Cause of Death FB Meme (1 Viewer)

[calamity]

Hmmm....I bet this is true.

 

[nota bene]

Source? FB?

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Really? Why do you bet that?

 

[CMPancake]

Really? Why do you bet that?

Because it would confirm his bias.

 

[nota bene]

Causes of Death in the United States : snopes.com

 

[Grand Mal]

Hmmm....I bet this is true.

Over a million abortions a year?

 

[Henrin]

Well planned parenthood alone does about three hundred thousand a year, which by itself puts abortion pretty high on the list.

 

[FutureIncoming]

Cause of death of human entities is not the same thing as cause of death of human persons. Unborn humans don't count as persons, so that first item on the list "Abortions", needs to be broken down into "deaths of pregnant women" and "deaths of unwanted mere-animal parasitic entities".

Data on this page (at bottom of page) shows that the maternal death rate during legal abortions is pretty low --but that is a "per 100,000 births" rate, and not a total number. However, if I take that data for 1990 (50 deaths from abortion per 100,000 births) and combine it with this data, the part of it for 1990 (rounding up to 4.2 million births), then 42 groups-of-100,000 times 50 deaths-per-100,000 equals 2100 maternal deaths, because of legal abortion in 1990, in the USA.

Now recall that Minnie616 has on numerous occasioned mentioned that abortion rates are down, and therefore maternal deaths associated with abortion are very likely down, too, since 1990. Even without that, the maternal death rate is significantly less than the lowest item mentioned on the list in the Original Post of this Thread. All those other hundreds of thousands of abortion-related deaths are nothing more than deaths of unwanted animals, of no more importance than the deaths of unwanted parasitic guinea worms.

 

[Henrin]

Since the human life cycle begins at conception it only makes sense to count deaths at that point. :shrug:

Also comparing the life of humans to rats is ****ing insulting and ridiculous.

 

[FutureIncoming]

Since the human life cycle begins at conception it only makes sense to count deaths at that point. :shrug:
Also comparing the life of humans to rats is ****ing insulting and ridiculous.

YOU MEAN YOU ARE STUPIDLY PREJUDICED ABOUT HUMANS? Why? Perhaps you should read The Cuticle Cell Argument, to see the error of your ways. Persons matter. Human life doesn't. Except when, and only when, a human life is also a person's life. A hydatidiform mole, for example, is 100% "human life", and 0% person --even abortion opponents agree with that FACT!

 

[Henrin]

YOU MEAN YOU ARE STUPIDLY PREJUDICED ABOUT HUMANS? Why? Perhaps you should read The Cuticle Cell Argument, to see the error of your ways. Persons matter. Human life doesn't. Except when, and only when, a human life is also a person's life.

Your cuticle cell argument has been refuted by pretty much everyone on both sides on the forum. Drop it.

 

[FutureIncoming]

Your cuticle cell argument has been refuted by pretty much everyone on both sides on the forum. Drop it.

YOUR MERE CLAIM IS WORTHLESS WITHOUT EVIDENCE. While various abortion opponents have generically denounced it, that is not the same thing as an actual refutation. An actual refutation would involve pointing out specific flaws (or at least one specific flaw) in the argument, and NONE have so-far been specified. Not by you, not by any abortion opponent, and certainly not by any pro-choicer.

You are welcome to be the first, to point out an actual specific flaw in The Cuticle Cell Argument.

 

[Henrin]

YOUR MERE CLAIM IS WORTHLESS WITHOUT EVIDENCE. While various abortion opponents have generically denounced it, that is not the same thing as an actual refutation. An actual refutation would involve pointing out specific flaws (or at least one specific flaw) in the argument, and NONE have so-far been specified. Not by you, not by any abortion opponent, and certainly not by any pro-choicer.

You are welcome to be the first, to point out an actual specific flaw in The Cuticle Cell Argument.

Dude even pro-choice posters refuted your cuticle argument. :shrug: No one but you considers the cuticle argument valid.

 

[FutureIncoming]

Dude even pro-choice posters refuted your cuticle argument.

YOUR CLAIM IS WORTHLESS WITHOUT EVIDENCE. Show me a Message Number, at least, or a quote of some pro-choicer pointing out a flaw in that argument.

 

[Cardinal]

Hmmm....I bet this is true.

And you would lose that bet. Numbers aren't even out for 2016. That should have been as much a tip off for you as if it had said "Causes of Death on Planet Cybertron."

Prolifers are hilarious. They're so emotional about their cause they can't be bothered to get the tiniest detail in their misinformation right. Authors and screen writers create works of fiction every day that have painstaking research put into them, but a prolifer can't figure out the year that statistics are released.

 

[calamity]

And you would lose that bet. Numbers aren't even out for 2016. That should have been as much a tip off for you as if it had said "Causes of Death on Planet Cybertron."

Prolifers are hilarious. They're so emotional about their cause they can't be bothered to get the tiniest detail in their misinformation right. Authors and screen writers create works of fiction every day that have painstaking research put into them, but a prolifer can't figure out the year that statistics are released.

It says numbers for '16 "through June 15." What makes you so sure those numbers are not out?

 

[calamity]

Over a million abortions a year?

Easily. I think it's like 1.25 per year. But, I haven't looked in a while.

 

[calamity]

Really? Why do you bet that?

Because i know that there are about 1-1/4 million abortions per year and only 34,000 deaths by gunshot....with about 20,000 of those being suicides. The other numbers for various diseases seem about close to our annual morbidity stats when multiplied out to a full year.

 

[Cardinal]

It says numbers for '16 "through June 15." What makes you so sure those numbers are not out?

Because no real institution compiles those figures until the following year. Right now I'm in a gun control debate and I don't have firearm-related homicides for 2015 and 2016 because the FBI won't release the figures for 2015 until around September. As inefficient as our government is reputed to be, nobody is spending thousands of man hours compiling figures in the current year when those numbers are constantly evolving. Nobody, not even our government, is that inefficient.

You got conned.

 

[nota bene]

Prolifers are hilarious. They're so emotional about their cause they can't be bothered to get the tiniest detail in their misinformation right.

Way to embarrassingly overgeneralize. I am ardently pro-life...yet posted the Snopes information. :3oops:

 

[Scrabaholic]

Hmmm....I bet this is true.

I'll take that bet, since I know I'd win.

 

[Cardinal]

Way to embarrassingly overgeneralize. I am ardently pro-life...yet posted the Snopes information. :3oops:

Did you create the misinformation? Fact is that typical pro-life misinformation is consistently the worst researched fiction ever, almost certainly because they're writing for their choir than anybody with two discriminating brain cells to rub together. It's just the videos over and over and over again. I do give you credit for not being an automatic believer in their choir.

 

[year2late]

Way to embarrassingly overgeneralize. I am ardently pro-life...yet posted the Snopes information. :3oops:

Thank you for that.

 

[calamity]

I'll take that bet, since I know I'd win.

I didn't say the meme was true, I'd just bet that the numbers are consistent with the facts.

 

[Cardinal]

I didn't say the meme was true, I'd just bet that the numbers are consistent with the facts.

To give the credit to Nota Bene that he (she?) deserves, they aren't. For example the meme shows the number for heart disease to be at 282,038 when the real number is at about half a million. Seriously, whoever created the meme wasn't even trying to be accurate.