Nope. I don’t talk about myself like that.

  • 0 Posts
  • 588 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 8th, 2023

help-circle
  • We assume that 41.7 million women strictly adhere to the B4 movement.

    You cannot make that assumption. That was the point of my post some 5-6 posts up.

    Korea IS A monolith when it comes to a number of factors. Culturally Korea is the antithesis of “diverse”. My point is that America is nothing similar to Korea culturally to pull this off.

    Further just because they voted for Kamala is not a marker or evidence that they would even be on board with this type of response/campaign. So your number is flawed from the get go.

    And the premise is self defeating. If you’re refusing to have kids and teach them your beliefs, all you’ll have are kids that belong to the other party. You will effectively just breed your ideals out of existence. This is one of the primary reasons that most religions are still around, they tend to (statistically) have van loads of children.

    This also ignores the fact that those who would be willing to participate in such a campaign were likely to never have or have few children. Where-as those who disagree with this type of stance are going to be the religious types that statistically have more children anyway.

    So let’s take your example and apply more relevant controls on it… You’d at best get maybe 30% participation. And that 30% would be most likely to only represent 0-2 children over their lifetime. I bet after accounting for that you’re closer to maybe a decrease of 10-20% birthrate… and you’d simply breed your ideal out of society in a matter of a generation or two.



  • Once again. No. What lost the democrats the win was Kamala. Biden refusing to step down earlier so proper primaries could be done (not sure why they didn’t just hold primaries ANYWAY). The democrat party proved in 2020 that nobody wanted or even like Kamala (https://www.vox.com/2019/11/20/20953284/kamala-harris-polls-2020-election or lookup any poll from 2019). Her inability to actually talk about her platform (and how she’ll attain her actual goals) and answer the question being asked lost her a lot too. A hard focus on issues that were not “top of mind” for the majority of the country didn’t help either. Not some conspiracy that a handful of republicans are pulling the strings everywhere. People were simply unmotivated to vote for someone who couldn’t answer how she’d do any of what she claimed to want to do.

    Regardless of what you think the border IS a valid problem.

    Now there’s some magic plan? Either they’re stupid or masterminds. You can’t really have it both ways. Nobody is out there convincing people that women aren’t human and have no rights. Stop with your nonsense.


  • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.comtoPolitics@beehaw.org4B in the US anyone?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Yeah no. Continuing this rhetoric is exactly how the Democrats will continue to lose elections. Making vast assumptions about men and telling them they’re lesser is what drove away voters for the past 4 years. The vast majority of men have no desire or whim to do any of what you claim.

    Edit: Just realized the swipe typo. Corrected.




  • You’re moving goalposts. You claimed that we’d pay MORE (dollar on the dime). Drilling locally means supply increases considerably. Supply going up with demand staying in place means price drops, there’s no reason to pay “dollar on the dime”… and doing so would actually mean price increases.

    Also, most exports are of the crude for processing where we purchase the refined for use. We had a decent deal with Canada to make a boatload of oil export/import in that exact purpose. But then Biden shut down the pipeline that would have made that much more efficient.







  • the first is a lot of personal risk; the 2nd is minimal risk

    This flies in the face of the article though… it expounds quite a lot that it’s hard to sue for this situation at all. With the reviewing hospital doing the procedures in house quite often as they get referrals all the time.

    But because the delays and discharges occurred in an area of the hospital classified as an emergency room, lawyers said that Texas law set a much higher burden of proof: “willful and wanton negligence.”

    It’s clearly NOT a lot of risk since the burden of proof for that lawsuit would be effectively insurmountable. To the point that the no lawyer is willing to take the case according to the article. If it’s that hard to put a lawsuit together on the matter, why would a doctor be scared about conducting an abortion that was already covered as an exception to the law already? I’m not seeing it. I’m not buying the excuse.

