I traditionally have a thread heading to the election, here we go.
Get out the popcorn for this one.
Quote
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is expected to formally announce next week he is running for president in 2024, NBC News reported Thursday, citing two sources familiar with the matter.
The governor's official entry into the Republican primary field will put him head-to-head with former President Donald Trump, the party's current frontrunner for the nomination. Trump has already spent months treating DeSantis as his primary campaign rival, thrashing him with torrents of criticism over his gubernatorial record, his political skills and his personality.
Exactly. That observation dovetails nicely with the reality that conservative states with consistent republican political leadership have sadly high child poverty rates and higher infant mortality rates as compared to the rest of the country.
And the poverty and mortality rates would be less if their mothers had abortions? Mothers who are poor should have abortions so the babies are not born into poverty and will probably die anyway?
Is there any evidence to link poverty and mortality rates to abortion access in these states? Sounds like a terrible false equivalency
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Crusades said:
Perfect. Then we have some trust issues.
I don't care or pay any attention to P2025. I only looked at it because I heard it here. It's fantastical and ridiculous as the idea that we will all be living in the handmaid's tale fantasy fiction. The only attention it gets os rom demorats.
You do not have to believe Trump. There is no outside evidence that he supports P2025 either. The creators say it's not affiliated with any political candidate.
Reminds me of people saying their friend or family members have a mental illness because some of the behaviors are the same as some of the symptoms. So because somethings in P2025 are simular to what Trump says, or more accurately, interpreted as what Trump says, make him connected to it.
I think of Trump was a narcissist you claim him to be, he would not allow anyone but him to take credit for it. He would double down on it and claim is is "the best ever in history , every one agrees, I make the best policies.l, everyone loves me bla bla bla..". This serves as far better "evidence" than speculative hyperbolic theories by democrats designed to cause hysteria.
Pretty much anything Trump says or does is rejected. He doesn't care so why would he miraculously care about this?
It's been very sucesfull presenting this speculation and theory in order to invoke fear to deflect from Biden's cognitive decline.
There are always trust issues with well known liars and cheats. Trump and his associates have a long history of lying and cheating that predates his political life by decades.
I won't so easily or quickly dismiss the manifesto of some of the same people who thought up the plan to seperate children from family at the southern border during Trump's first failed term. The people who wrote this blueprint for Trump are influential in RNC politics across the country. It would be naive to think that the crazy people won't act out crazy ideas after we watched them act out craziness because of masks, vaccines and a lost election already. I mean, one of the authors of P2025 is currently in prison.
Of course Trump is going to be associated with the things that he has said or the policies he has mentioned. Trump is the unequivocal leader of the republican party. He has dictated the political agenda of the GOP legislators for 8 years now. All of a sudden we're all supposed to believe that these people went rogue and didn't include Trump in this brain storming, because the well known liar says so?
If Trump didn't care he wouldn't be trying to distance himself from P2025. That's simple logic. Trump is an obvious narcissist. That is not in question, it is reality.
When Trump lied about covid, that needed to be rejected.
When Trump lies about the 2020 election or the security of our elections in general, those lies should be rejected.
When Trump suggests that presidents should have absolute immunity, that should be rejected.
When Trump muses about terminating parts of the constitution which might limit his power, all patriots should reject that thinking.
There is quite a bit of our country and constitution that Trump doesn't care about if you actually listen to and watch what he does.
Crusades said:
No one is
Let's use the correct terminology and drop the vast and generic "healthcare".fallacy.
No one is denying women healthcare because they are women.
Yes. Women in guidance with their healthcare provider have the right to make their decision.
I never said otherwise.
I've never said I was against abortion.
Abortion is healthcare. Limiting access to abortion is limiting access to healthcare.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Crusades said:
And the poverty and mortality rates would be less if their mothers had abortions? Mothers who are poor should have abortions so the babies are not born into poverty and will probably die anyway?
