“Pro-life” Phonies

[TexasTiger 8,659]

[I_M4_AU 5,561]

So, Axios quotes a report from Gender Equity Policy Institute that indicates child birth can be dangerous and somehow can state delivering babies can be 3Xs more dangerous than aborting in certain states.  All this after just 9 months or so since the Dobbs decision.

This must have been one of those long term reports that are beyond reproach.  

I don’t believe it.

[icanthearyou 3,148]

The lives of the unborn are sacred.

After birth, only the lives of those who are economically "useful" are sacred.

[icanthearyou 3,148]

States with the highest rates of child poverty:

Mississippi 26%

Louisiana 24.3%

New Mexico 21.6%

Alabama 20.9%

Arkansas 20.8%

W. Virginia 20.3%

Georgia 19.5%

Kentucky 19.4%

Texas 18.8%

South Carolina 18.8%

Oklahoma 18.6%

Tennessee 18.4%

[jj3jordan 1,610]

Kill them all. That’ll fix it ICHY.

[icanthearyou 3,148]

1 hour ago, jj3jordan said:

Kill them all. That’ll fix it ICHY.

Your ignorance and indifference are noted.

However, to imply that I want them killed is an outright lie.

You have a lot of work to do in order to be a decent human being.

[homersapien 9,490]

On 1/22/2023 at 12:32 PM, I_M4_AU said:

So, Axios quotes a report from Gender Equity Policy Institute that indicates child birth can be dangerous and somehow can state delivering babies can be 3Xs more dangerous than aborting in certain states.  All this after just 9 months or so since the Dobbs decision.

This must have been one of those long term reports that are beyond reproach.  

I don’t believe it.

Perhaps because you misinterpreted it.

It didn't say laws banning abortion are directly responsible for birthing deaths.  It said that women in states that ban abortions are 3X more likely to die giving birth.

The only logical conclusion is that legislatures in those states don't exhibit as much concern about women dying giving birth compared to legislatures in states that allow legal abortions. 

They claim to be "pro-life" when it comes to the unborn fetus, but they don't exhibit equal concern for the living woman - where are the efforts to reduce childbirth deaths for women? 

Guess it's easier - and cheaper -  to simply impose laws on women to mandate giving birth than it is to provide guaranteed prenatal healthcare (not to mention postnatal child care). 

Thus, the "pro-life" hypocrisy. 

 

Edited January 23 by homersapien

[Son of A Tiger 83]

[jj3jordan 1,610]

6 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

Your ignorance and indifference are noted.

However, to imply that I want them killed is an outright lie.

You have a lot of work to do in order to be a decent human being.

Sorry I won’t be lowering my ideals so you will consider me “decent”.

[autigeremt 5,635]

Poverty Rate by State 2023 (worldpopulationreview.com)

A look at overall poverty rates in the United States. Familiar faces. 

[CoffeeTiger 3,373]

 

“The unborn” are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It’s almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.

Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.  — Pastor Dave Barnhart

 

 

[I_M4_AU 5,561]

25 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

 

“The unborn” are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It’s almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.

Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.  — Pastor Dave Barnhart

 

 

I think you just outed Ichy.  

I guess to this *pastor* we need to abort all babies until we *fix* the problems he sees, would this be a correct assumption?  What a defeatist way of looking at the world.

[I_M4_AU 5,561]

Here is our VP misquoting the Declaration of Independence:

 

She also left out *by their creator* after endowed.  What a scum.

[CoffeeTiger 3,373]

19 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I think you just outed Ichy.  

I guess to this *pastor* we need to abort all babies until we *fix* the problems he sees, would this be a correct assumption?  What a defeatist way of looking at the world.

 

No, it's simply making an observation about how easy, risk free, and convenient it is to support abortion bans, as opposed to taking care of the living, which requires work, sacrifice, and commitment from society at large.  

 

Alabama for example bans abortion with a snap of the finger while at the same time endlessly debating year after year with little change or action on how to not be one of the worst States in the country in health, poverty, education, and welfare. 

Conservatives in Alabama are too busy building private run prisons, closing hospitals, denying Medicaid expansion, executing prisoners, and making guns easier to get that they never have time or energy to make things better or easier for anyone who isn't a middle class white Christian. 

 

 

[I_M4_AU 5,561]

5 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

No, it's simply making an observation about how easy, risk free, and convenient it is to support abortion bans, as opposed to taking care of the living, which requires work, sacrifice, and commitment from society at large.  

I guess it would be so much easier to just abort babies after conception because all of you know that a child doesn’t stand a chance in this world.  One would wonder if our society has forgotten how babies are conceived and that it is preventable.  But that doesn’t matter as we have a convenient way of solving that problem.

