this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
771 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2546 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, it claimed to be removing the judiciary from the abortion debate. In reality, it simply gave the courts a macabre new task: deciding how far states can push a patient toward death before allowing her to undergo an emergency abortion.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit offered its own answer, declaring that Texas may prohibit hospitals from providing “stabilizing treatment” to pregnant patients by performing an abortion—withholding the procedure until their condition deteriorates to the point of grievous injury or near-certain death.

The ruling proves what we already know: Roe’s demise has transformed the judiciary into a kind of death panel that holds the power to elevate the potential life of a fetus over the actual life of a patient.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 36 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's the thing. It's okay when their god kills a fetus for fun. But we're never supposed to no matter what.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 41 points 10 months ago (3 children)

They literally want to investigate every miscarriage as a potential murder

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 38 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Yes. The objective is to punish women for the crime of having sex.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 25 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Punish poor women.

The Rich and Politician daughters and mistresses will still have full access to abortions under the guise of health retreat/2 week vacation/etc etc.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Well, as long as daddy/hubby approve. In their ideal world, they'd be able to control this as well, and bring about the end of no-fault divorce, etc.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago

Sex with anyone but them, mind. You know they'd have no issues flying their mistresses to a more permissive state for an abortion.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 15 points 10 months ago

Having unauthorized sex. Look at that GOP woman who was having three ways to 'save her marriage.' It was fine for her to have relations with another woman as long as the owner approved.

[–] ChexMax@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Which is absolutely insane, especially considering 1 in 4 pregnancies end in miscarriage (and that's just confirmed pregnancies! The actual number is likely higher!)

[–] ultranaut@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago (1 children)

From what I recall it's actually the majority of pregnancies that end in miscarriage, it's just that they usually occur before the woman can even really notice she was pregnant or is having a miscarriage. From the woman's perspective she may of had a particularly unpleasant monthly period when it was actually a miscarriage. It's one of those things no one likes to acknowledge because people find it disturbing and it completely undermines a lot of assumptions people like to make about "the miracle of life".

[–] ChexMax@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

Yes, I think if it ends in the first 4 or 5 weeks it's considered a "chemical pregnancy" and doesn't even count towards the stats. It's extremely common. The whole point of not announcing your pregnancy in the first 12 weeks is because it's so common to not make it past 12 weeks

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 12 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Meanwhile, the backlog of untested rape kits keeps growing and growing...

Priorities.