Is there any evidence to link poverty and mortality rates to abortion access in these states? Sounds like a terrible false equivalency
Is that the way your logical thinking flows?
There are links and correlation between poverty and access to abortion in some states. There is data available, yes.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Crusades said:
Right. So the unwanted and difficult to place infants would be better off if their mothers terminated their pregnancy? That's not a dig, I certainly hope that's not what you think. Perhaps you should clarify that?
That's your assessment of your understanding? Or are you trying to create a strawman argument?
Right...... because you don't have a habit of citing cherry picked info that supports what you say.
It's okay. Child mortality/ poverty has several factors and cannot be related to one determinant. So I understand why you do not want to provide evidence.
There is no study/evidence to support that child mortality/poverty is directly related to abortion laws.
The only conclusive result would be less poor kids and less child mortality because they were never born poor and didn't have a chance to become a mortality stat because they never lived.
I didn't say anything about "killing after birth" or before birth.
Any termination after the second trimester would only be done in order to save the mother and the baby. There for this does not fit in with the super scarry republican abortion law handmaid's tail fallacy that republicans/Trump are trying to take away women's health rights. My primary point. My personal experience was to solidify that what I had woukd not be restricted by republican abortion laws.
Appeal to emotion fallacy. "Do you think so badly about women"?
It's illogical to consider that a woman would never or rarely get an abortion later in pregnancy for anything other than her health. She loved that baby for 32 weeks.; When women murder their babies and children all the time. Most do not, but there's laws against it.
Why don't you just tell us how many abortions happen after 24 weeks for frivolous reasons? It would make your argument factual. The only "late term" abortion I ever say in almost 38 years of delivering anesthesia was a c-section we did on a woman's who's fetus died in utero late in the pregnancy. Technically it wasn't an abortion but the zealots of today would stone her verbally anyway. I said in my post that it was Trump was the one spouting off about abortion after birth. And yes, the Republicans have made it their platform to Interfere with women's rights to health care when women are forced to travel to other states to get an abortion for a missed AB because they aren't septic enough for OB GYN's to feel comfortable enough to do it. Don't you read the news? And now, Clarence Thomas and Alito want to take a "relook" into birth control. It's not a fallacy to mention you and The Handmaiden in the same sentence if you think women are flocking to have abortions at 32 weeks. States keep statistics on this stuff and they are exceedingly rare. Yes, you must hate women to even accuse us of such callousness.
And the poverty and mortality rates would be less if their mothers had abortions? Mothers who are poor should have abortions so the babies are not born into poverty and will probably die anyway?
Is there any evidence to link poverty and mortality rates to abortion access in these states? Sounds like a terrible false equivalency
Duh. Crime is related to poverty. I guess you might think that poverty is all genteel. Addiction is related to poverty. Addict parents are related to child death and misery. Go to any ER and you will see the pattern of children killed by mom's boyfriend or the gun they left in open sight of children. So yes, Since the rates of homelessness for kids growing up in the foster care system are over 90%, we might have a better society with lower crime rates which, BTW, are inversely related to the rates of abortions. It's not a pretty construct but it is true. I wouldn't want to a y of the teenagers I work with in the foster system to be denied an abortion if they wanted one. Some of these babies end up going to addicted relatives and only some are lucky enough to get reported to CPS. I'd rather have my eyes open to reality than to some made up religious baloney. Humans are just monkeys with keys who behave worst then most animals when it comes to children. We had a famous case in my town when mom's boyfriend put an infant in a dryer. The child lived but will suffer that trauma for the rest if her life. Incest is rather frequent in these families. Wake up to reality and consider the ethics involved here. Plenty if religions do not condemn abortion and make exceptions. I think Jesus likes them better.
Crusades
1,655 Posts
And the poverty and mortality rates would be less if their mothers had abortions? Mothers who are poor should have abortions so the babies are not born into poverty and will probably die anyway?
Is there any evidence to link poverty and mortality rates to abortion access in these states? Sounds like a terrible false equivalency