Risk of jumping out of a small plane with a parachute vs. staying in plane: 19% higher ( I accept as your premise) Risk of staying in plane vs. staying on ground: let's say 19% higher just for laughs. and if it's your body your choice (meaning you're not pregnant and forcing an unborn baby to take that risk with you) then you chose the 19% higher risk. whether or not you chose to get out of the plane has no comparison to abortion. you either chose the increased risk of getting in the plane to begin with, or you didn't. If that's your mother wearing a parachute and you weren't born yet, you didn't choose it, and it's your life at risk and it's not her choice, because it's your body and your life. pregnancy without prenatal care has 19% more risk of death than no pregnancy. i didn't copy your number, that's the actual number. pregnancy with proper prenatal care has no more risk of death than no pregnancy. even a teenager can understand that. giving a woman proper prenatal care eliminates the risk of death caused by pregnancy. Even a teenager can understand that. Would forcing a woman to get proper prenatal care be wrong? Yes, but no woman would ever choose not to get proper prenatal care, EVER, so that's a total lie of a point you're making about "FORCE" in capital letters. Is proper prenatal care available to every pregnant woman? No. Would it be if the tax funds spent on abortion, were spent on prenatal care? Yes. Did taxpayers CHOOSE for those funds to be spent on Family Planning? Yes. Were taxpayers told when they were voting, that Family Planning would use 99% of it on proper prenatal care? Yes. Were taxpayers told when they were voting, that 97% of the funds would be spent on abortions? NO. Taxpayers CHOSE to spend the funds on proper prenatal care but were FORCED to spend them on abortion. Women who need proper prenatal care and can't afford it, CAN NOT CHOOSE to get proper prenatal care through Family Planning. that CHOICE has been TAKEN FROM THEM because Family Planning says they would love to help but don't have to funds to do so. They end up being FORCED to take a 19% risk of death and then being FORCED to ["CHOOSE" <--- sarcasm] between their own death and the baby's death. FORCING a woman to make that ["CHOICE" <---sarcasm] is FASCIST, ANTI-CHOICE and wrong. Even a teenager can understand that.
wow you simply dont get it, your post changes absolutley nothing and is a meanignless rant, its not even on topic LMAO
you are still focusing on the risk, the risk doesnt matter
you cant FORCE somebody to risk their life against their will, sorry this wont change based on your OPINIONS
I also noticed you didnt answer any of my questions, i wonder why?????
are you going to dodge questions again?
i definitley think you are young because i have no clue how you think your post pretains to anything being discussed.
ill ask my questions AGAIN, lets see if you dodge them
did i commit a crime?
could i be charged with a crime?
maybe a crime as high as reckless endangerment or attempted murder?
better yet what if that less than 1% is today and you do die, both your chutes dont open in a freak accident
do you think ill be charged with a type of murder?
or, because the risk was less than 1% i did nothing wrong and it was absolutely ok for me to force you against your will to risk you life since you know, the risk is so low ?
and ill add this one, its a yes or no question.
DO i have the right to force you to risk your life against your will?
also stop posting the lie about prenatal care, it factually does not eliminate all risk of death LMAO