Trump makes conflicting comments, both of them ominous and disturbing

[Kenny]

Don't drag me into your disputes with others. I haven't said you're biased anywhere here.

I’m sorry… didn’t mean to get you upset.

But if you don't want to come off as biased, then you should support your statements with scientific studies and credible news sources.

Again… didn’t mean to get you upset.

That's the one.

ok -

"Results Between 2018 and 2022, there were 102 391 infant deaths in the US, with 10 351 of these deaths occurring in the state of Texas. Between 2021 and 2022, infant deaths in Texas increased from 1985 to 2240, or 255 additional deaths. This corresponds to a 12.9% increase, whereas the rest of the US experienced a comparatively lower 1.8% increase. On the basis of the counterfactual analysis that used data from Texas and eligible comparison states, an excess of 216 infant deaths (95% CI, −122 to 554) was observed from March to December 2022, or a 12.7% increase above expectation. At the monthly level, significantly greater-than-expected counts were observed for 4 months between March and December 2022: April, July, September, and October. An analysis of neonatal deaths found somewhat similar patterns, with significantly greater-than-expected neonatal deaths in April and October 2022. Descriptive statistics by cause of death showed that infant deaths attributable to congenital anomalies in 2022 increased more for Texas (22.9% increase) but not the rest of the US (3.1% decrease)."

Figures are really interesting because there are so many factors that can be missed or not addressed.

1) An increase of 216 deaths. Doesn’t say what those deaths were caused by. It also doesn’t address increased population caused by a surge of increase of people moving into that area. Obviously, more people, more deaths.

2) More applicable is the 22.9% of deaths attributable to congenital anomalies - although it doesn’t say how many are represented in the count of 2240. Need better data than that. If it increased from 4 to 5 deaths - that is 20% but only added one death. (obviously it is more than that - but there is no data on numbers).

3) Also… it doesn’t say what attributed to the anomalies… was it environmental?

4) Also, there are other states that have instituted laws of reducing abortion times. If the average is 3.1% decrease - does that mean that the other states did not experience increase even thought they also have laws?

So, obviously we need better information.

That being said, I all for amending the law if it is certain that the baby in the womb will not survive outside of the womb.

Equally, I would be against torturing a baby inside the womb if it is a healthy baby.

What I am saying is that the bill in Texas has resulted in people being forced to give birth to infants who have severe birth defects and WILL NOT SURVIVE. What will and is happening, is that these severely handicapped infants, which would have otherwise been aborted much earlier in the pregnancy, because they are NOT VIABLE, are being forced to be born "naturally" and then they suffer in absolute horrendous agony and live only minutes or hours. And during all this the woman is forced to experience the trauma of all of this, then watch her newborn infant suffering in agony in her arms until it inevitably dies. What kind of a mental toll do you think that has a human being for their entire life? I've not seen you address the mother's life/condition in any of this. You should watch the tearful testimony of a woman who had to go through all of this, thanks to Texas' draconian laws.

I’ve lost two babies… it is quite difficult.

I agree that if we know, as you stated, it “WILL NOT SURVIVE” - I’m all for making those exception in the law through amending the law.

I'm trying to illustrate to you the unintended consequences that arise when your draconian beliefs about other peoples' bodies becomes enacted into law. It demonstrates that people who run around proclaiming how "pro-life" they are, really aren't all that pro-life at all.
Instead, they're pro-fetus.

This was a little bit dramatized but I understand your zealousness for you position. However, your deduction from point “a” the the conclusion of “pro-life” is quite illogical.

Oh, it's torture alright. It's absolutely insane to me that you don't recognize that.

Again.. I’d be for amending if it “WILL NOT SURVIVE” to alleviate the suffering.

The women in Texas are none too impressed with what's happening to them. You should read some of their testimonies.

"On Tuesday, Manzano and six other women joined an ongoing court challenge to Texas’ abortion laws, bringing the total number of plaintiffs in the lawsuit to 22, including two doctors. The new plaintiffs, like the other patients on the lawsuit, allege they were denied abortion care in Texas for their medically complex pregnancies, including cases where the fetus was not expected to survive after birth. The suit, filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights, claims the state’s near-total ban on abortion violates their rights under the Texas Constitution.

After an emotional hearing in July, a Travis County judge granted a temporary injunction that protected doctors who, acting in their “good faith judgment,” terminate complicated pregnancies. The Texas Office of the Attorney General immediately appealed that ruling, putting it on hold until the Texas Supreme Court hears the case later this month.

“The harms to pregnant women in Texas is continuing every single day,” said Molly Duane, senior staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights. “As more people learn about the lawsuit, they continue to tell us the same things are happening to them.”