If the ban will force these young people to be responsible for their actions, I don’t see that as a bad thing.

13 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Conservatives in Alabama are too busy building private run prisons, closing hospitals, denying Medicaid expansion, executing prisoners, and making guns easier to get that they never have time or energy to make things better or easier for anyone who isn't a middle class white Christian. 

I’m a little confused; is this statement racist or anti-religious?  Or both?

[CoffeeTiger 3,373]

20 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I guess it would be so much easier to just abort babies after conception because all of you know that a child doesn’t stand a chance in this world.  One would wonder if our society has forgotten how babies are conceived and that it is preventable.  But that doesn’t matter as we have a convenient way of solving that problem.

If the ban will force these young people to be responsible for their actions, I don’t see that as a bad thing.

 

Yes, force innumerable unwanted children to live a life of poverty, abuse, foster care, and decreased standard of living because you want to 'Teach a lesson" to their 'whoring' mothers.

Christ. 

 

 

 

20 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I’m a little confused; is this statement racist or anti-religious?  Or both?

It's reality in Alabama. What are you disputing? Are you saying Alabama politics isn't dominated by white Christians? or that the State isn't bottom of the barrel in most quality of life rankings? 

 

Edited January 23 by CoffeeTiger

[I_M4_AU 5,561]

20 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Yes, force innumerable unwanted children to live a life of poverty, abuse, foster care, and decreased standard of living because you want to 'Teach a lesson" to their 'whoring' mothers.

Christ. 

No, I am all for taking personal responsibility for your actions.  Have you fathered a child or had a woman pregnant and have them get an abortion?  You don’t have to divulge any information, but it is possible to be responsible.  Assuming a person can’t control themselves is having a low expectation of your fellow human being.

If you don’t set the standard, it will not be met.  Christ is exactly who to look to for the standard.

25 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

It's reality in Alabama. What are you disputing? Are you saying Alabama politics isn't dominated by white Christians? or that the State isn't bottom of the barrel in most quality of life rankings? 

I’m not disputing anything other than you have a defeatist attitude when it comes to the politics of Alabama.  If you live there, you have a voice.

[icanthearyou 3,148]

14 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

Sorry I won’t be lowering my ideals so you will consider me “decent”.

Control is not an "ideal". 

[I_M4_AU 5,561]

Here’s the other end of the equation:

 

There has to be a median somewhere.

[CoffeeTiger 3,373]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

Here’s the other end of the equation:

 

There has to be a median somewhere.

 

We had a middle ground. Your Supreme Court decided do away with it.

[I_M4_AU 5,561]

20 minutes ago, CoffeeTiger said:

 

We had a middle ground. Your Supreme Court decided do away with it.

It didn’t do away with it, they moved the responsibilities to the states where it was 51 years ago before your Supreme Court conjured up a *right* out of whole cloth.

[CoffeeTiger 3,373]

17 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

It didn’t do away with it, they moved the responsibilities to the states where it was 51 years ago before your Supreme Court conjured up a *right* out of whole cloth.

That still doesn't change the fact that it was a 'middle ground' where pro-life states were allowed to severely limit abortion access but not outright ban it (usually only have one clinic for the entire state), while pro-choice states were limited in what they could legally allow for abortion.

 

Now that we finally have the Conservative wet dream of "States rights" on this issue, you want to complain that some states are taking it further than you think should be allowed? 

[I_M4_AU 5,561]

1 minute ago, CoffeeTiger said:

Now that we finally have the Conservative wet dream of "States rights" on this issue, you want to complain that some states are taking it further than you think should be allowed? 

I didn’t complain, I just pointed out the other extreme from Alabama.  Do you believe infanticide is a solution?

And abortion had a leftist creep, like all leftist ideas, from safe legal and rare to abortion on demand.  The Dems are wanting to codify Roe into law, but which version?  This is going to take time to settle.

[SaltyTiger 6,052]

9 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

 

“The unborn” are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don’t resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don’t ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don’t need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don’t bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It’s almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.

Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.  — Pastor Dave Barnhart

 

 

No. Some people simply believe abortion is wrong. Made my mind up decades ago. Every circumstance is different and is understood by reasonable people.  Pastor Dave sounding off with typical progressive rhetoric.

[I_M4_AU 5,561]

Another ramification on the war on reproduction:

 

From the OP:

"Women in states with abortion bans are nearly three times more likely to die during pregnancy, childbirth or soon after giving
birth." Axios reports.

Fear mongering about childbirth doesn’t help.