• venusaur@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    28
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Yikes. Not good for the abortion legislation carrot that dems have been dangling in front of voters.

    • doughless@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 hours ago

      You seem to be under the misunderstanding that dems want to increase abortions. They want increased access to abortion, but that’s not the same thing.

      This really hurts Republicans more than Dems. Let’s say you have a goal of reducing “x”, so you pass a law banning it, but that causes a noticeable increase in the behavior. Your law made things objectively worse towards accomplishing your goal.

      If you think the increased occurrence is justified as long as people are punished for it, then you don’t actually care about reducing abortion, you just want to punish people for it.

      • venusaur@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Not sure how you came to that conclusion. Dems want you to believe that power to the states will eliminate access to abortions, when it seems this data shows that regardless of the overruling, abortions are still accessible. People aren’t getting fired up because access is being limited. People are getting fired up because they think access is being eliminated for people in certain states.

        It hurts Republicans because they didn’t get exactly what they want, but I think it hurts Democrats more because it minimizes one of their greatest scare tactics.

        • doughless@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I think dems genuinely believe that if Republicans take control of the House, Senate, and Presidency, that they will absolutely implement a nationwide ban, which will reduce access. That implies it’s still a valid concern and not a scare tactic.

          And even though overall abortions have increased, there has still been a restriction in access, it’s just that enough people can still afford to overcome those restrictions (for now), as well as Dems pushing to allow meds by mail to help alleviate the restrictions.

          But, there have already been unfortunate consequences to the health and lives of women who couldn’t afford to overcome the restrictions, or it was too late, or they were convicted a crime if they did obtain access.

          So again, not a scare tactic if they are actual things that are happening, and will just get worse with a nationwide ban.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Yikes. Not good for the abortion legislation carrot that dems have been dangling in front of voters.

      This is really not a good look for you. I don’t know if you intended it, but it reads like this:

      “Yikes. Not a good look that women are exercising autonomy over their own bodies.”

      • venusaur@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        5 hours ago

        that’s an interesting interpretation. enjoy the democrat circle jerk. it’s actually saying that power to the states isn’t as bad as people thought it would be.

        • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 hours ago

          it’s actually saying that power to the states isn’t as bad as people thought it would be.

          Is that because you didn’t read the article or are you having difficulty interpreting the data?

          The women in the states that banned abortions are getting them by travel to states where abortion isn’t banned. How would that work against Democrats that champion the idea of a woman’s ability to chose what to do with their own bodies? Do you think that the women that traveled to another state preferred the travel to getting treatment in their own state?

          Other articles point out other massive detriments to abortion restrictions, like mothers dying from childbirth 62% higher in states with abortion bans. source.

          “To compare maternal death rates (deaths during pregnancy, at birth, or within 42 days of birth) in states with abortion bans or restrictions to those without, we examined the most recent three years of data.7 We found that maternal death rates were 62 percent higher in 2020 in abortion-restriction states than in abortion-access states (28.8 vs. 17.8 per 100,000 births). Notably, across the three years presented in Exhibit 4, the maternal mortality rate was increasing nearly twice as fast in states with abortion restrictions.”

          So pro-force-birth folks are successful in killing more mothers. Great success?

          How does any of this play worse for Democrats wanting the right for a woman to choose?

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 hours ago

      To the contrary: people have shifted to having to travel long distances or get pills through the mail without local medical support.

      In some states (eg: Idaho) these are substantially inaccessible.

      • venusaur@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        fair, but it’s not the catastrophe that dems want you to believe so you vote for them.