• Sam_Bass@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 days ago

            Depends on how involved they were in the laws creation. Probably not enough to matter though. Their bosses could be charged with involuntary manslaughter on an individual basis, conspiracy to commit murder as a group or individual.

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

              Involuntary manslaughter would probably not stick as a charge

              https://zealousadvocate.com/resources/law/involuntary-manslaughter-texas-legal-insights-and-real-world-perspectives/

              Involuntary manslaughter refers to the unintentional killing of another person, usually through reckless behavior or negligence. It’s different from other homicide offenses because it doesn’t require intent, deliberation, or premeditation.

              The following factors influence criminal liability:

              • Actus reus (guilty action or conduct): evidence that the accused committed an unlawful act that directly led to a person’s death or acted in a way that demonstrated criminal negligence or recklessness.
              • Mens rea (intention or knowledge): while intent to kill is not required for Involuntary Manslaughter, there must be evidence of negligence or recklessness. For this, the accused should have been aware, or at least reasonably should have been aware, of the risk or danger their action (or inaction) would create.
              • Causation: There must be no doubt that the accused’s reckless or negligent behavior led to the victim’s death. In other words, the victim’s death would not have occurred without the reckless or negligent behavior of the accused.

              It’s the actus reus part that I don’t think checks out with this charge. They weren’t acting unlawfully. They weren’t acting criminally. They were doing their jobs within the law.

              https://www.dwilawyerstexas.com/tx-penal-code-15-02-criminal-conspiracy/

              Texas law prohibits criminal conspiracy, which is the agreement to commit a crime. If two or more people devise a plan to commit a felony, and at least one of them acts in furtherance of the plan, each person may be convicted of conspiracy to commit the object of the conspiracy.

              Again, they weren’t acting unlawfully.

              It’s actually legal for legislatures to pass legislation that kills us “passively.” Otherwise, if it wasn’t legal, homeless people could sue for their conditions and win. People who die from lack of medical care could sue and win. People who die in car accidents could sue because we dont have public transportation due to oil industry. We could sue due to climate change effects and government policies that worsened that. They currently cannot sue lawmakers and win those cases.

              I am 100% for having laws in place that charge lawmakers with crimes for policies like this. But they currently don’t exist how we want them to.

    • Soup@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

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

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

        That’s not logical? It doesn’t even have a legal basis.

        The real logical answer to bad government management is the French one - protest

          • Alph4d0g@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 days ago

            We might be headed toward the same conditions that spawned the French revolution. I’m not in favor of that but once the wealth transfer gets to a certain point there’s historical president to draw upon.

            • Soup@lemmy.cafe
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              10 days ago

              That isn’t going to happen. And in the very off chance that it does- the government is guaranteed the win, and the people will suffer.

              Greatly.

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

                The government is made of people. Those people might refuse to do their jobs too.

                A protest is SUBSTANTIALLY more likely to happen than the original suggestion of charging state lawmakers with murder. There’s no murder charge that would qualify.

                • Soup@lemmy.cafe
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  9 days ago

                  Riiiiight. Well, have fun storming the castle. Just don’t make a mess on my street, okay? I don’t want to have to clean that shit up.

                • JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  9 days ago

                  Reckless endangerment and manslaughter.

                  They were warned that women would die due these laws and they didn’t listen. They recklessly put those laws there and people died… resulting in manslaughter.

                  I’d prefer homicide too, but I feel like manslaughter charges would stick better because you don’t have to prove intent, just that someone died because of their actions.

        • Sam_Bass@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 days ago

          And if protests dont work as they often dont, then what? The guillotine. Thats a french thing nest pas?

      • dubious@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

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

        • Soup@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 days ago

          I I’m not. Because the american government follows no logic whatsoever.

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

      They’re not pro life. They’re anti women having sex, and want to punish women for doing something as natural as breathing. It’s going to bite them in the ass, but it will be too late for so many before it does.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 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.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 days ago

          I know. I just don’t think they should be allowed to get away with calling themselves that unchallenged beyond the “and you call yourselves pro-life?” I feel the need to point out that they literally could not give less of a shit whether or not any given fetus lives or dies as long as medical intervention isn’t required for the latter.

          • On the one hand, I absolutely think it’s worth calling out. On the other hand, they’ll often be very quick to try and turn it around on you, calling anyone pro-choice pro-death or saying they “want to kill babies”.

            Obviously those aren’t quite the same thing, but they see it as the same and I just wish there was a way to bridge that gap and have everyone listen to each other…

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 days ago

              At which point, I tell them that it’s not about the fetus, it’s about the fact that people have a fundamental right to their own bodies and no one should be allowed to use their body without their consent. Just like we have people consent to organ donation.

              If they want fetuses to live, great. Start working on artificial womb technology. They don’t seem interested.

