Some friends I just can’t shake

hard enough

around the neck

with a firm grip

    • dreugeworst@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’m gonna charitably guess he means a unborn baby at nine months, but… Does he think those are aborted or some?

      • Disinfect056@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        You are somehow correct. I do mean nine month unborn baby, its not my opinion if they are killed or not, depends on the state some will allow you to kill your 9 month old baby.

        • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          26
          ·
          5 months ago

          No they fucking don’t.  Unless there’s lethal fetal anomalies or threats to the health of the mother, no one is aborting babies at 9 months. Ffs turn off Fox News already.

                • theonyltruemupf@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  With a quick Google search I can also find out why the earth is in fact a flat triangle. You need to use your critical thinking skills and evaluate sources.

                  There are states without hard limits, but it is not “legal to kill a 9 month old baby”.

                  1. Late term abortions are really rare and only performed if there is no chance of survival for the fetus while the mother is at risk.

                  2. If these horrible conditions are met, doctors will find out well before the 9th month, often before the 3rd trimester.

        • Girru00@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          5 months ago

          Sorry but that’s not true… either emergency c section at around 7 months onwards or regular delivery etc. No such thing as an abortion as far as Im aware. Is this what you think a “late term abortion” is?

          • Disinfect056@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 months ago

            No, this is what I mean: [ Viability: 14 states ban abortions after the fetus is considered viable. Some laws that don’t specify a limit say it’s up to the abortion provider’s “judgment” to determine whether a fetus is viable. Third trimester: Virginia is the only state that prohibits abortions in the pregnancy’s third trimester, which starts at around 25 weeks, per Guttmacher. It’s also the lone southern state that hasn’t banned or restricted abortion since the end of Roe.

            No limit: Six states and Washington, D.C., do not impose any term restrictions. That has not changed since the overturning of Roe.](https://www.axios.com/2022/05/14/abortion-state-laws-bans-roe-supreme-court)

            • Girru00@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              5 months ago

              Sure, but you have the logic backwards. Viability isnt used so that people can get an abortion even though the baby can survive, its so the physician can make the judgement to deliver a baby that can survive instead of attempting an abortion - when the mothers life is in danger.

              There is no magic cut off date, where all babies are ready to deliver or will die. So basically the math goes like this: physician determines the mother will die if the baby does not come out. If they determine the baby is viable --> the baby comes out and is alive via medical procedure (not abortion). If they determine that the baby is not viable --> the baby comes out and cannot survive via medical procedure (abortion). Fyi, in case you think oh well, keep the baby in: the mom dies, the baby is not viable to survive and dies too. Thats it. No one is aborting babies that could be birthed and survive.

              “Viability is reached when, in the judgment of the attending physician on the particular facts of the case before him, there is a reasonable likelihood of the fetus’ sustained survival outside the womb, with or without artificial support. Because this point may differ with each pregnancy, neither the legislature nor the courts may proclaim one of the elements entering into the ascertainment of viability – be it weeks of gestation or fetal weight or any other single factor – as the determinant of when the State has a compelling interest in the life or health of the fetus.” Colautti v. Franklin (1979)

              This is a different situation than early pregnancy abortions. Different areas of focus, rights, benefits, ethics etc. Dont treat both rights as requiring the same logic to support.

              It seems to me, at least, no matter what someones position is on early term terminations, late term is a slam dunk obvious answer. Leave the decision to the parents and their physicians, not lawyers and legislators.

              • Disinfect056@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                I wish you were correct. But that is not the case. “No limit: Six states and Washington, D.C., do not impose any term restrictions. That has not changed since the overturning of Roe.” No matter what the case is you dint have restictions.

                Qe have to understand that the reason we have some laws is to protect the most inosent, specially those who cant defend themselfs. We do this with the older, handicaped and kids. Kids are not able to drink, why? Why cant they smoke? They are not mature enough to make desitions for themselves, so we take that responsability upon their parents.

                So, should laws be put to protect the unborn babies? Is their life worth more or less then yours? Why can you kill the baby before 9 months but not after? What is different? “If the baby continues to develop it will kill the mother so lets kill the baby so the mother can live” is the argument before 9 months but never after 9 months.

