Those two examples are wildly different from eachother. One is a medical procedure involving theoretical children, and the other has real kids getting injured and killed.
Edit: wanted to add that the medical procedure is always to prevent a major health issue when being funded by state taxes.
More like, Schrodinger’s kids. I genuinely hope you find peace and learn to not let being pro-birth justify letting others suffer and/or die. Red tape and bans kill when it comes to healthcare, without solving anything.
Why does that matter? If the fetus cannot survive outside the womb due to genetic defects, why would I care about that when I could care about the health of the mother?
If you are absolutely certain the foetus cannot survive, and carrying it to term will give the mother a high probability of dying after giving birth due to physical complications, then an abortion is a valid medical procedure. However, this accounts for less than one percent of abortions, so unless we are arguing against that, it’s not a valid talking point.
Your taxes may also go towards murdering kids, whether it be state funded abortions or bombing Gaza
Those two examples are wildly different from eachother. One is a medical procedure involving theoretical children, and the other has real kids getting injured and killed.
Edit: wanted to add that the medical procedure is always to prevent a major health issue when being funded by state taxes.
Whenever the israelis bomb the buildings, they don’t know for certain there are kids in there. They are just theoretical kids in the moment to them.
More like, Schrodinger’s kids. I genuinely hope you find peace and learn to not let being pro-birth justify letting others suffer and/or die. Red tape and bans kill when it comes to healthcare, without solving anything.
A successful abortion always has at least a 100% fatality rate.
Why does that matter? If the fetus cannot survive outside the womb due to genetic defects, why would I care about that when I could care about the health of the mother?
If you are absolutely certain the foetus cannot survive, and carrying it to term will give the mother a high probability of dying after giving birth due to physical complications, then an abortion is a valid medical procedure. However, this accounts for less than one percent of abortions, so unless we are arguing against that, it’s not a valid talking point.
Oh, so the mother’s die every time?
Even under your bad definition it’d be only 50-60% (accounting for the fact that some mothers do die)
That’ll make it 200% if they did
You can’t have a higher than 100% death rate, that means more people died than were involved in what happened
By reasonable definition that’s 1 death: the mother
By your own poor definition it’s 2: mother and fetus
So where are we getting extra from?
The fundamental core issue is: do we count the foetus as a life? If so, there’s no such thing as a “safe abortion”
Got it I’ll just stop paying my taxes that’ll fix everything
What about when they carefully aim and shoot a child?