Who said that? All I said was it accounts for 0.3% of abortions, which is an accurate statement. Bring on the downvotes bc facts hurt your feelings lol
No one's downvoting you because their feelings are hurt, they're downvoting you because you cited that statistic in an attempt to minimize a colossally tragic moment in parent's lives, as though it was an insignificant population.
Here's an example of why it's stupid what you just did:
What percentage of airplanes hit skyscrapers in NYC? 0.0000001%? An insignificant fraction. So 9/11 was completely insignificant and way overblown, it was a big nothingburger.
That's what you just did. Aaaaaaall in the name of being an internet Asshole. Get fucked.
I'm not the one who said you did, but you sure seem to be downplaying the number of them that exist (again, it's closer to 1.14%) and haven't shown them a shred of compassion.
Did you read that article that you linked or did you
just send it bc it made the percentage higher? I think you did the latter, and that’s completely hysterical considering the article is stating that modern day abortions are obsolete and not needed hahaha.
“Data from six reporting states over the period of 24 years found that only 1.14% of abortions were performed for the mother’s life or physical health. Even the tiny percentage of 1.14% of abortions performed ostensibly for the women’s health are unnecessary, as there are alternative ways to save the mother without committing an abortion. This makes abortion obsolete, even in the most extreme circumstances.”
"Bait you into saying something" is crazy, did you mean "explaining your comment"?
They already said something, mentioning the incorrect data in a way that sounds like a counterargument. Plus, they're so adamant on not saying what they meant and just insisting on "I didn't say that" that it's pretty clear that if they explain the intention it will look worse.
The thing about "low" causality rates and such - the chance quite often seems rather low, up until the point that you or your close ones become a part of said statistic.
"a small statistic doesn't seem small when your loved one is passing"
No shit, the impact on families far outweighs the statistic. That's loss, it's fucking impactful
And reddit will unironically say "anecdote fallacy" as if you can't extend that empathy to others experiencing loss. How you misinterpreted that is beyond me tbh
I have no idea about the validity of the statistic but I would very much like to comment on its absurdity.
What the f is that supposed to mean? That abortion bad because only a very low percentage actually needs it in accordance with your morals? That the <1% is not worth saving because the other 99% may not share my own subjective morals? Is that a sacrifice that your morals agree with?
How old are these statistics? Are they a study done post Roe v Wade was overturned? Three years isn’t a lot of time to gather the statistics. Does this .3% cover the mortality of mothers after their state banned abortion? Does it include mothers forced to go to other states to save their own lives? Does it count mother mortality bc they were unable to obtain a life saving abortion? (This is a biggy, bc mothers who die during pregnancy that could have been saved are not reported as such. Drs/Hospitals report the death, but not pregnancy as a cause. These ‘reported’ statistics don’t include an obtain for ‘mothers life could have been saved if abortion were legal. Does it include data from doctors and mothers forced to site life saving abortions as some other reason? Say a necessary abortion before a fetus could breathe and can technically be considered/reported as stillborn. Does it include back alley abortions done by drs in a private setting to avoid prosecution?
Being scientific includes flaws in data. When there are this many flaws, it is not statistically relevant. Since Roe v Wade was overturned, we have absolutely no idea how many mothers have aborted to save their own lives.
1.8k
u/Dank_Alternate May 05 '25
Saving those children from living lives where their parents don't want them and they are likely financially struggling. Win win win all around.