• xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    153
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is a form of class warfare: it isn’t the rich women - they can go out of state or country to get proper medical care if they need it… it’s poor women that are bearing this awful cost.

    • danc4498@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      2 months ago

      Oddly enough, it’s the poor that are making this happen to themselves by voting for these people. Religion is a hell of a drug.

  • Podunk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    80
    ·
    2 months ago

    Please support Elevated Access in any way you can. Even if you are not a pilot or know jack shit about general aviation, you can help. Donate to them or reach out and drive a friend to a local ga airport. Its probably outside of your hometown. Ill land on a dirt strip to help.

    I personally fly for them. Many pilots in texas do. We can cross state borders to get texas women the care they need and deserve. Colorado or new mexico doesnt have to be a ten hour drive. Ken Paxton and his ilk want to shut down the state highways to stop pro choice in Texas, but they cant stop federal airways.

    • Reyali@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 months ago

      I knew about Angel Flight but wasn’t aware of this. Thank you for sharing, and for flying! My dad was the top contributing pilot for Angel Flight in Texas a few years back. If he was still able to fly, I’d be pushing him to take this on as well.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      59
      ·
      2 months ago

      They were never pro-life. They were never even pro-birth. They’ve never argued for anything like free pre-natal care. If something is wrong with your baby and you and your baby are going to die, that’s god’s will, so don’t you dare get an abortion.

      They are not pro-anything. They’re anti-abortion. That’s as far as it goes whether they admit it or not.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          2 months ago

          I know. I just don’t think they should be allowed to get away with calling themselves that unchallenged beyond the “and you call yourselves pro-life?” I feel the need to point out that they literally could not give less of a shit whether or not any given fetus lives or dies as long as medical intervention isn’t required for the latter.

          • Jojo, Lady of the West
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            On the one hand, I absolutely think it’s worth calling out. On the other hand, they’ll often be very quick to try and turn it around on you, calling anyone pro-choice pro-death or saying they “want to kill babies”.

            Obviously those aren’t quite the same thing, but they see it as the same and I just wish there was a way to bridge that gap and have everyone listen to each other…

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 months ago

              At which point, I tell them that it’s not about the fetus, it’s about the fact that people have a fundamental right to their own bodies and no one should be allowed to use their body without their consent. Just like we have people consent to organ donation.

              If they want fetuses to live, great. Start working on artificial womb technology. They don’t seem interested.

              • Jojo, Lady of the West
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 months ago

                Again, I agree with you. I just see the danger of refusing to acknowledge how a group conceptualizes their own position, even if they’re being deliberately blind to other factors.

                And I wish people could spend more effort trying to understand each other’s perspectives, because otherwise how does it ever change?

                I’m only barely talking about pro-life/anti-choice or pro-choice/pro-death here, too. The same kind of thinking and focusing on aspects the other person isn’t addressing is everywhere in discourse these days. And a lot of them are very close to home for me and I guess I want them to be able to consider my perspective. But they won’t, because they think of the world this way, so they see me as a problem and a problem-causer just by being me.

                Any way… Rant over I guess

                • kofe@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  How does it ever change? The 70+% of people that disagree show up to vote. I was raised by forced birthers and have been to family therapy with them to try to talk with a neutral third party. The therapist gave us all a blanket statement that we’ll never change each other’s minds. So, fine. My brother and I just have to cancel out their votes and get more people to tip the scales.

                  Every state that’s been able to vote on it has upheld protections for abortion. More are on the ballot for November. Check your state and be ready to show up.

      • Westdragon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        I call them forced-birth, which sums up their position well. They care nothing for the woman having the child and care nothing for the child after it’s born. It’s all about forcing that birth by whatever means… then walking away.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          But they don’t even care if there’s a birth. If the fetus dies inside the mother and then the mother dies- god’s will.

    • Kalysta@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      They’re not pro life. They’re anti women having sex, and want to punish women for doing something as natural as breathing. It’s going to bite them in the ass, but it will be too late for so many before it does.

  • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    2 months ago

    The Republicans in power can see in the statistics that more black and brown people are dying, so they don’t care. Less people voting against them.

    • capital@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      You risk your own and others situational awareness when you paint everything as a race issue.

      I grew up in Texas in a deep red county.

      They believe abortion is literally the same as killing a healthy 2 year old. Straight up. THAT is the basis for their opposition to abortion, plain and simple.

      You are dumbing down the discourse by being so focused on race.

      • Senal@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        2 months ago

        “This stops them from killing babies” and “This also predominantly affects the group I don’t like” aren’t mutually exclusive ideas

        • capital@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          They literally don’t care about skin color here. Not one iota. Murder is murder and this is that (to them).

          • Senal@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I grew up in Texas in a deep red county.

            In a country notorious for it’s systemic and institutionalized racism, you grew up in a section that votes predominantly for the party that is notoriously racist ( In general, not in comparison to any other party ) and would claim that race has no part in a decision that is known to have racial divides in applicability.

            That might be the greatest feat of mental gymnastics i’ve ever seen, truly.

            On the off-chance you genuinely mean what you say:

            That you and the people you know don’t care about race is laudable, but it doesn’t seem to be broadly applicable to the rest of the state or country ( and in the case of republicans their party )

            • capital@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              This shouldn’t be hard to believe.

              These are largely white people voting to stop their largely white neighbors from getting abortions.

              Are you under the impression their position toward abortion would be different if the entire state or country were 100% white? I assure you it would not be. And if that’s true, it cannot be based on race.

              What’s more is this argument that their position on abortion is informed by statistics is laughable. These are low information voters. You seriously think they even know the stats? Why in the world would anyone think that?

              • Senal@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Are you under the impression their position toward abortion would be different if the entire state or country were 100% white? I assure you it would not be. And if that’s true, it cannot be based on race.

                I’ve no idea, all i was stating is that dismissing race as a part of the decision making process (consciously or unconsciously) in a place known for outcomes based on race could be considered dumbing down the argument.

                What’s more is this argument that their position on abortion is informed by statistics is laughable. These are low information voters. You seriously think they even know the stats? Why in the world would anyone think that?

                Entirely laughable, which is why nobody has claimed this.

                I was saying these people are what makes up the statistics.


                As an entirely made up example:

                “10% of the population don’t like the taste of potatoes” doesn’t mean 10% of the population base their decisions about eating fries on reading the statistics.

                claims such as “All the people i know like potatoes , so potato preference can’t possibly be related to the amount of fries eaten” just doesnt make any sense.


                and to be clear I’m not claiming all positions are race based, just that it’s enough of a factor that pretending it doesn’t have any impact at all is some gold medal mental gymnastics.

                • capital@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  I’ve no idea

                  I think knowing that these voters base their position on abortion on the belief that it is murder hurts your position so it’s better not to answer. Or you just don’t know them that well and really have no idea.

                  Entirely laughable, which is why nobody has claimed this.

                  The argument that these voters’ position on abortion (and therefore their votes) are based on race necessarily requires that they are aware of the statistics. If the claim is they vote this way because it disproportionately harms minorities, how do they know it disproportionately harms minorities?

                  But I’m glad we agree that they do not know that.

      • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s both. Unfortunately, a lot of people are incredibly racist without even knowing that they are racists. They are just doing whatever they’ve always been doing, “and now, all of a sudden, that’s racist.” It’s like when people are defending slavery because it was “normal at the time.” It was still racist! It is now and it was then.

      • OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 months ago

        You’re getting down voted, but you’re right. The actual lawmakers are probably more racially motivated. But based on my experience growing up in Alabama, most of the regular “pro-life” voters seem motivated by a genuine belief that abortion is murder.

        • Kalysta@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Until they need an abortion. Then they’re fine with it. Ask anyone who works at an abortion clinic how many times people out there protesting come in for abortions

          • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yes because they don’t actually believe that they are killing a living human. That’s why they will get it done for themselves or their mistresses.