              • Again, I agree with you. I just see the danger of refusing to acknowledge how a group conceptualizes their own position, even if they’re being deliberately blind to other factors.

                And I wish people could spend more effort trying to understand each other’s perspectives, because otherwise how does it ever change?

                I’m only barely talking about pro-life/anti-choice or pro-choice/pro-death here, too. The same kind of thinking and focusing on aspects the other person isn’t addressing is everywhere in discourse these days. And a lot of them are very close to home for me and I guess I want them to be able to consider my perspective. But they won’t, because they think of the world this way, so they see me as a problem and a problem-causer just by being me.

                Any way… Rant over I guess

                • kofe@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 days ago

                  How does it ever change? The 70+% of people that disagree show up to vote. I was raised by forced birthers and have been to family therapy with them to try to talk with a neutral third party. The therapist gave us all a blanket statement that we’ll never change each other’s minds. So, fine. My brother and I just have to cancel out their votes and get more people to tip the scales.

                  Every state that’s been able to vote on it has upheld protections for abortion. More are on the ballot for November. Check your state and be ready to show up.

      • Westdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 days ago

        I call them forced-birth, which sums up their position well. They care nothing for the woman having the child and care nothing for the child after it’s born. It’s all about forcing that birth by whatever means… then walking away.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 days ago

          But they don’t even care if there’s a birth. If the fetus dies inside the mother and then the mother dies- god’s will.

      • pyrflie@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 days ago

        They will when their wives and kids die. They are the ones that will kill their politicians, because they don’t have empathy.

        • Okokimup@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 days ago

          Their families will be fine. They will just go out of state, or out of country if need be. The poor will suffer. So it goes.

          • pyrflie@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            10 days ago

            Don’t know if you aren’t from the US or have only lived in a city. Either way you wiffed.

            Weathy families have always been fine, they aren’t who are dying or the only ones armed; especially not in Texas.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 days ago

              Sorry… what do arms have to do with this? I’m pretty sure doctors don’t recommend using speeding bullets as a safe way to end a pregnancy.

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 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
      0
      ·
      10 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.

  • TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 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’s 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
      ·
      10 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
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        8 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
          0
          ·
          8 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
            0
            ·
            8 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
              0
              ·
              8 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.

    • orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      To them, hypocrisy is a virtue. This is all about power and has nothing to do with integrity.

  • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 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
      ·
      10 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.

      • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 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
        ·
        10 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
          ·
          10 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
            0
            ·
            10 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.

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

          I could see the race thing being more true for the politicians but even then I think it’s less of a thing than most people on Lemmy think.

          If we stop to think about it a moment I think that becomes clear.

          Do we think Ted Cruz would rather have a black Republican neighbor or a white Democrat? I truly think he’d rather have a black Republican neighbor. I believe the same is true for everyone I grew up with in Texas.

          IF we accept that (big if, admittedly) it can’t be a race thing. It would have to extend to a cultural thing.

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

            Are you from an area that mainly espouses colorblindness as its racism?

            A month ago, I was sent a picture of a black lynching by a Nazi. It’s 100% about race for a lot of people.

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

              Note that I didn’t say racism didn’t exist anymore. I said it wasn’t the driving principle behind their position on abortion. And that hyper fixation on race does a disservice to them and others by often missing the point.

              I would also say “color blindness” isn’t racism, if that’s what you meant. Maybe I misunderstood you?

              I largely agree with Coleman Hughes on this point but I frankly don’t expect anyone here to honestly engage with his position.

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

                Well, I’ve already explained exactly why it’s a continuation of native American genocide and how race is 100% a driver for these organizations en masse, even though other races are also affected.

                It’s not a hyperfixation on race to acknowledge racial issues and address them.

                I guessed you were from an area with colorblindness as it’s main racism, I am as well. That’s because you’re in an area that is still colonizing land from Natives, so it’s important to reduce their claims. One way to do this is to erase their heritage and ethnicity by forcing language, names, holidays, foods, etc that aren’t part of their history. Suppressing claims of racism automatically is colorblindness and part of how colorblindness is racist.

                https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Native-Indian-Culture-Color-Blind-Racism-F3YRAC73VU5YW

                Another form of racism placed onto Native Indian people is color-blind racism. This form of racism rationalizes “racial inequality as the outcome of nonracial dynamics” (Robertson 120). Color-blind racism takes the standards created by the dominant discourse and applies them to all ethnic groups, putting them on an even level plain field without recognizing historical or social context of each group. Therefore, according to color blind racism, the effects of casualties and stereotypical of Native Indians such as alcoholism, poverty, etc. is essentially their fault and they should be the ones to start change. However, these the casualties of Native Indian culture was changed by racial oppression implemented by the dominant discourse. Therefore, Native Indians cannot be the ones to change of societal perception when they were not the ones to implement it.

                https://www.pbs.org/education/blog/unlearning-kindness-color-blindness-and-racism

                The pressure to assimilate and narrow the gaps in our proximity to Whiteness goes hand and hand with so-called “color blindness,” or claiming not to see race. At best, this ideology is misguided because it’s predicated on the false assumption that if we do not talk about or acknowledge race and racism, then these issues will go away. It should go without saying that this is asinine, yet so many well-meaning White people wear their alleged color blindness as a badge of honor.