Manzano’s experience changed her mind about abortion, and she said she’s sharing her story in hopes of educating people who don’t realize how restrictive the state’s abortion ban is."

More women join lawsuit challenging Texas’ abortion laws

Twenty women are challenging the state’s abortion laws, saying they were unable to get the health care they needed for their medically complex pregnancies.

www.texastribune.org

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/11/15/1213188342/20-women-sue-texas-over-abortion-laws

It’s good that they law can review it and see if the law should include exemptions.

No, I'm questioning the things you're saying to me.

And I’m trying to clarify what you are saying and applying your logic across the board.

They haven't.

They have:

Anaphylaxis after COVID-19 vaccination is rare. It has occurred at a rate of approximately 5 cases per one million vaccine doses administered. Anaphylaxis, a severe type of allergic reaction, can occur after any kind of vaccination. If it happens, healthcare providers can effectively and immediately treat the reaction. Learn more about COVID-19 vaccines and allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis.

GBS is a rare disorder in which the body’s immune system damages nerve cells, causing muscle weakness and sometimes paralysis. GBS has largely been observed among people ages 50 years and older.

Selected Adverse Events Reported after COVID-19 Vaccination

Rare instances of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccinations have been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

www.cdc.gov

I'm suggesting the law sucks. I'm suggesting it's far too draconian and oppressive. I'm suggesting that the people who made these laws didn't think them through to their logical conclusions, mainly because they don't really care about the people involved. I

Again.. I’d be for amending if it “WILL NOT SURVIVE” ot alleviate the suffering.

'm suggesting that women should be free to make decisions about their own bodies. Period.

Again, babies in the womb are not their bodies - scientifically.

Are you kidding me? I just explained to you what I'm talking about.

This was in response to, "You really think medical professionals are on the side of needlessly causing infants to suffer in agony and destroying women's health? Really? You really think actions that bring direct harm to infants and women jives with their oath to "do no harm?"

So you're cool with the increase of the suffering and death of infants?

That last statement is quite dramatic and quite irrelevant in our discussion. The whole of the law is an attempt to stop the suffering and death of infants in the womb.

But again.. I’d be up for amending if it “WILL NOT SURVIVE” to alleviate the suffering.

 

[Kenny]

Hasn't he made it clear enough yet that he doesn't care? You're trying to get sympathy for those children, but his loyalty is to his god and what he believes it wants from him. All you can accomplish here is to point that out and how anti-American and anti-mother and child that is. He will never care about what you care about, so why do more than post relevant statistics and be done with it? Begging someone to read and try to understand has a stake in not understanding is pointless and suggests that you think he can do better if you just show him the facts and try to get him to take an interest in those mothers and children, but by now you can see that that's never going to happen. Well, maybe if it happened in his family, but not before that.

@Kenny - please feel to rebut that if you think that there is any evidence that I am wrong. I'm not interested in opinion, just evidenced argument.

Yes, you are wrong. I do have sympathy and care. I’m all for the lessening of suffering. I’m for abortion because of ectopic pregnancies and probably others.

Of course, if the baby is not in danger or the mother is not in danger, then I would choose life instead of choosing death for the baby

 

[fantome profane]

Of course, if the baby is not in danger or the mother is not in danger, then I would choose life instead of choosing death for the baby

Well if at anytime you find yourself in a situation where you have the opportunity to make that choice, then I support you making that choice for yourself. Because I am pro-choice.

 

[Kenny]

Well if at anytime you find yourself in a situation where you have the opportunity to make that choice, then I support you making that choice for yourself. Because I am pro-choice.

Yes… we all have free will. I use to be pro-choice on abortion.

 

[fantome profane]

Yes… we all have free will. I use to be pro-choice on abortion.

And apparently you are still pro-choice for yourself, but not for others.

 

[Kenny]

And apparently you are still pro-choice for yourself, but not for others.

I am for relieving of suffering, even babies in the womb which is “others".

 

[Spice]

Again, babies in the womb are not their bodies - scientifically.

Until that umbilical cord is cut, and/or the placenta detaches, it is a part of the woman's body. And emotionally, by the middle of the second trimester, it is so much of the woman's body that losing it is like losing an arm or leg. It's always "felt."

Personally, I don't believe I could ever knowingly have an abortion, but a medication termination in the first trimester after rape -- oh yes. And up to 12 weeks after, it's not a fetus, but a dividing mass of cells known as an embryo. There should be no question up until this point.

Afterwards, it should be a decision made between the woman and her doctor. Many woman, like me, would take a chance on most prognosis, but being the mother of a special needs, and eye-witnessing many much, much worse, I would never judge a woman's decision -- either way.

