FrenLivesMatter

FrenLivesMatter, 7 months ago

The guy who invented it:

https://lemmy.today/pictrs/image/7deef662-c4c7-4cfe-9b1b-39bb743dd1d8.jpeg

FrenLivesMatter, 7 months ago

I’m afraid that isn’t made from copper either

FrenLivesMatter, 7 months ago

Why stop there? You have no idea, right? So why do you masturbate or use condoms? You’re killing millions of potential babies!

Not the guy you’re responding to, but you have a point. Coincidentally, most religions are also against both, so at least you can’t accuse them of being inconsistent on the issue of reproduction.

FrenLivesMatter, 7 months ago

Banning abortion doesn’t stop abortion, it just shifts it to a black market where women are far more likely to die.

Perhaps, but it will likely at least severely reduce it. It’s certainly not appropriate to assume that every woman who would have had an abortion when it’s safe and legal would also do so when it’s dangerous and illegal. More likely, it would lead to a rise in babies given up for adoption.

FrenLivesMatter, 7 months ago

So you’re saying it’s better to perfectly kill babies than to imperfectly give them up for adoption?

There is historical precedent that your assumptions are not the case.

Yeah, I’m going to need a source on that.

FrenLivesMatter, 7 months ago

I honestly wouldn’t know where to start looking for data on that. But I didn’t make the claim that this was definitely going to happen, just that it was the likely outcome, based on the common sense assumption that if abortion access wasn’t easy, safe, and anonymous, and involved a significant risk of injury or death for the mother, more women would likely find it less risky to carry their pregnancy to term and give up the baby for adoption if they haven’t changed their mind on it by then.

Also, they may simply choose to use birth control more often, and/or insist on their partners wearing a condom.

From my point of view, I find the claim that making abortion illegal would not prevent even a single one from occurring far more incredulous and therefore requiring a higher level of proof.

FrenLivesMatter, 7 months ago

Me neither, I was talking about historical precedent, not some hard and fast rule of the universe.

Well that’s the thing, “historical precedent” means that this has actually demonstrably happened before, in which case there should be data on it. That’s why I asked for proof. Which I understand you’re most likely not going to be able to provide, since there obviously can’t be any reliable data on the amount of clandestine abortions that happened before it was legalized.

First of all, with the “death or injury” part of this, I don’t see why this is preferable. Seems like threatening their lives and happiness in the interest of forcing births.

I mean, I’m not a woman, but if I were, and I was given the choice between having an illegal procedure that had a good chance of injury or death (and no possible recourse), and carrying an unwanted pregnancy to term, I think I would choose the latter, because it seems a lot safer, no matter how inconvenient.

This is just a piece of that bullshit take that argues women will learn to love their future babies if they are just forced to carry them long enough that abortions are more difficult and less legally accessable. Nah

Well, in the absence of any hard data, I find that idea more convincing than the opposite, but again, I’ll admit that I’m not a woman. But unless you are, you’re likely no more of an expert on this than I am. And even if you are AND have gone through all this, you’d just be a single data point of anecdotal evidence, which would not be enough to convince me.

Good thing I wasn’t claiming that then. I’m saying the amount prevented would be negligible, not magically impossibly zero. It would likely be a small amount, and utterly overshadowed by the negative effects of banning abortions.

You realize that for statistical purposes, “zero” and “negligible” are absolutely identical, right? It’s called a null hypothesis, look it up.

FrenLivesMatter, 7 months ago

Okay, well I don’t care enough about winning arguments on the Internet in order to write a whole research paper right now, so I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree and call it a draw.

FrenLivesMatter, 7 months ago

Well, a draw means that neither of us is more correct than the other, at least that’s what I’ll take away from this.

FrenLivesMatter, 7 months ago

Okay? I never said that he was.