                At worst, it is a White supremacist tool used to intentionally gaslight BIPOC and give White people a justification for turning away from the experiences and voices of BIPOC. Color blindness requires BIPOC to “grin and bear” everyday instances of racism. We are expected to do this all in the name of making White people more comfortable with benefitting from their ancestors’ ill-gotten gains, as well as current inequalities. This is the “polite” brand of racism that prioritizes White supremacist notions of decorum, comfort, and acceptable forms of social expression over dismantling racism and alleviating the suffering that it causes.

      • Senal@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 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
          ·
          10 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
            ·
            9 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
              9 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
                0
                ·
                8 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
                  0
                  ·
                  8 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.

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

        No, you’re missing pieces of the puzzle. Modern day abortion bans are a piece of legal child trafficking via adoptions.

        Latina girl tries to get an abortion. She shows up at a fake abortion clinic because she’s ESL and those clinics are deceitful. She gets guilt tripped into giving her baby up for adoption.

        The fake abortion clinic just so conveniently works with an adoption center that only adopts out to Christian families that can pay them about $20k-$40k for a kid. This money doesn’t go to the birth mother. Most of these adopting families are white.

        Then these Christian organizations go on to lobby for less social safety nets, less abortion access, less birth control access and education, thus driving more desperate girls to their clinics.

        Race plays a part - this is continued genocide happening primarily against Native American Latinos who lack the same legal protections as Native Americans from here in the US, even though those borders didn’t exist before we put them there. Those are very similar groups of people who share some ancestry and used to trade with each other.

        Yes other races are damaged by this too. It’s just not in the same way. It’s okay to be intersectional instead of just giving up thinking about race altogether.

        Here’s an example of one of these adoption agencies: https://christianhomes.com/

        Almost everyone supports abortion in rapes cases and risk to life cases - it is very rare that someone literally thinks it’s the same as murdering a toddler if you actually ask them about those “fringe” cases.

        It’s more that people are reactionary and don’t want to actually think and so they just parrot whatever is comfortable to them.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 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.
  • samokosik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 days ago

    If someone says, “I support this because I am conservative,” you actually mean, “I support this because I am a cock.”

  • ignirtoq@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 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
      0
      ·
      10 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.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      Let’s rephrase your question a couple of times:

      “How difficult is it to remain abstinent when you’re married and don’t want a kid since birth control might fail?”

      “How difficult is it to remain abstinent when you have been given inadequate sex education in your red state school and don’t understand how to have safe sex?”

      And then there’s-

      “How difficult is it to remain abstinent while you’re being raped?”

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      how difficult is it to remain abstinent when you want a kid but pregnancy complications means if you don’t abort the pregnancy the woman is going to die?

      if there’s something wrong with the pregnancy that you wanted, just go back in time and don’t have sex with your spouse.

      #fucking moron.

      • LunchMoneyThief@links.hackliberty.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 days ago

        It’s really difficult. You have to draft legislation, deliberate over it with room full of bureaucrats, hope and wait for it to pass sigh good session, guys, now where to for lunch?!

        Meanwhile, the decentralized solution is to refrain from recreational sex. It’s super easy to do! I use Arch btw.

  • Mwa@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 days ago

    fully banning it too far its only rlly good for saving a womens life

  • Warjac@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 days ago

    I’m not aure why they don’t consider the fetus a home invader and try to invoke stand your ground laws.

  • Podunk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 days ago

    Please support Elevated Access in any way you can. Even if you are not a pilot or know jack shit about general aviation, you can help. Donate to them or reach out and drive a friend to a local ga airport. Its probably outside of your hometown. Ill land on a dirt strip to help.

    I personally fly for them. Many pilots in texas do. We can cross state borders to get texas women the care they need and deserve. Colorado or new mexico doesnt have to be a ten hour drive. Ken Paxton and his ilk want to shut down the state highways to stop pro choice in Texas, but they cant stop federal airways.

    • Reyali@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      I knew about Angel Flight but wasn’t aware of this. Thank you for sharing, and for flying! My dad was the top contributing pilot for Angel Flight in Texas a few years back. If he was still able to fly, I’d be pushing him to take this on as well.