        • capital@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I could see the race thing being more true for the politicians but even then I think it’s less of a thing than most people on Lemmy think.

          If we stop to think about it a moment I think that becomes clear.

          Do we think Ted Cruz would rather have a black Republican neighbor or a white Democrat? I truly think he’d rather have a black Republican neighbor. I believe the same is true for everyone I grew up with in Texas.

          IF we accept that (big if, admittedly) it can’t be a race thing. It would have to extend to a cultural thing.

          • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Are you from an area that mainly espouses colorblindness as its racism?

            A month ago, I was sent a picture of a black lynching by a Nazi. It’s 100% about race for a lot of people.

            • capital@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Note that I didn’t say racism didn’t exist anymore. I said it wasn’t the driving principle behind their position on abortion. And that hyper fixation on race does a disservice to them and others by often missing the point.

              I would also say “color blindness” isn’t racism, if that’s what you meant. Maybe I misunderstood you?

              I largely agree with Coleman Hughes on this point but I frankly don’t expect anyone here to honestly engage with his position.

              • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Well, I’ve already explained exactly why it’s a continuation of native American genocide and how race is 100% a driver for these organizations en masse, even though other races are also affected.

                It’s not a hyperfixation on race to acknowledge racial issues and address them.

                I guessed you were from an area with colorblindness as it’s main racism, I am as well. That’s because you’re in an area that is still colonizing land from Natives, so it’s important to reduce their claims. One way to do this is to erase their heritage and ethnicity by forcing language, names, holidays, foods, etc that aren’t part of their history. Suppressing claims of racism automatically is colorblindness and part of how colorblindness is racist.

                https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Native-Indian-Culture-Color-Blind-Racism-F3YRAC73VU5YW

                Another form of racism placed onto Native Indian people is color-blind racism. This form of racism rationalizes “racial inequality as the outcome of nonracial dynamics” (Robertson 120). Color-blind racism takes the standards created by the dominant discourse and applies them to all ethnic groups, putting them on an even level plain field without recognizing historical or social context of each group. Therefore, according to color blind racism, the effects of casualties and stereotypical of Native Indians such as alcoholism, poverty, etc. is essentially their fault and they should be the ones to start change. However, these the casualties of Native Indian culture was changed by racial oppression implemented by the dominant discourse. Therefore, Native Indians cannot be the ones to change of societal perception when they were not the ones to implement it.

                https://www.pbs.org/education/blog/unlearning-kindness-color-blindness-and-racism

                The pressure to assimilate and narrow the gaps in our proximity to Whiteness goes hand and hand with so-called “color blindness,” or claiming not to see race. At best, this ideology is misguided because it’s predicated on the false assumption that if we do not talk about or acknowledge race and racism, then these issues will go away. It should go without saying that this is asinine, yet so many well-meaning White people wear their alleged color blindness as a badge of honor.

                At worst, it is a White supremacist tool used to intentionally gaslight BIPOC and give White people a justification for turning away from the experiences and voices of BIPOC. Color blindness requires BIPOC to “grin and bear” everyday instances of racism. We are expected to do this all in the name of making White people more comfortable with benefitting from their ancestors’ ill-gotten gains, as well as current inequalities. This is the “polite” brand of racism that prioritizes White supremacist notions of decorum, comfort, and acceptable forms of social expression over dismantling racism and alleviating the suffering that it causes.

      • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        No, you’re missing pieces of the puzzle. Modern day abortion bans are a piece of legal child trafficking via adoptions.

        Latina girl tries to get an abortion. She shows up at a fake abortion clinic because she’s ESL and those clinics are deceitful. She gets guilt tripped into giving her baby up for adoption.

        The fake abortion clinic just so conveniently works with an adoption center that only adopts out to Christian families that can pay them about $20k-$40k for a kid. This money doesn’t go to the birth mother. Most of these adopting families are white.

