It’s totally fine if you believe that life starts at conception.
The thing that actually baffles me are the states that passed anti-abortion laws, but struggle to provide adequate health care, especially for those who are not financially stable.

I found this article, “States with more abortion restrictions have higher maternal and infant mortality”, but feel free to correct or educate me on the topic.

Edit: removed “this article” appearing twice and tried to fix preview

  • Matriks404@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 hours ago

    What pseudoscientific ideology has to day that life doesn’t beging at conception? Is left denying science now?

    • LaVacaMariposa@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 minutes ago

      Even if it did start at conception, the real argument is about bodily autonomy. No one can be forced to donate any part of their body to keep someone else alive. Nobody can take your blood without your permission, why should women have their bodies taken without theirs?

    • Bertuccio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Life began billions of years ago.

      This phrasing is meant to hide a religious argument as a scientific one. The question they’re really asking is “When does God insert a soul into a body?”

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      It’s just a poorly written description of the argument. If I understand the argument correctly there’s a difference between a blastocyst (collection of cells not yet developed) and a fetus.