Women Having To Flee States With Insane Restrictions on Abortions

https://www.economist.com/united-st...ful-maternal-mortality-rate-looks-set-to-rise

We will already have the worst maternal mortality rate in the industrial world. Where a typical country has three mortality out of 100,000 live births, while the USA has a mortality rate of 17 (more than five times higher). States like Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee, are becoming illegal, already had mortality rates above 30. They will get much worse.

There are about 3.6 million births per year in the USA. If the mortality rate goes up by 10, there will be 3,600 more women that die. If you think abortion is murder, that might not be a lot of deaths. There might be about 600,000 abortions per year, and anti-abortion laws in some states might reduce the number of abortions by 10%. That would be 60,000 fetuses (or "unborn babies" as the Republicans call them). Maybe 3,600 women dying is worth saving 60,000...

But we should not lie. This is going to kill women.

Please list the top ten states women are "fleeing from" due to a reduction in baby killing options.
 
Don't be such a tool. Nobody's "fleeing" from anywhere. The only thing this chick is "fleeing" from is personal accountability.

There have already been quite a few cases where there will never be a live birth, but it will hurt the health of the mother to carry the pregnancy to term. The woman happens to be in the wrong state, and must leave that state in a hurry to get an abortion in another state. That is the definition of fleeing.
 
The idiot doesn't think Mexico is part of the industrialised world.

It is not considered a first world/industrialized/developed country. If you feel that it is the equal of the USA in economic development, feel free to take that up with The Economist. I really do not care.
 
Please list the top ten states women are "fleeing from" due to a reduction in baby killing options.

Are you denying that women who need abortions are fleeing states where they cannot get an abortion to go to states where they can get abortions? Which states are which is changing from day to day, which causes more chaos. A woman can have an appointment for the next day, only to find the laws changed overnight, and they can not longer get a life saving abortion until they are further along towards death.
 
Where is this mass exodus of women occurring? What state is seeing women flee it in mass numbers?

Why would there be a mass exodus? Women needing abortions are relatively rare, so the number of women fleeing is a constant trickle, not a mass thing. Also an exodus is usually an immigration (more permanent), where as fleeing to get an abortion would be more temporary. They flee, get the abortion, and then they return home.
 
Where are all these "fleeing women"?

I, and others, have posted several stories of women who had to flee their states to get abortions. In fact, this thread began with a story of a woman who had to flee.

It is reality that this is happening. You may question how often women who need abortions must go to another state to get them, but it is obviously happening.

We are having a problem that the alt right cannot accept reality.
 
Poor come back a 1/10 for normal people. But it's a 10/10 for an Alzheimer patient like you. You got added point for effort.:laugh:

Another poor post on your part. You really need some lessons...and apparently all the schooling I am doing is upsetting you too much to have an effect.

It is good for a laugh, though.
 
based on medieval science that says the fetus is nothing but water......I wonder if the doctors in the pediatrics division of Mt. Sinai Hospital still believe that to true......

The SCOTUS position on overturning Roe actually was based on medieval law. Ironic. Every twumpard accusation is a confession.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opini...ling-betrays-medieval-ignorance-anc-rcna27473

"Alito claims historical precedent for his anti-Roe position, but in fact, abortion has been a widely accepted practice from antiquity to the modern era. Historian John M. Riddle believes many women actually may have had more access to reproductive care in the actual Dark Ages (the early medieval period, roughly the 5th century to 10th century) than they have in many parts of the United States today. "
 
I'm pretty sure an appendectomy and an abortion are very different procedures... although they do both begin with the letter "a"... If a woman miscarries, does she not mourn the loss of her child? The very definition of being pregnant is having a child developing in the uterus... The ultimate goal is to lessen the Huge numbers of abortions happening every year...to not treat them as just another method of birth control...this is in everyone's best interests when all is said and done...don't you think?

Whew.. a lot to unpack there. So you are comparing:

A woman, who is excited about an upcoming birth, losing her child via miscarriage to -

A little girl, raped and impregnated desperate to get rid of the rape fetus.


Your logic is troubling.
 
.
Kentucky will vote on abortion in November.

Battle at the ballot box | Kentuckians to vote on abortion in November

Constitutional Amendment Two is on the ballot, proposing a change to the state Constitution stating the document does not ensure a right to abortion.

Author: Grace McKenna
Published: 6:47 PM EDT June 27, 2022
Updated: 6:47 PM EDT June 27, 2022

LOUISVILLE, Ky. — In the wake of the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe V. Wade, Kentucky voters are set to decide another issue in the abortion debate.

Constitutional Amendment 2, which is on the general election ballot Nov. 8, reads: "To protect human life, nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to secure or protect a right to abortion or require the funding of abortion."

https://www.whas11.com/article/news...ucky/417-a3fbe2c8-0df6-47c1-8232-6837f043eecb

Hey, you know. it's not Kansas but Kentucky was where there was all that bullshit about the City Clerk refusing to sign marriage licenses for "the gays".

I'm done trying to make predictions.
 
I do think...which is why I say that a woman with a pregnancy occurring in her own body should have the right to terminate it if she chooses.

There is no reason to lessen the number of abortions happening each year. The number happening is just the number happening.

Anyone who thinks they are on some moral crusade by opposing a woman's right to have an abortion is kidding him/herself. A pro-choice stance is every bit as moral as an anti-abortion choice.

No, by it's very name, "pro-choice" is superior in morality because by its very nature, gives women a choice, versus being forced to carry an unwanted fetus to term.

"Pro-life" - gives a woman only 2 choices, birth or jail.
 
Back
Top