancies, simply due to false fears of radiation fall out and what it might do to the child during pregnancy. One report had it as as high as 150,000 abortions. Very sad. The false fears of radiation? Wasn't there any? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 33 minutes ago, thegreaterbuzzette said: So you can’t walk and chew gum at the same time? wouldn't the public education, health, and criminal resource items I listed do more than substantially cut down on abortions? why can’t you not find value in all humans, and not just ones not yet born? Sure I can. Do more than what??? What gives you the idea I don't find value in all humans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 25 minutes ago, Larry said: The false fears of radiation? Wasn't there any? Maybe unnecessary or over blown would have been a better adjectives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 13, 2019 Author Share Posted June 13, 2019 13 minutes ago, twa said: What gives you the idea I don't find value in all humans? Your absolute 100% loyalty to the Republican Party? (Sorry. Had to.) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 Just now, Larry said: Your absolute 100% loyalty to the Republican Party? (Sorry. Had to.) it's not absolute when the other options don't suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 12 minutes ago, nonniey said: Maybe unnecessary or over blown would have been a better adjectives. “Worldwide, an estimated excess of about 150,000 elective abortions may have been performed on otherwise healthy pregnancies out of unfounded fears of radiation from Chernobyl, according to Robert Baker and ultimately a 1987 article published by Linda E. Ketchum in the Journal of Nuclear Medicine which mentions but does not reference an IAEA source on the matter.[171][172][176][177][173][178]” They said unfounded. I said false. I suppose unfounded is the correct word. I dont think unnecessary or overblown correctly captures the context. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted June 14, 2019 Share Posted June 14, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 14, 2019 Author Share Posted June 14, 2019 2 hours ago, Cooked Crack said: Hey, you're attacking her because of her religious beliefs as a Muslim. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted June 14, 2019 Share Posted June 14, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 14, 2019 Author Share Posted June 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Cooked Crack said: Please tell me that now she's got an Anchor Baby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted June 14, 2019 Share Posted June 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Cooked Crack said: ....One of the plaintiffs was 17 years old when she was apprehended at the border. She had been raped in her home country before traveling to the United States and the rapist had impregnated her. She repeatedly asked for an abortion. The government refused to let her obtain one.... Not enough info provided - how far along in her pregnancy was she - would be the first question that comes to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted June 14, 2019 Share Posted June 14, 2019 8 minutes ago, nonniey said: Not enough info provided - how far along in her pregnancy was she - would be the first question that comes to mind. Guess you don't remember this one from Kavanaugh's audition. Either way. Quote The court noted that the ban applied even if the teenager met the requirements for an abortion under state law where they were being held and secured their own funding and transportation; it also applied if the teenager had been raped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now