 

[Heyo]

I am for relieving of suffering, even babies in the womb which is “others".

There are no babies in wombs.

 

[Kenny]

There are no babies in wombs.

Scientifically and logically, they are.

 

[Kenny]

Until that umbilical cord is cut, and/or the placenta detaches, it is a part of the woman's body. And emotionally, by the middle of the second trimester, it is so much of the woman's body that losing it is like losing an arm or leg. It's always "felt."

It is “attached” to her body… but it isn’t her body.

 

[PureX]

It is “attached” to her body… but it isn’t her body.

Being dependent on her body makes it her "charge".

And being that none of us knows when a human fetus becomes a human being none of us has the right to decide this for anyone else. So this becomes the woman's burden, and the woman's choice.

And your sense of morality does not usurp her or anyone else's liability.

 

[Kenny]

Being dependent on her body makes it her "charge".

A 1 month old baby is still dependent.

And being that none of us knows when a human fetus becomes a human being none of us has the right to decide this for anyone else. So this becomes the woman's burden, and the woman's choice.

a fetus is latin for a young one. It is a human being

And your sense of morality does not usurp her or anyone else's liability.

Correct, that is why I am for the human being in the womb as I am for you outside the womb..

 

[PureX]

A 1 month old baby is still dependent.

But not on the mother's body specifically.

a fetus is latin for a young one. It is a human being

That's irrelevant semantics.

Correct, that is why I am for the human being in the womb as I am for you outside the womb..

Except that none of us knows when that happens. And none of us knows why humans exist. Or where our "being" comes from or goes to, if anywhere, when the body it comes to inhabit no longer sustains it. And because we don't know any of these things, we do not get to presume them upon others.

But because the mother's body is the sustaining vessel during gestation, the responsibility for deciding these things falls to her. This is how it has been deemed by the order of human procreation. If you believe in a creator God, you should respect the procreative order that He has set for us. And therefor the mother's liability during gestation.

 

[wellwisher]

I think America is in lots of trouble.

Especially with the dumb and dumber team of stolen valor and stolen property. Walz exaggerates his military rank and Harris steals Trump's idea of not taxing tips for service workers.

I saw a clip how one of the fake news station tried to show Trump's idea of no taxes on tips as a big loss of Government revenue. Then after Harris steals it, the same fake news now builds it up as Harris is for the working class. The Con artist clown circus is in town.

This entire topic is about a flip flopping because that is the Harris and Waltz strategy; radial left repackage to be moderate, even stealing the idea of the other party. In terms of no tax on tips, Biden-Harris hired more IRS agents to shakedown the service industry for tip revenue. This just went into effect. Harris had the deciding vote in the Senate. Now she pretending for the tax break, but has not called off the dogs. What is with that?

Stolen Valor and Stolen Property

I heard that what made Joe Biden change his mind, and step down not run for President, was caused by the Injustice System, at the request of Nancy Pelosi. The Injustice system who hd been protecting Hunter Biden, allowing the statute of limitation to expire, all of a sudden found that a Rumanian Oligarch had given Hunter $ 3 million to influence US policy. This was the closest that even got to connecting Joe Biden to the family business.

A day or to later, Joe Biden quit, because of the crooked DNC coup was set against him, using law fare. Biden was dealing with the criminal element in his own party for a few days. Trump has had to deal that since 2016, and is strong enough to still be in the mix.

Romanian oligarch hired Hunter Biden to influence US policy, special counsel says

 

[PureX]

You can't invent enough slanderous accusations to make Trump the preferable choice.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Hasn't he made it clear enough yet that he doesn't care? You're trying to get sympathy for those children, but his loyalty is to his god and what he believes it wants from him. All you can accomplish here is to point that out and how anti-American and anti-mother and child that is. He will never care about what you care about, so why do more than post relevant statistics and be done with it? Begging someone to read and try to understand has a stake in not understanding is pointless and suggests that you think he can do better if you just show him the facts and try to get him to take an interest in those mothers and children, but by now you can see that that's never going to happen. Well, maybe if it happened in his family, but not before that.

@Kenny - please feel to rebut that if you think that there is any evidence that I am wrong. I'm not interested in opinion, just evidenced argument.

Yes, he has. And you are right.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I’m sorry… didn’t mean to get you upset.



Again… didn’t mean to get you upset.



ok -

"Results Between 2018 and 2022, there were 102 391 infant deaths in the US, with 10 351 of these deaths occurring in the state of Texas. Between 2021 and 2022, infant deaths in Texas increased from 1985 to 2240, or 255 additional deaths. This corresponds to a 12.9% increase, whereas the rest of the US experienced a comparatively lower 1.8% increase. On the basis of the counterfactual analysis that used data from Texas and eligible comparison states, an excess of 216 infant deaths (95% CI, −122 to 554) was observed from March to December 2022, or a 12.7% increase above expectation. At the monthly level, significantly greater-than-expected counts were observed for 4 months between March and December 2022: April, July, September, and October. An analysis of neonatal deaths found somewhat similar patterns, with significantly greater-than-expected neonatal deaths in April and October 2022. Descriptive statistics by cause of death showed that infant deaths attributable to congenital anomalies in 2022 increased more for Texas (22.9% increase) but not the rest of the US (3.1% decrease)."

Figures are really interesting because there are so many factors that can be missed or not addressed.

1) An increase of 216 deaths. Doesn’t say what those deaths were caused by. It also doesn’t address increased population caused by a surge of increase of people moving into that area. Obviously, more people, more deaths.

2) More applicable is the 22.9% of deaths attributable to congenital anomalies - although it doesn’t say how many are represented in the count of 2240. Need better data than that. If it increased from 4 to 5 deaths - that is 20% but only added one death. (obviously it is more than that - but there is no data on numbers).

3) Also… it doesn’t say what attributed to the anomalies… was it environmental?

4) Also, there are other states that have instituted laws of reducing abortion times. If the average is 3.1% decrease - does that mean that the other states did not experience increase even thought they also have laws?

So, obviously we need better information.

That being said, I all for amending the law if it is certain that the baby in the womb will not survive outside of the womb.

Equally, I would be against torturing a baby inside the womb if it is a healthy baby.




I’ve lost two babies… it is quite difficult.

I agree that if we know, as you stated, it “WILL NOT SURVIVE” - I’m all for making those exception in the law through amending the law.




This was a little bit dramatized but I understand your zealousness for you position. However, your deduction from point “a” the the conclusion of “pro-life” is quite illogical.



Again.. I’d be for amending if it “WILL NOT SURVIVE” to alleviate the suffering.




It’s good that they law can review it and see if the law should include exemptions.



And I’m trying to clarify what you are saying and applying your logic across the board.


They have:

Anaphylaxis after COVID-19 vaccination is rare. It has occurred at a rate of approximately 5 cases per one million vaccine doses administered. Anaphylaxis, a severe type of allergic reaction, can occur after any kind of vaccination. If it happens, healthcare providers can effectively and immediately treat the reaction. Learn more about COVID-19 vaccines and allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis.

GBS is a rare disorder in which the body’s immune system damages nerve cells, causing muscle weakness and sometimes paralysis. GBS has largely been observed among people ages 50 years and older.

Selected Adverse Events Reported after COVID-19 Vaccination

Rare instances of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccinations have been reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

www.cdc.gov

Again.. I’d be for amending if it “WILL NOT SURVIVE” ot alleviate the suffering.



Again, babies in the womb are not their bodies - scientifically.



That last statement is quite dramatic and quite irrelevant in our discussion. The whole of the law is an attempt to stop the suffering and death of infants in the womb.

But again.. I’d be up for amending if it “WILL NOT SURVIVE” to alleviate the suffering.

"People receiving COVID-19 vaccines are less likely to die from COVID-19 and its complications and are at no greater risk of death from non-COVID causes, than unvaccinated people."

That's from your link that you gave me to supposedly demonstrate that people have died from the COVID vaccine.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Especially with the dumb and dumber team of stolen valor and stolen property. Walz exaggerates his military rank and Harris steals Trump's idea of not taxing tips for service workers.

I saw a clip how one of the fake news station tried to show Trump's idea of no taxes on tips as a big loss of Government revenue. Then after Harris steals it, the same fake news now builds it up as Harris is for the working class. The Con artist clown circus is in town.

This entire topic is about a flip flopping because that is the Harris and Waltz strategy; radial left repackage to be moderate, even stealing the idea of the other party. In terms of no tax on tips, Biden-Harris hired more IRS agents to shakedown the service industry for tip revenue. This just went into effect. Harris had the deciding vote in the Senate. Now she pretending for the tax break, but has not called off the dogs. What is with that?

Stolen Valor and Stolen Property

I heard that what made Joe Biden change his mind, and step down not run for President, was caused by the Injustice System, at the request of Nancy Pelosi. The Injustice system who hd been protecting Hunter Biden, allowing the statute of limitation to expire, all of a sudden found that a Rumanian Oligarch had given Hunter $ 3 million to influence US policy. This was the closest that even got to connecting Joe Biden to the family business.

