Trump judge who believes abortion causes cancer confirmed by Senate

[SirBeef]

Considering how much effort is being made to get people to stop smoking and eating healthier doesn't necessarily mean you need to ban something .

Then great! We can discourage abortion without banning it. Good idea.

There we go. Any person advocating for banning abortion over improving sex ed and providing better family planning health care, better be advocating for banning smoking and non eletric automotives. If not they are complete hypocrites.

- - - Updated - - -

Abortion can't be good for a woman's body, considering the female body was designed for pregnancy.

The body doens;t know better. it treats it like a miscarraige. Are those not good for the body? should we punish those who miscarry?

[s_bushido]

the female body was designed for pregnancy

Right, that's why so many women died in childbirth before the advent of modern medicine.

[draynay]

And here I thought Healing Rain had committed seppuku for the dishonor of accidentally posting in the same thread more than once.

[Masark]

Right, that's why so many women died in childbirth before the advent of modern medicine.

Obviously the female body was also designed to be disposable.

[Eveningforest]

Abortion can't be good for a woman's body, considering the female body was designed for pregnancy.

It's a very imperfect design when up to 50% of all pregnancies end up in spontaneous abortions (miscarriages). And that's just one of the many things that can go wrong. One hell of a designer behind human reproduction. A sadist, perhaps.

[Milchshake]

It's a very imperfect design when up to 50% of all pregnancies end up in spontaneous abortions (miscarriages). And that's just one of the many things that can go wrong. One hell of a designer behind human reproduction. A sadist, perhaps.

Or maybe it still is a perfect reproducing organism. The high failure rate is just due to it rejecting a high rate of faulty mongoloid sperm out there.
But why would the host kill itself over this? Maybe an evolutionary adaptation to enforced monogamy.

Uterus; "I'm stuck with this guy and his loser sperm for life?!?! Goodbye world!"

Just trying to game theory this from another perspective.

[Sheperd]

Abortion can't be good for a woman's body, considering the female body was designed for pregnancy.

The funny thing about this is that the human body has failed to adapt to giving birth to a human baby. This failure is why human birth is so much more dangerous and horrifying then that of other primates.

[Eveningforest]

Or maybe it still is a perfect reproducing organism. The high failure rate is just due to it rejecting a high rate of faulty mongoloid sperm out there.
But why would the host kill itself over this? Maybe an evolutionary adaptation to enforced monogamy.

Uterus; "I'm stuck with this guy and his loser sperm for life?!?! Goodbye world!"

Just trying to game theory this from another perspective.

Hah. A much better way would be some sort of a recognition system that analyzes a faulty mongoloid sperm and immediately prevents it from reaching the egg. But that would be too easy. Women absolutely need to deal with the physical and emotional trauma that is a miscarriage. It builds character.

[Chonar]

They don't have a conscience. They aren't actually sentient beings.

Wendy Vitter isn't a sentient being?
I mean... I wish that was true. That'd make things easier.
But things aren't ever easy. She is a sentient being with an agenda, and she does harm. Period.

[RaoBurning]

Two pages in and nobody noticed that the judge's name is Wendy. Checked the article and, sure enough, it's a woman who has no idea how her own biology operates.

Sniped, somebody did notice. Still worth noting the lengths some people will go to harm their own interests.

[announced]

Man Mormo has been busy. this is his 20th thread this month. It's almost like he's paid to post here.

Abortions as a medical procedure can cause harm to the woman, and yes that may lead to cancer down the road. The study isn't conclusive either way, but ripping the baby out does cause internal damage to the woman. I knew this girl that had 3 abortions when she was younger and she does have some problems now (like being unable to have kids if she wanted them in the future)

We'll have to see how this judge rules, it's too early to tell.

[Mormolyce]

Abortion can't be good for a woman's body, considering the female body was designed for pregnancy.

Another great example of pro-lifers being ignorant of biology, thanks HR! Your assistance is appreciated as always.

- - - Updated - - -

Man Mormo has been busy. this is his 20th thread this month. It's almost like he's paid to post here.

Ahahaha, unfortunately tormenting the ignorant is merely a hobby for me.

Abortions as a medical procedure can cause harm to the woman, and yes that may lead to cancer down the road. The study isn't conclusive either way

Results of studies looking at the potential link between abortion and breast cancer risk differ depending on the type of study. Cohort studies have not found an increased risk, while some case-control studies have found an increased risk. The myth that abortion causes breast cancer has resurfaced due to a recently published meta-analysis (a method which contrasts and combines results from multiple studies, in the hope of identifying patterns among the study results) that concluded that there was an association between abortion and breast cancer in Chinese women. The meta-analysis included 36 studies – 34 of which were case-control studies, while the remaining two were cohort studies. The two cohort studies included in this meta-analysis did not find an increased risk of breast cancer in women who had a history of abortion. In other words, in this meta-analysis, only the studies with the weaker research design suggested a link between abortion and breast cancer. Both of the studies with the stronger design did not find evidence of such a link.

In summary, research evidence does not suggest that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer in women. Women who want to reduce their risk of breast cancer would be well advised to concentrate on risk factors that evidence has clearly shown increase the risk of breast cancer.

https://www.cancercouncil.com.au/100...breast-cancer/

Studies into this myth have been hard to do because of the personal nature of the topic. Abortions were illegal in many countries before the 1970s so data has been hard to gather. The best evidence currently available comes from a large study published in The Lancet in 2004. Researchers considered information from 53 studies conducted in 16 countries, including three in Australia and one in New Zealand. In total, there was information on 83,000 women. The results showed that the risk of breast cancer is not increased in women who have had an abortion or a miscarriage, compared to those who have not.

https://iheard.com.au/question/abort...t-cancer-risk/

NO LINK TO BREAST CANCER
Around the world reproductive health and anti-cancer organisations have rejected any association between abortion and an increased risk of breast cancer. This rejection is based on reliable scientific investigation, documented in reputable medical publications, and has been endorsed by the World Health Organisation [4].

One study published in the Lancet medical journal in 2004 was an analysis of 53 studies, involving 83,000 women with breast cancer from 16 countries, which found that “pregnancies that end as a spontaneous or induced abortion do not increase a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer” [5].

The National Cancer Institute in the United States examined in great detail the research on abortion and breast cancer in 2003, finding that:

“having an abortion or miscarriage does not increase a woman’s subsequent risk of developing breast cancer” [6].

The Australian Cancer Council does not recognise induced or spontaneous abortion as a risk for breast cancer [7], nor does the National Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre [8].

https://www.childrenbychoice.org.au/...fetyofabortion

[Edge-]

The damage Trump, McConnell and the Republican party are doing to the federal judiciary will last a generation.

When Democrats take back the Senate and White House, fuck playing nice and fair. Republicans didn't bother with either, flagrantly disregarding blue slips multiple times.

Pack. The. Fucking. Courts. Find the most ideologically left-wing judges they can and ram them through without debate one after another. Remind Republicans that this is what they get when they decide to stop playing by the rules (not laws, but rules) and decide to turn the judiciary into a political fight.

I'm over the "take the high ground" approach. It's not gonna work, and it fails when the "opponent" isn't playing by the same set of rules.

[Powerogue]

Women who take contraceptives....changes their DNA...to suddenly change their preference...to abusive, adulterous husbands?

The fuck?