Laffy

Unintended consequences, forced-birthers?

“Data suggests that thousands of women have crossed state lines to obtain an #abortion, in the face of restrictions at home. It also indicates a rise in abortions among those living in states where the procedure is legal.”

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/09/07/us/abortion-data-bans-laws.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Abortions Rose in the U.S. in 2023, Data Shows. See the Changes by State.

In eight states, the estimated number of abortions increased by 60 percent or more as patients crossed state lines seeking care.

The New York Times
Sep 7, 2023 at 1:23pmWeb
Show threadKristFistSep 7, 2023
@GottaLaff #proLife4TREES !
Show threadNazaniSep 7, 2023
@GottaLaff Women now longer have the luxury of "wait & see" if a pregnancy will be viable or pose a health risk. The new laws mean some women would be smart to abort immediately if there's the slightest chance something could go wrong.
Show threadArtemisSep 7, 2023

EXACTLY. Overnight an abortion ban became the law of the land in my state (WI) when Roe v Wade was overturned. If I found out I was pregnant, I would be in a car, on my way to Illinois, before even catching my breath.

Like, we know the GOP wants to keep people from going to get abortions in states where it's legal, and while I don't think a law like that would ultimately hold up when challenged, that doesn't mean I wouldn't be fucked if they try to enact such a thing here.

@Nazani

Show threadLaffySep 7, 2023
@Nazani Yep. They’re now forcing abortion instead of forcing birth. Oops.
Show threadSolarbird Sep 7, 2023
@GottaLaff The point is always control over women. They don’t actually care about the numbers except as a reason to further limit our rights.
Show threadLaffySep 7, 2023
@moira Oh I know. That's been my mantra for decades
Show threadSolarbird Sep 7, 2023
@GottaLaff sure, but sometimes I reply for people who might look at replies and don’t already know
Show threadLaffySep 7, 2023
@moira No, I was agreeing with you.
Show threadSolarbird Sep 7, 2023

@GottaLaff I was saying I understand that you know.

My reply was for _other_ people who might _not_ know, but would look at replies to your post.

So I'm ... _also_ agreeing with _you?_ I'm just saying that sometimes I respond not necessarily for the original poster but for people reading the original poster.

Show threadLaffySep 7, 2023
@moira LOL, no I totally got that!