305
all 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 63 points 1 year ago

If you are wondering why, she said this, it’s part of a pattern of spreading misinformation about abortions that has been happening as long as people want to keep other people from having them.

The goal is to scare vulnerable women away from the resources that can help them and to make it easier to prosecute anyone who has been found to help them by conflating them with drug dealers.

It adds to the cloud of confusion that desperate women must cut through in order to gain access to the resources they need, and for some of those women, it will push the window out too far for them to have an abortion that they can afford, or cause them to give up, and just have the baby they don’t want, damn the costs.

Since they see this as saving a baby’s life, they don’t have any ethical issues whatsoever with lying like this.

[-] Delusional@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Right so then she is just a dumb evil cunt that doesn't deserve to be anywhere near public office. Got it.

All these glaringly obvious issues that will never be taken care of because we give people too much freedom. That statement alone should get her fired and not allow her to be in office anywhere ever again.

Oh oh oh I wanna play this game too.

I heard newborns coming out of the womb are laced with Fentanyl.

That's why some weirdos consume the placenta afterward, they're just trying to get that residual high. It all makes sense!

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

I heard newborns try to take advantage of our taxes and use socialism! They force people to take time off work and apply for various assistances! Then they grow up and try to take our jobs!!

[-] StarServal@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

We need to build a wall and make the uterus pay for it!

[-] Wodge@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I heard steamed hams are laced with, you guessed it, fentanyl.

[-] Bdtrngl@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

"Seymour the house is on fire!" "No mother that's just fentanyl."

[-] relative_iterator@sh.itjust.works 29 points 1 year ago

Maybe they will be when people are forced to buy them illegally 🤦🏻‍♂️

[-] matchphoenix@feddit.uk 12 points 1 year ago

“If you can’t find the problem, just make a new one!”

Republicans

[-] StarServal@kbin.social 20 points 1 year ago

Louisiana AG hopeful Liz Murrill may be laced with fentanyl.

[-] BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago

She does prozac and percs like a good uoperclass middle aged white lady. Fent is for the urban people

[-] betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Coat hangers used in home abortions may be an infection risk too. Know what reduces the rates of those?

[-] HuddaBudda@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

Assuming that fentanyl was in the abortion pill..... then it has become the safest way to ingest it.

https://nida.nih.gov/research-topics/trends-statistics/overdose-death-rates

Fentanyl deaths are in grey. As you can see 60,000 - 70,000 people in 2021. That number will spike in 2023.

However the abortion pill by those same statistics, they only managed to find 9 people who took the pill and died thereafter between the years 2000 and 2023.

Note, they did not die from the abortion pill, but because of what happened right after:

The deaths included: 9 (45.00%) sepsis, 4 (20.00%) drug toxicity/overdose, 1 (5.00%) ruptured ectopic pregnancy, 1 (5.00%) hemorrhage, 3 (15.00%) possible homicides, 1 (5.00%) suicide, 1 (5.00%) unknown. (Table 1).

Leaving us with a possible 4 people within 20 years that would have died to POSSIBLE Fentanyl overdoes as a causality in the past 20 years.

Making it the safest way you could take the drug.

Note: The following is sarcasm. Please do not take the abortion pill because you actually think it actually has fentanyl.

[-] itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

if they were, they'd be pretty effective.

[-] kreynen@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

The legal representation of the voting machine companies are a box of pupies compared to the big pharma lawyers. IANAL, but this sounds like textbook defamation.

[-] VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago

I don't know why you are being downvoted like that but it's true. She should get sued for defamation by the company's making these drugs. And she should have to prove her stance too!

[-] Jode@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

Came here to say this. Please let it happen.

[-] StarServal@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

“The legal representation of the voting machine companies is insignificant next to the power of Big Pharma.” - Darth Kreynen

this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
305 points (98.1% liked)

politics

19033 readers
2310 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS