Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 90963

1 out of 7 billion are very low odds. Many medical procedures brag about being safe because only 1% of the procedures are fatal. As a real thing to be concerned about, there were some 30,000 fatalities due to hospital acquired infections in the US last year. Those are completely preventable. But because our government is liberal, those in charge are unable to do anything rational or reasonable. Instead, they want to save the 1 out of 7 billion humans whose babies kill them. Liberals govern by hysteria and emotion. They are lunatics. They take one dramatic case and make drastic law changes for it, while ignoring very serious problems that don't excite their hysterical emotions. Liberals are horrible leaders.

SharnCedar, The Daily Beast 31 Comments [11/26/2012 8:20:01 AM]
Fundie Index: 36
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2


BLASTOCYSTS ARE NOT PEOPLE!!! Fuckwit.

11/26/2012 8:25:25 AM

Dr.Shrinker

"But because our government is liberal, those in charge are unable to do anything rational or reasonable."

- So starting simultaneous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was rational? Giving tax cuts to the richest citizens causing the deficit to balloon and income inequity to rise was reasonable? Or perhaps you don't care about wars or the faltering economy because your mission is to "save duh baybeez!"

A mission you have clearly taken up out of emotion and hysteria.

11/26/2012 8:31:29 AM

Frostythesnowman

Where does this '1 in 7 billion' figure come from?

Should someone who clearly has no mathematical options left when he runs out of fingers and toes, be trying to deal with such huge, and imaginary statistics?

11/26/2012 8:43:26 AM

Papabear

SharnCedar is a horrible source for accurate statistics.

11/26/2012 8:57:33 AM

Arctic Knight

So where do you draw the line? Do we make a law when the odds are only 1 in 7 million? 1 in 7 thousand? 1 in 7 hundred? 1 in 70? 1 in 7? At what point do you draw the line that it is no longer acceptable to save a life?

11/26/2012 9:06:23 AM

Osiris

Pro-life: Life starts at conception, but stops at birth.

11/26/2012 9:12:57 AM

Renon

Because 30,000 mothers suffering an agonizing and preventable death is perfectly acceptable to you, right, Sharn?

11/26/2012 9:24:19 AM

Reynardine

Let's look at this logically. Every birth has to take place, especially the lethal ones, or women would go unpunished for having cunts.

11/26/2012 9:51:38 AM

Valerius

"As a real thing to be concerned about, there were some 30,000 fatalities due to hospital acquired infections in the US last year. Those are completely preventable. But because our government is liberal, those in charge are unable to do anything rational or reasonable."

But if the government were to try and pass legislation establishing better sterilization protocols and procedures, you lot would throw a fit and scream about the big bad authoritarian government interfering in the free market when it has no right to do so, oppressing doctors and hospital staff and limiting their freedom by forcing them to follow the new legislation, which is totally unnecessary and wrong and communist!!!11!!!ONEONEONE!!!!!11!

Remind me again, who're the irrational, unreasonable people here?

11/26/2012 10:22:06 AM

breakerslion

"They are lunatics."

Says the fuckwit that makes up reality as she goes along.

11/26/2012 10:22:23 AM

Matante

So... it happens about once in a generation, worldwide?

Pease don't try to use any statistics if you didn't even bother to learn how many people there are on earth!

11/26/2012 10:35:35 AM

UHM

So let me make that clear: The hospitals are privately owned. The insurances are private. The doctors all come and go for according to what they are paid. The patients can choose between hospitals based on the free market. The manufacturers of hardware and medicine are privately owned. How exactly are those 30,000 the governments fault?

The ownly way I see that being the governments fault is that the government hasn't taken this wasteful industry over yet.

11/26/2012 10:45:17 AM

Jezebel's Evil Sister

Wiki, and reality, show that you are a liar or an idiot but most likely both.

The World Health Organization estimates that approximately 800 women globally die every day due to complications from pregnancy or delivery.[World Health Organization 1] The number of maternal deaths worldwide was estimated to be 529,000 in 2000.[United Nations 1] However, it is well recognized that maternal mortality numbers are often significantly under reported.[10] In fact, according to the United Nations, it is estimated that the numbers of maternal deaths globally could fall within a range of 277,000 to 817,000 per year.[United Nations 2]

Africa and Asia account for 95% of the maternal deaths each year. Those deaths are evenly divided between the two regions. Latin America and the Caribbean account for 4% of maternal deaths, and the remaining 1% is found in developed regions of the world.[United Nations 3]

11/26/2012 10:48:10 AM

Mister Spak

There are only 7 billion people on earth, we need to make a huge deal out of one baby. Because we are stupid conservatives unable to understand mathematics, or to compare things of different scales. We can't distinguish between 50 million babies starving, many of them for the "crime" of being muslim, and one embryo dying in a hospital and taking an adult person with it. We conservatives pride ourselves on ignoring mathematics, rational thinking, and science. We make decisions by emotions, hysteria and the fear of making the giant man with a long white beard who lives on clouds angry.


11/26/2012 11:01:47 AM

Hasan Prishtina

"1 out of 7 billion are very low odds."

