Abortion: a different take on the debate

[istara]

Sorry - weird doublepost.

[quote]
OK, let’s get this straight. The cultures of the mideast are equal in every way to that of the United States? All cultures are equal, no matter what?

State your position and we can argue that if you want. I feel like I’m being sniffed by a PC dog at the airport here or something.**
OK, fine. What Mideast cultures are you referring to? Which countries, which religions, which types of society?

[Jackmannii]

@Aeschines

…in some cases, it’s already happening (there are European countries with low birth rates that greatly restrict abortion).

What European countries have instituted or amplified restrictions on abortion due to declining population?

[Aeschines]

@istara

OK, fine. What Mideast cultures are you referring to? Which countries, which religions, which types of society?

The point’s the same–are all cultures equal or not. You really don’t want to answer this simple question, do you?

Cultural relavists are on the hotseat when it comes to–let’s be slightly more specific–Mideastern cultures with predominantly fundamentalist Muslim populations. You know, the ones that treat women like crap and wouldn’t allow you to say “all cultures are equal” if you were there.

I’ll gladly confess my overall ignorance of the Mideast and its varied cultures and long history. I wish the people there the best. But throughout most of the Arab world you have political despotism, crap economies, and rigid, fundamentalist religious thinking predominating. Mixed into that are many fine individuals, fine cuisine, etc. But overall it’s not my ideal society.

You also have problems with Muslims emigrating to Europe and then preaching Islamic fundamentalism there and rejecting the notion of integration with those societies. For the record, that disaster is mostly the Europeans’ fault.

[istara]

@Aeschines

The point’s the same–are all cultures equal or not. You really don’t want to answer this simple question, do you?

Because it can’t be answered. It depend what your criteria are. Openness. Education. Democracy. Welfare. Safety. Spirituality. You can’t measure them one against each other like that.

Returning to your “abortion” theory: are women today having half the number of children their mother and grandmothers had because they are aborting the extras? Or because they have access to contraception?

[Scott_Plaid]

@Aeschines

You also have problems with Muslims emigrating to Europe and then preaching Islamic fundamentalism there and rejecting the notion of integration with those societies. For the record, that disaster is mostly the Europeans’ fault.

Aeschines, given the recent VanGogh murder, and other incidents, I would like to hear you explain the above remarks.

[Aeschines]

@overlyverbose

After seeing the above exchange, I had to step in for clarification. In third world countries, particularly in countries where disease is often spread by overpopulation, why would having more children be beneficial to those people? Wouldn’t having more and more kids put a significant strain on these populations, both economically and socially?

First off, I think this is pretty much standard thinking, not my own opinion. See the link I posted in the OP for some more info.

Second, it has nothing to do with the “third world”. In underdeveloped countries, the question is whether the basic support of children–really just some food and minimal clothing–is worth their economic contribution to the family. And it generally is, so there is no reason not to have a lot of kids–it literally makes you richer.

In the developed world, that all gets turned on its head. In order to be in the middle class or higher, you’ve got to feed your kids well, have them see the dentist, clothe them properly, pay to put them through college, etc. The costs are enormous. Kids make you poorer.

[brickbacon]

@Aeschines

The point’s the same–are all cultures equal or not. You really don’t want to answer this simple question, do you?

Cultural relavists are on the hotseat when it comes to–let’s be slightly more specific–Mideastern cultures with predominantly fundamentalist Muslim populations. You know, the ones that treat women like crap and wouldn’t allow you to say “all cultures are equal” if you were there.

I’ll gladly confess my overall ignorance of the Mideast and its varied cultures and long history. I wish the people there the best. But throughout most of the Arab world you have political despotism, crap economies, and rigid, fundamentalist religious thinking predominating. Mixed into that are many fine individuals, fine cuisine, etc. But overall it’s not my ideal society.

You also have problems with Muslims emigrating to Europe and then preaching Islamic fundamentalism there and rejecting the notion of integration with those societies. For the record, that disaster is mostly the Europeans’ fault.