        Then these Christian organizations go on to lobby for less social safety nets, less abortion access, less birth control access and education, thus driving more desperate girls to their clinics.

        Race plays a part - this is continued genocide happening primarily against Native American Latinos who lack the same legal protections as Native Americans from here in the US, even though those borders didn’t exist before we put them there. Those are very similar groups of people who share some ancestry and used to trade with each other.

        Yes other races are damaged by this too. It’s just not in the same way. It’s okay to be intersectional instead of just giving up thinking about race altogether.

        Here’s an example of one of these adoption agencies: https://christianhomes.com/

        Almost everyone supports abortion in rapes cases and risk to life cases - it is very rare that someone literally thinks it’s the same as murdering a toddler if you actually ask them about those “fringe” cases.

        It’s more that people are reactionary and don’t want to actually think and so they just parrot whatever is comfortable to them.

  • umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    2 months ago

    this was predicted. this is probably how the people who made this happen intended it to be.

  • samokosik@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    2 months ago

    If someone says, “I support this because I am conservative,” you actually mean, “I support this because I am a cock.”

  • TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    It’s pathetic these clowns call themselves pro-life without vomiting. Their platform is based entirely around murdering pregnant women. They don’t care how many times you explain this is essential healthcare, they are happy to let these women die because in their mind they deserve it for daring to try and save their own life with an abortion. It will be so sad and predictable when they find out the women in their life get ectopic pregnancies too, I wonder how much their lives are worth to these dishonest ghouls.

    • orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      To them, hypocrisy is a virtue. This is all about power and has nothing to do with integrity.

  • davidagain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    You’d think this would give republicans pause, or make them reconsider.

    Young women dying in dramatically increasing numbers.

    But it won’t.

    All these young women left to die on the altar of their misinterpretation of their religion and their uncaring principles.

    But no, it was a policy born in hate and the tragic imposed deaths of women are not an unfortunate side effect, they’re just misogyny in action. Working itself out.

    If they cared about babies, there would be more support for women, for early years interventions, and maybe they might also care about children dying in schools on the altar of their misunderstanding of their 2nd amendment and their uncaring principles.

    But no, they don’t care about children dying in schools either, and do you know why? Because caring about children dying in schools doesn’t involve telling women what they have to do and ruling their lives with oppressive freedom-denying laws.

    Caring about children dying in schools would involve some infringement on their UNDENYABLE RIGHT TO FEEL IMPORTANT with a gun and caring about women dying in childbirth would interfere with their UNDENYABLE RIGHT TO FEEL IMPORTANT with a rule about what women can and can’t do.

  • Bruhh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    2 months ago

    For the party of “small government”, they sure like getting in people’s business.

  • SSTF@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    What is going on here? The laws came into place in September 2021, but mortality was already climbing from 2019-2021. What was going on those years to cause this? Then a sharp decline in mortality between 2021 and 2022 for two of the three groups.

      • SSTF@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I really wish the article talked about those years rather than just comparing 2019 to 2022, given that 2022 is a drop compared to 2021. Or if the article had showed the same chart with national data of those same years 2019-2022 for a good compare and contrast visual to show the national mortality rate climb and then post-Covid drop. As it is, the law goes into place and then mortality rate drops, which could easily be a talking point in its favor, even if it may be a deceptive point. By not addressing that, and instead glossing over the article seems incomplete.

    • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      Lockdown - domestic violence peaked during those years as well. Abusive men often use birth/pregnancy to abuse their partners, because they feel like their partner is obligated to be with them now that they share a child. There can also be some jealousy issues from the man towards the baby or the wife, since they get special treatment especially during pregnancy and right after.

      So you’ll see more stuff like deliberate poisoning (including sneakily feeding foods unsafe for pregnant women), beatings, rape. They will also delay or deny medical treatment.

      Oh actually, that’s probably a big reason too - people stopped going to the doctor during those years because we were told not to. It was too busy and overwhelmed. We were told you’d get covid and miscarry if you went in to the doctor also. Prenatal care is HUGE for preventing deaths during birth. My guess is a combo of factors.

        • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          You’d be delusional to think there wasn’t. Everybody was cooped up and stir crazy. Nobody was seeing friends, coworkers, teachers etc face-to-face. Ya know. People who would notice a black eye or a bruised arm. Possibly even mandatory reporters.

          Not to mention that one of the first things most prenatal care centers will do (at least any decent one) is take the woman into another room, without her partner, and ask if they are safe. That doesn’t work so well over a telehealth appointment.

          Abuse absolutely went up. The lowest estimates I’d seen were like 8%. Pregnant women can only fall down so many flights of stairs before fetuses start dying.

        • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s well known, like really widely reported and known, that abuse towards children and partners went up during the pandemic. It’s also well documented that abusers use pregnancy to amp up their abuse. But you know, if you had done the basics to look this up before you commented, you wouldn’t have been able to call me delusional (misogynistic insult). Here, my girl brain did it for you, since it was too hard for you:

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11345045/

          Covid-19 created circumstances and measures that increased the risk and incidence of DV/IPV in pregnant women, which led to a higher prevalence of the phenomenon.

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9582712/

          Incidents of domestic violence increased in response to stay-at-home/lockdown orders, a finding that is based on several studies from different cities, states, and several countries around the world.

          https://www.unwomen.org/en/news/in-focus/in-focus-gender-equality-in-covid-19-response/violence-against-women-during-covid-19

          Since the outbreak of COVID-19, emerging data and reports from those on the front lines, have shown that all types of violence against women and girls, particularly domestic violence, has intensified.

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_the_COVID-19_pandemic_on_domestic_violence

          Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries reported an increase in domestic violence and intimate partner violence.[1] United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, noting the “horrifying global surge”, called for a domestic violence “ceasefire”.[2][3] UN Women stated that COVID-19 created “conditions for abuse that are ideal for abusers because it forced people into lockdown” thus causing a “shadow pandemic” that exacerbated preexisting issues with domestic violence globally.

          https://health.ucdavis.edu/news/headlines/domestic-violence-involving-firearms-increased-during-covid-19-pandemic/2023/10

          The researchers noted the decrease in reported domestic violence contrasted with increases in reported firearm domestic violence.

          They point out that the results may reflect a decrease in reporting due to barriers from the pandemic rather than an actual decrease in domestic violence. For example, during the lockdown, it may have been harder for those experiencing domestic violence to report to law enforcement because they were confined with a perpetrator who was monitoring their communications.

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10378456/

          The increase in cases of IVP against pregnant women during the pandemic was striking, according to the current study

    • DokPsy@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      Defunding of women’s health programs such as planned parenthood started long before the actual ban

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

            The comment I replied to said the spike was due to woman’s programs being defunded. I don’t know if it was that, or covid, or something else. Right now it appears everyone is speculating the reason. Some detail, specifically some from the article would have been helpful. In its face, the article is blaming a 2021 law for a rise in mortality between 2019-2022, despite the mortality rate declining overall after the law went into effect. I don’t think that’s the whole story, but the article seems to gloss over it.

    • punkaccountant@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      According to the cdc website pretty much everywhere in the u.s. went up during 2020-2021 and things started coming down 2022-2023. In fact it looks like the average across the u.s. was pretty much back to “normal” by 2023. But what we see here is that while things declined again for TX in 2022, they still remain quite elevated above 2019 while the u.s. average went back to pre-pandemic average, which would tell me that something else is going on in TX unrelated to the pandemic.

      • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        For a more interesting question, why did it go down for everyone except white women, and increased for white women? That’s weird enough that it feels like there’s a reason, but I have no clue what it might be.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Well then I guess you shuttle have learned to keep your legs shut!”

    • my most angry and outspoken conservative relatives and acquaintances, always bringing the subtlety and shades of grey.
  • Warjac@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I’m not sure why they don’t consider the fetus a home invader and try to invoke stand your ground laws.