This is the product of someone who thinks that the only woman who has ever died due to the complications of pregnancy died in a faraway country of which she knows nothing though, to give her credit, she failed to join in the racial abuse of her grieving relatives that we've seen in other posts. As it is, 21 women out of every 100,000 live births in the United States die as a result of pregnancy. In Somalia it's one in a thousand. Those are a lot worse odds than one in seven billion; "arguments" like that are driven by hysteria and ignorance.

11/26/2012 11:19:12 AM

nazani14

You need to take a stroll through a graveyard with a lot of Victorian era headstones.

11/26/2012 11:28:46 AM

fishtank

And what does your side do?

11/26/2012 12:17:56 PM

Anon

> it happens 1 out of 7 billion times <

NO.

It happens about once a minute. That's over 1000 times a day, and about half a million times a year. Very roughly, 1% of women die from complications from pregnancy.

Only 10%-20% of those would be saved by aborting the pregnacy. But that's still tens of thousands of women dying unnecessarily every year because abortions aren't performed. Most of those cases result from lack of access to medical care. But cases like Savita Halappanavar happen on a weekly basis in places where the only obstacle to saving their lives is doctors refusing to do their jobs. There is a problem there.

Information from World Health Organization Maternal Mortality reports, as indexed by Wikipedia.

Also:

>>As a real thing to be concerned about, there were some 30,000 fatalities due to hospital acquired infections in the US last year. Those are completely preventable. But because our government is liberal, those in charge are unable to do anything rational or reasonable.<<

Hospital-acquired infections are a serious problem, but it is a lie to say that the government being 'liberal' has anything to do with it. The indicated procedure to prevent hospital-acquired infections is for everybody to follow strict hygiene protocols. There are already laws in place mandating surveillance for and enforcement of such, but it is very difficult to ensure that everybody's hands are always clean.

That isn't something that depends on on 'liberal' or 'conservative' nature of the government. An extreme libertarian 'the market will fix it' lack of oversight would be criminal, though.

And the attempt at derailing is noted. We agree that hospital-acquired infections should be minimized. Now, shall we save all of these women who are dying from not having abortions?

11/26/2012 12:24:23 PM

Swede

That is one EXTREMELY shiny mirror you've got there!

I think you need to check your figures again. More than one person die from pregnancy-related causes, that would be removed if the fetus were aborted, each year. I'd guess the figure is more in the region of tens of thousands of women, maybe even hundreds of thousands. It would definitely be hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, if abortions were not available.

Where are the drastic recent law changes for abortions? It has been a slow and gradual change over decades, as more and more countries realize that banning abortions doesn't stop abortions from happening, any more than the prohibition stopped people from drinking alcohol, and that extensive sexual education and readily available condoms and other forms of contraception, reduces the number of abortions, more than anything else.

Hospital acquired infections, and things like MRSA, would be much fewer if the hospitals had more money at their disposal, if everyone could afford health care, and if farmers didn't routinely feed their animals antibiotics.

11/26/2012 12:38:43 PM

mellenORL

Oh, SharnCedar again. Must be about the young Indian-Irish woman who died from septicemia because the coward docs would not remove the dead, festering miscarried embryo from her womb. Right. 1 in 7 billion; the ratio of functioning to non-functioning brain cells in SharnCedar's skull.

11/26/2012 12:44:03 PM

The Crimson Ghost

I seriously hope this genetic disaster commits suicide.

11/26/2012 12:55:00 PM

Old Viking

Very few people command the sort of logic you do. Very, very few.

11/26/2012 3:30:26 PM

Blarghonius

At least they don't live their lives according to a book written by a bunch of barely-literate sheep herders from the Bronze Age.

11/26/2012 3:55:19 PM

Seeker Lancer

One out of seven billion are odds you pulled completely out of your ass. There aren't even 7 billion people on the planet (yet).

But I guess since you have no concept of numbers you don't understand how overpopulated we are either.

11/26/2012 4:35:01 PM

Felix Wilde

@Seeker Lancer: I think you'll find it has happened yet. Just this year we cracked the 7b mark.

Ahem...

One out of umpteenillion are very low odds. Some actions brag about being safe because only 1% of actions are fatal (though that 1% shouldn't brag, only the 99%). I think infection is 100% preventable so that just shows how much I know about statistics and medicine. But the government doesn't interfere enough with what private enterprises do, even though I claim private enterprise is good and government regulation is bad. That's why Golden Staph is around, because the liberal government didn't stop it. Instead, they wanted to save the 1 in umpteenillion embryos that get aborted just to save the mother's life. Christofascists govern by hysteria and emotion. They are psychopaths. They take one meaningless issue and make drastic law changes for it (like editing the marriage act to disallow gay marriage) while ignoring the very serious problems that don't excite their hysterical emotions (like their own citizens suffering of illiteracy, innumeracy, malnutrition and easily preventable disease). Christofascists are terrible leaders, but since they're excellent authoritarian followers they still keep electing their own ignorant incompetent kind.
*end*


...seriously, examine that second sentence. The abuse of grammar makes me wince. It doesn't nearly mean what she's trying to say.

And is it just me, or did you guys all think American conservatives wanted to keep healthcare private too? Blaming the government for not fixing something, while simultaneously complaining about how the government has for the first time become involved in said thing and insisting this is unjust, is incongruity at a whole new level.

11/26/2012 5:00:35 PM
1 2