It’s your thread and I realize you were answering a comment, but what does this have to do with the question you posed. I still don’t get how a country facing population losses would think outlawing abortion would be the most effective way of reversing the trend (assuming that this is indeed a problem)?

[Aeschines]

@Scott_plaid

Aeschines, given the recent VanGogh murder, and other incidents, I would like to hear you explain the above remarks.

I’m not sure what you mean (again, which side are you on?), but the Europeans have allowed massive immigration of Muslims whom they treat like second-class citizens if indeed they let them become citizens at all. The Muslims naturally become pissed and hate their host countries. The natives of the host countries then hate the Muslims for their poverty and hostility. Etc. etc. Reap what you sow.

The US way is better: let people come in from a wide variety of places and treat them decently (mostly!) so that they don’t hate the US and form enclaves of dissatisfied people. US immigration policy is still horribly unfair to individuals, but on the macro level it is not making the country worse.

[istara]

[quote]
but the Europeans have allowed massive immigration of Muslims whom they treat like second-class citizens if indeed they let them become citizens at all.**
Is this humour/irony or an extraordinarily embarrassing display of ignorance?

[Aeschines]

@istara

Because it can’t be answered. It depend what your criteria are. Openness. Education. Democracy. Welfare. Safety. Spirituality. You can’t measure them one against each other like that.

You come out and accuse me of racism, but all you do here is dodge, dodge, dodge. I’ll repeat the question: What do you think of the matters you have been criticizing me about? Kind of scary to answer that, huh? Easier just to label and run.

Returning to your “abortion” theory: are women today having half the number of children their mother and grandmothers had because they are aborting the extras? Or because they have access to contraception?

I already said that access to contraception was the main reason for the reduction; abortion is merely a backup method. Read the posts.

[Hoodoo_Ulove]

@Aeschines

In underdeveloped countries, the question is whether the basic support of children–really just some food and minimal clothing–is worth their economic contribution to the family. And it generally is, so there is no reason not to have a lot of kids–it literally makes you richer.

In the developed world, that all gets turned on its head. In order to be in the middle class or higher, you’ve got to feed your kids well, have them see the dentist, clothe them properly, pay to put them through college, etc. The costs are enormous. Kids make you poorer.

But in underdeveloped countries, though the individual may be richer for having more childern, the society is poorer, right? By your logic, wouldn’t said societies be justified in coercing the poor into contraception or abortion?

[Aeschines]

[QUOTE=istara]

but the Europeans have allowed massive immigration of Muslims whom they treat like second-class citizens if indeed they let them become citizens at all.**
Is this humour/irony or an extraordinarily embarrassing display of ignorance?

Another pot shot without any substantiation.

What I said was true. If it’s not true, tell me why it’s wrong.

France has allowed massive immigration of Muslims that it treats like crap and ghettoizes. Here is a Cite. (Just ripped from the top of the Google search page–there seem to be hundreds other like this.)

[istara]

You come out and accuse me of racism, but all you do here is dodge, dodge, dodge. I’ll repeat the question: What do you think of the matters you have been criticizing me about? Kind of scary to answer that, huh? Easier just to label and run.

This isn’t about my views - it’s about bizarrely ignorant statements that you keep coming out with.

But for the record: I do not think US culture is blanketly superior to any other. I do not think that muslim immigration is necessarily detrimental to another country, such as the US.

[Aeschines]

@Hoodoo Ulove

But in underdeveloped countries, though the individual may be richer for having more childern, the society is poorer, right? By your logic, wouldn’t said societies be justified in coercing the poor into contraception or abortion?

No, actually that’s not true at all. Underdeveloped societies do not have the technology to make extensive education of the populace profitable. Children are extremely valuable for their labor, and, in any case, they are required by their high death rates (including infant/child mortality) to have high birth rates anyway.

[Scott_Plaid]

@Aeschines

I’m not sure what you mean (again, which side are you on?)