A day or to later, Joe Biden quit, because of the crooked DNC coup was set against him, using law fare. Biden was dealing with the criminal element in his own party for a few days. Trump has had to deal that since 2016, and is strong enough to still be in the mix.

Romanian oligarch hired Hunter Biden to influence US policy, special counsel says

You guys are really flailing around with these attacks on Harris & Walz. Trump too.
Keep it up, it really seems to be working for you guys.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

You guys are really flailing around with these attacks on Harris & Walz. Trump too.

It's fun to watch.

the dumb and dumber team of stolen valor and stolen property. Walz exaggerates his military rank and Harris steals Trump's idea of not taxing tips for service workers.

You are the one exaggerating, a nice way of saying lying. They say it's not a lie if one believes it, but for such a person, the moral failing is the willingness to believe and, in your case, propagate the lies of others.

But no worries. You can't do any harm. You're already MAGA and won't convince anybody of anything that hasn't already drunk the Kool-Aid as well. Those lies are to keep you angry and in grievance mode, and to help you live with your choices assuming that they cause any cognitive dissonance in you at all.

A day or two later, Joe Biden quit, because of the crooked DNC coup was set against him, using law fare.

More malevolent, dishonest fantasy from you. There is no evidence for any of that. Au contraire. Nobody had the power to force Biden out of the election using lawfare or any other technique. Stepping down was a selfless sacrifice, putting country over self - a foreign concept to MAGA. Biden already had a very impressive set of accomplishments during his first two years, before the gremlins reclaimed the House and brought chaos and gridlock to Congress, but this will probably be the greatest of those, and the one he will be remembered for.

It's the one Washington is remembered for. I don't anything else about his presidency apart from him deciding that the president is not a king, and that he left office voluntarily with a peaceful transfer of power. That alone made him one of the highest rated presidents in history. Biden will probably wind up in the top ten as well. Trump is among the bottom three in most surveys, dead last in the most recent one I saw.

I do have sympathy and care. I’m all for the lessening of suffering.

Not all for. Your words before these say the opposite. @SkepticThinker pointed out the gratuitous suffering that you are willing to let occur.

Of course, if the baby is not in danger or the mother is not in danger, then I would choose life instead of choosing death for the baby

The matter about which you showed no compassion involved babies who were going to die anyway. You were willing to let the parents and baby all suffer needlessly. I don't know why you don't realize that about yourself. Look at your own words.

So, no rebuttal or evidenced argument then? I wrote, "please feel to rebut that if you think that there is any evidence that I am wrong. I'm not interested in opinion, just evidenced argument." Simply disagreeing is not enough. You need to show why you are right and I am wrong if you think that's the case. Otherwise, there is no reason to think that you are correct.

When one is correct, he can make a sound, evidenced argument showing that as I have. I argued that you don't actually care about the things you say you do and offered your own words as evidence. You dissented but did nothing more.

A 1 month old baby is still dependent.

And now, it has bodily autonomy more or less. Its parents can still force it to take vaccines and have surgery without its consent.

a fetus is latin for a young one. It is a human being

That's irrelevant. There is nothing that you can call a fetus that changes the moral calculus of abortion. Go ahead and call it whatever you like - a human being, a person, a citizen, a baby, or a child, and nothing changes because of that fact. A gall bladder is also alive and human, but that doesn't prevent us from removing and killing it. Whatever answer you give to somebody who thinks that even that life is sacred and deserves protection can be given to you even if you add some distinction between gall bladders and complete human beings that matters to you but not to the other guy.

I am for the human being in the womb as I am for you outside the womb..

I think that you're more for the fetus. I'm more for sentient people (and yes, my words imply that a fetus is a person; that word changes nothing). Fetuses don't enjoy that same status with me until they become sentient whatever else you call them apart from sentient and able to experience and understand terror and/or severe pain, which is why many kill ants with no moral dilemma, but wouldn't do the same to a puppy unless it was for reasons of mercy, and even then, painlessly and without terrorizing the animal.

You don't seem to care what befalls its parents or it once it becomes a baby, which seems to be true for most of the conservative Christian community. It's all about forcing unwanted births, but not healthy births or births supported by society that are more likely to flourish because of that support.

Such people don't care that a young woman's life be diminished by an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy. They don't care if forcing her to have that baby at 17 years old means that she and that baby will live in relative poverty when she might have aborted it, finished school, and had children that were wanted and could be better supported in ten years. They don't express concern about anything at all except that every pregnancy that can generate a baby does that.

 

[Spice]

It is “attached” to her body… but it isn’t her body.

When you carry a child within get back to me on that.