    It’s not like sepsis is undocumented and unknown to the medical community. It’s not hard to justify the required treatment through literal decades of medical cases that have been studied and there’s specific exemptions in place for medical necessity in TX (and most[qualifier only because I have checked all] other states with a “ban”). The only way this situation make sense is if these places didn’t actually have the doctor on hand/staffed and it was some other medical provider that didn’t have power to actually make the decision. In which case there’s a whole 'nother bag of worms of a problem that needs to be addressed. If it’s not negligence on the doctor’s behalf (whether that be due to laziness,ignorance,fear, whatever), it’s because there wasn’t a doctor at all like an RN calling the shots. But the article claims to have gone through everything and doesn’t share with us, so I have to assume the former.

    This smells a lot like “cops need immunity otherwise they won’t investigate stuff”. No… they need to do their job better.


  • the delays at the 3rd hospital

    My statement/arguments were more for the first two visits. I feel (and I’m no doctor) was that it was already too late by visit 3. I don’t think she was going to make it at that point regardless.

    is that they shouldn’t be hard cases

    Sepsis IS ALWAYS a hard case unless you catch it very very early. They delayed her significantly and she was already down the path of symptoms. I’m not sure that shrugging of the hard case of potential sepsis (for the first one that didn’t bother checking her thoroughly) and confirmed sepsis for the second hospital… is anyway at all related to the case being hard because of “abortion”.


  • Some said the first ER missed warning signs of infection that deserved attention. All said that the doctor at the second hospital should never have sent Crain home when her signs of sepsis hadn’t improved. And when she returned for the third time, all said there was no medical reason to make her wait for two ultrasounds before taking aggressive action to save her.

    Hawkins noted that Crain had strep and a urinary tract infection, wrote up a prescription and discharged her. Hawkins had missed infections before. Eight years earlier[…]

    This has nothing to do with abortion ban. This has everything to do with shitty doctors. None of this required or even remotely called for any abortion. And should that first doctor NOT have been allowed to keep their license from previous cases of being a bad doctor… A women and her child probably would be alive today.

    The other facility that examined the case was also in Texas. Clearly the “ban” doesn’t stop them.

    The well-resourced hospital is perceived to have more institutional support to provide abortions and miscarriage management, the doctor said. Other providers “are transferring those patients to our centers because, frankly, they don’t want to deal with them.”

    Can’t blame a “ban” if there’s places that can and do legally do it.

    This is shitty doctors/hospitals blaming to the law to skirt around hard cases that they simply don’t want to deal with.

    But because the delays and discharges occurred in an area of the hospital classified as an emergency room, lawyers said that Texas law set a much higher burden of proof: “willful and wanton negligence.”

    Now this is a shame… This is what TX should be fixing. Malpractice shouldn’t need a higher standard in an ER

    All in all, I’m not sure how this is related to the abortion “ban” in any way shape or form. So why is it in the article/OP at all? Especially since in this case, it would have been covered regardless…

    Section 170A.002 prohibits a person from performing, inducing, or attempting an abortion. There is an exception for situations in which the life or health of the pregnant patient is at risk. In order for the exception to apply, three factors must be met: A licensed physician must perform the abortion.
    The patient must have a life-threatening condition and be at risk of death or “substantial impairment of a major bodily function” if the abortion is not performed. “Substantial impairment of a major bodily function” is not defined in this chapter.
    The physician must try to save the life of the fetus unless this would increase the risk of the pregnant patient’s death or impairment.



  • Real Autopilot also needs constant attention

    Newer “real” autopilot systems absolutely do not need constant attention. Many of them can do full landing sequences now. The definition would match what people commonly use it for, not what it was “originally”. Most people believe autopilot to be that it pilots itself automatically. There is 0 intuition about what a pilot actually does in the cockpit for most normal people. And technology bares out that thought process as autopilot in it’s modern form can actually do 99% of flying, where take-off and landing isn’t exempted anymore.




  • I don’t like what this bit of information is doing to discussions in Lemmy.

    Cool. That’s fine that you don’t like it. However people have a right to not see what they don’t want to see. If they decide that means it’s lemmy.ml, then that’s their right.

    Just like I have a right to not peer with lemmy.ml if I didn’t want to.

    Hell I have a hard block on ALL Russian and Chinese IP addresses. Not because I have something against the people. But I just don’t want to deal with the headache of accepting traffic from those countries.

    Just because some (or even a majority) of the people on lemmy.ml are fine to interact with doesn’t mean that there isn’t contention from other users and admins on that instance.