SCOTUS is hearing arguments to ban Mifepristone b/c “FDA failed to address concerns about whether the drug is safe for women.”

Mifepristone reports 5 deaths per 1M people who use it—a death rate of 0.0005%.

Viagra has a 15X greater death rate.

So…when do we ban Viagra??🤔

@QasimRashid not sure because restoring the rights of women is more important!!!

@QasimRashid Why Viagra in that case?

I would look at the violence, harm, and absence of opportunity done to women and children where safe abortion had not been available as the alternative arguments along with ...studies, etc.

Measure the absence of the aid to prove the benefit, sts.

Think that would fly? 👨‍🍳

@innivate @QasimRashid

Because it's the most similar drug in this case.

Women want abortions, there's a drug for that, it has side effects, but all in all, the benefits weigh heavier.

Men want to fuck, there's a drug for that, it has massive side effects, but all in all, the benefits weigh heavier.

So, if you ban the abortion pill, you're effectively saying boners are several orders of magnitude more important than the life of a woman.

@AdmSnackbar @QasimRashid Can't see that being more than a punchline to a joke.

But I'm no atty.

@innivate @QasimRashid

Maybe that's a you-problem. It's pretty obvious.

@innivate Well, for one, because there's a history of certain other moralistically stigmatised medicines getting banned. Why ban obesity medicines over low rates of side effects if Viagra is not banned? Well, one reason being, old white powerful men oftentimes imagine themselves not needing obesity medicines (although the semaiglutide revolution may change that), most old white powerful men imagine themselves needing Viagra.
@QasimRashid

@QasimRashid

The Supreme Court is an illegitimate organization.

@QasimRashid the men who legislate what women can or cannot do will never regulate the drug that they desperately need to prop up their failed masculinity. GOP are fascists

@QasimRashid

But the comparison with Viagra is an unfair apples to oranges one.

Viagra is used by men, so it shouldn't be regulated.

#sarcasm

@QasimRashid for anyone not reading the sarcasm, /of course/ no one's going to ban Viagra. That would inconvenience /men/.
@QasimRashid When the GOP catches a woman taking it.

@gooba42 @QasimRashid well actually...

"Sildenafil (Revatio brand) reduces high blood pressure associated with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). This improves the ability to exercise in people with PAH and delays any worsening of their symptoms."

@darwinwoodka @QasimRashid And apparently has some effect on libido and...

I'm not saying that women can't take it, I'm just saying the GOP hasn't noticed yet.

@QasimRashid These questions sound a lot like inputs to legislation.
@QasimRashid I thought rigor mortis was viagras intended effect!

@QasimRashid

Never thought about getting #Viagra until now.

@QasimRashid

If you're going to ban something for not being safe for women, ban Texas.

@QasimRashid does anyone know the details of the case? I was curious if the plaintiffs have grounds to bring the suit? Don’t you need to be an injured party to have grounds?
@QasimRashid Oh come now, that might inconvenience men, and if there's one thing US courts can be relied upon to do in this present moment, it's to not inconvenience the menfolk.
@QasimRashid How many suicides do Evangelical preachers cause?
@QasimRashid The question is far more interesting than it sounds, btw.