What was the first time you asked?,

but the Europeans have allowed massive immigration of Muslims whom they treat like second-class citizens if indeed they let them become citizens at all. The Muslims naturally become pissed and hate their host countries. The natives of the host countries then hate the Muslims for their poverty and hostility. Etc. etc. Reap what you sow.
<snip> so that they don’t hate the US and form enclaves of dissatisfied people. US immigration policy is still horribly unfair to individuals, but on the macro level it is not making the country worse.

I do not see support for this statement in my admittedly low study of cultures reaction to immigration in other countries. However, I would have to place the blame of Theo van Gogh’s murder on an ideology created before immigration.

“Don’t do it. Don’t do it. Have mercy!” were Mr. van Gogh’s last words, according to witnesses. But the note the killer pinned to Mr. van Gogh’s
body said, “There will be no mercy for the wicked,” **adding that America,
Europe and the Netherlands “will go down.” **

The Van Gogh Murder

Those do not sound like the words of people who are convinnced that a better life awaits them in America. They are wrong to think that, but I don’t think being wrong will change their minds.
Also, my side is my own, that of the fact that I see elements of each culture being beneficial to the group it comes from, but quite harmful to those who challenge any elements of the native culture.

[Aeschines]

Here’s a better cite about France:

It is also regarded as a message to fundamentalist Islamists, whose certainties are seducing disaffected young French Muslims. The government stresses that its new law refers to all religions, but nobody is fooled. How many schoolchildren turn up to class wearing crucifixes of a “manifestly excessive dimension”? “It’s not the crucifix or the kippa that is targeted,” insists Khalil Merroun, the rector of the Evry mosque, “but Islam.”
Many French people feel deeply uncomfortable about defiant, assertive Islam. France, after all, is home to Europe’s biggest Muslim population (outside Turkey): some 5m, next to 3m in Germany and 1.5m in Britain. The country has about 1,600 mosques or prayer halls. Many young French Muslims find no difficulty in balancing private faith with French secularism. But an increasingly vocal minority, many of whom speak no Arabic and freely mix Nike trainers with the hijab, finds such compromise unacceptable.

Etc. Remember the whole head scarf fracas?

[Aeschines]

@istara

This isn’t about my views - it’s about bizarrely ignorant statements that you keep coming out with.

In GD we “fight ignorance” with cites and logical arguments. Feel free to provide either.

But for the record: I do not think US culture is blanketly superior to any other. I do not think that muslim immigration is necessarily detrimental to another country, such as the US.

Well, I have no problem agreeing with that. Who would want to beat up on such a wimpy, inoffensive little opinion?

[Aeschines]

@Hoodoo Ulove

But more babies would fix it right up?

Preventing shrinkage is not adding more.

[Jackmannii]

@Aeschines

…in some cases, it’s already happening (there are European countries with low birth rates that greatly restrict abortion).

@Jackmannii

What European countries have instituted or amplified restrictions on abortion due to declining population?

@Aeschines

In GD we “fight ignorance” with cites and logical arguments.

Do you have an answer to my question?

[Aeschines]

@treis

The difference is that I am not advocating that some cultures should grow in population while the net population should decrease. You have made a judgement that some cultures are valuable and the members of that culture should ban abortion to increase their population.

Funhouse mirror distortions of what I’ve said coupled with ad hoc extrapolation.

I think, yes, somehow or another the world should contain about 2 to 3 billion people. The amount of people on any given continent or island or wherever would depend on the local environment.

This point is totally unrelated to my concern about shrinking populations. Is Japan overpopulated at 120M? I think it probably is, but that still doesn’t mean that a 1/3 reduction in population in 50 years is a good idea. The environment of that country is one concern among several. Another is that that the world economy is now dependent on the economy of that country. Etc.

China is working on shrinking its population on purpose (by lowering the birth rate), and that might very well be a good idea. AIDS is shrinking (or at least somewhat reducing) the population of Africa (by means of a high death rate), and I think it’s a horrible thing. Etc.