                • dreugeworst@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Wow, you just completely ignored what he said, and quoted the same short sentence you quoted before as if it settles the issue.

                  I hope you’re trolling, in which case: A+ effort, well done

    • Disinfect056@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Depends on the state, some mothers are able to kill their 9 month baby (does notmatter what the father opinion is)

          • cheesepotatoes@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            It doesn’t matter if there are no legal restrictions. No doctor that wants to keep their license is aborting a 9 month baby with no medical justification. You’re just spouting disinformation.

            Did you even read your own source?

            1% were performed at or after 21 weeks, according to the most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

            People who tend to have abortions later in a pregnancy do so because of “medical concerns such as fetal anomalies or maternal life endangerment, as well as barriers to care that cause delays in obtaining an abortion,” per KFF.

            Nobody wakes up at the 40 week mark and says fuck it, let’s abort this bitch. That’s pure fox news fiction.

            • Disinfect056@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              Nobody wakes up at the 40 week mark and says fuck it, let’s abort this bitch. That’s pure fox news fiction.

              1% of people who kill the baby do.

              What about the 93% perform before week 13. Is that not “I didnt want the baby but I was horney last weekend and I fucked without a condom so now Im killing the baby” acctitude?.

              People are just not responsable for their own actions its all.

              • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Cant say you are a conservative cause people will call you “rasist” “bigot” “sexist” “transphobic” and so on. Just because you think a 9 month old baby should have the same rights as a newtborn.

                What about the 93% perform before week 13. Is that not “I didnt want the baby but I was horney last weekend and I fucked without a condom so now Im killing the baby” acctitude?.

                lol. Interesting how you just shift to saying the quiet part out loud that you were just crying about being called sexist for even though you started off pretending you actually cared about babies.

                So easily too, all it took was being proved wrong on the most surface-level inflammatory argument that fox has been able to manufacture through lies and deception, relying on their audience’s extremely poor understanding of how the medical system interacts with the legal system. An understanding which you clearly have no intentions of improving just so you can stay mad.

                “😭 Just because…” my ass. You ain’t slick. We can see through your shit.

                I’d go on, but I don’t think you need to be told what’s wrong with your new argument. Otherwise you would have started with it.

                • Disinfect056@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  What are you talking about?

                  I hope you get the help you need.

                  Keeo it up, be responsable, enjoy life!

              • cheesepotatoes@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Bringing a baby into this world is a massive fucking responsibility. Absolutely nobody who is not ready to do it should be forced into it, full stop. It’s not about personal responsibility, it’s about the real world financial and health implications.

                I’m typing this literally from the hospital as my wife is in labour with our first child. Nobody should be forced to birth a baby they are not mentally, emotionally, physically and financially prepared for. Especially over stupid religious and/or faux-science bullshit. Stay the fuck out of other people’s lives, you cunt.

                • Disinfect056@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Totally agree. If you are not ready to have a baby dont have sex. Hard to do but simple as well. Its a big responsability. Just like borroeing a lot of money, easy to do but complicated to pay back. Need to be responsable.

                  Own it, be responsable for your own actions.

                  • cheesepotatoes@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    Ah yes, abstinence. The preferred method of sexual education among the room temperature IQ’d.

                    Be straight and admit you just want to punish women for having vaginas. We can all read between the lines, you aren’t fooling anyone.

      • root_beer@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        Have you ever considered that, at that late in the term, most of those mothers wanted their babies but had to abort to survive or because the fetus was already either dead or may as well have been? You talk like they’re just wantonly killing babies (just to spite men for some reason) because, idk, this is the future liberals want, drink blood, hail gay satan, whatever

        • Disinfect056@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          If the babie is death then its not an abortion. If the baby dies by natural reasons its not an abortion.

          Drink blood? Hail gay? What are you talking about

          • If the babie is death then its not an abortion

            Except that plenty of surgical abortions happen because the baby is already dead in the mother’s uterus though.
            Being dead doesn’t magically teleport it away and it needs to be taken out for the mother to survive.
            Which is, medically speaking, the same procedure as a surgical abortion.

            • Disinfect056@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              From wikipidia: Abortion is the termination of a pregnancy

              If the baby is dead the pregnancy has finished already.

                • Disinfect056@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Gdefinitions matter, and yes states that have banned abortion even have exceptions. Defining what abortion is is the main point. Cant put something in to law if ita not define.

                  But what does it matter if some people would argue that “woman” does not have a meaning.

      • theneverfox@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Do you know how they abort a 9 month old baby? A 6 month old, even?

        They induce delivery or do a c section. You can’t just vacuum it out or poison it or something - it’s several pounds of flesh and bone, and (as always) the biggest issue is the skull. It’s gotta come out, or the mother will die… Babies can die at any moment, and it will decompose. All that bacteria gets into the blood, and that bacteria poisons the blood… Sepsis is a death sentence - whether it’s an organ or a fetus, it has to come out or your chances aren’t good.

        So you have to get the skull out - it’s the widest part. So either induced delivery (the quicker, easier option), or it’s surgery.

        A C section is something that is extremely common and relatively safe - there’s not really a third option unless the mother is likely to die from that or induced birth.

        There’s a whole approval process for non-standard procedures (or you’d lose your license and be begging for malpractice to drop you), and you’d need a specialist, probably a pediatric surgeon who does en-utero surgery. They’d also have to go through review and defend why it was medically necessary - they’d be risking their license and being dropped by malpractice insurance if they didn’t have a very good argument.

        It would be grueling too - it would be a long, physically intensive surgery for everyone involved. Extremely expensive too…

        So you’re doing an induced birth or a c section. It’s also likely going to be automatically classified as a risky birth, because it’s premature, so you’ll be getting a more experienced surgeon and experienced nurses who have specialized in pre-mature births (possibly a special team, depending on the size of the hospital… But it’ll be the most experienced people available).

        These are going to be the people who devoted their life to giving babies every chance possible. I know several well… Let me share a couple stories I’ve heard.

        An older couple was almost 9 months into the pregnancy, and very much wanted the child, especially knowing it was probably their last chance. It was an at risk pregnancy so they were watching closely, but seemed to be going along pretty well… They’d picked out a name and decorated the nursery, it could come any day now. Then suddenly, the woman felt pain, and they rushed in… The baby had died without warning. They were crushed, but they had to induce delivery. The nurse was delivering the corpse, and as the head came through it fell off.

        The nurse blocked their view as she delivered the body, and took it over to the washing station. In cases like this, she’d clean and dress it, take a footprint and picture to give them something to keep, and let them hold their child once to give them a chance to say goodbye. So she did all that, bundled it in a blanket and covered the neck with a ribbon, and gave them that chance without them ever realizing.

        In another case, a younger mother’s health was going downhill midway through the pregnancy and she came in - the baby had died inside her some time ago, and she didn’t realize. She was in bad shape because of sepsis, so immediately they induced delivery. It had rotted… The arms had already fallen off, and she delivered it in decomposing pieces. The nurse did a footprint, but didn’t show the body.

        But mostly, she delivered pre-mature births - babies that may or may not make it if she did everything she could. Even if it wasn’t breathing or the heart wasn’t beating, she put it on a ventilator and do infant CPR. Over the years she even learned to do weird things as a last ditch effort, like pricking the baby’s foot with a needle or holding them at a certain angle… Giving dying babies every chance is what she’s spent her life doing.

        I did also ask about what they do in that situation, with a super late term abortion - they’d deliver the baby, and as soon as it was stable she’d whisk it away to the NICU. They then never mentioned it to the mother unless she directly asked… Apparently the mother usually doesn’t, and so if it survives it goes up for whatever processes for adoption. If there’s any kernel of truth in these stories, women might be leaving the hospital thinking their child is dead.

        So I mentioned non-standard procedures risking everything - so there’s a clear line here too. Part of the modern Hippocratic oath is to minimize harm… They can prioritize the mother’s autonomy or health over the baby, but the baby has to come out. Maybe there’s some crazy situation where killing the baby would improve the mothers chances, but without a pressing reason, the baby is going to get any chance they can give it.

        But forget the laws. There’s no way in hell they’re killing babies just because the mother told them to… I’ve heard them talk shit about weird or stupid parents, but the only complaint I’ve ever heard about the babies is “it was really troublesome, it kept trying to die every time I looked away”