Not arguing against abortion, but I was curious what countries have the lowest abortion. It’s:
Zambia - not safe at all
India - a woman dies every two hours from unsafe abortions, and sex selection has resulting in a gender disparity
South Africa - 5% of maternal deaths following childbirth are abortion related, and 57% of these are related to illegal abortions. Backstreet abortion deaths have gone down.
Bangladesh - illegal except when the woman’s life is in danger. They use something called “menstrual regulation.” Sounds like the author isn’t a native English speaker but it sounds like women are more likely to die from abortions than childbirth. Article feels a bit biased though. Abortion in Bangladesh - Wikipedia
Spain - legal, abortion rates going up.
Sounds like the availability of birth control and education leads to fewer abortions, not the legality of abortion. Not that abortion should be criminalized since as you say, women will do it anyway, in unsafe ways.
Saving her from being trapped in poverty, I am reliably informed.
…largely because of Planned Parenthood.
But many have specifically worked to remove - or attempted to - women’s birth control from insurance coverage despite the many non-birth control uses for it, the actual hardships this would cause and the continued support for coverage of drugs like Viagra (Rick Santorum made this one of the planks of his campaign platform).
And worked hard to close down women’s health centers, which for many women have been the only source of affordable birth control.
And treated any woman who dared to suggest that birth control pills should be treated like the medication they are as a sex-crazed slut.
But hey, at least they haven’t tried to make it illegal.
Cite? Because I suspect there’s more to it than “give poor people less money and they’ll do better”.
ETA: Anyway, there’s more to welfare than just handing over money. Access to affordable (or even subsidized) childcare and pre-school programs would both benefit poor children and allow poor mothers more opportunity to work their way out of poverty.
Well, the Pill and the IUD both can prevent the conception of a fertilized egg. If life begins at conception, that is murder. Either they oppose this, or they are hypocrits.
Likewise, most IVF treatment will involve the destruction of fertilized eggs. So any “life begins at conception” law will put a huge burden on IVF clinics and patients.
Hereis an article that mention a study that included 26 programs and found that they did not work and another that did a meta analysis of 300 programs and found that most did not work. Those studies that show sex education working are mostly a result of data mining.
As your link says, Hawaii’s drop happened during a time when abortion rates were falling nationwide and other states had their rates fall just as much with no coinciding education changes.
Almost solely because cheap. reliable birth control is available at every drug store, grocery stores, Walmart, or Target in the country.
Birth control is not an insurable event. Insurance is for large unforeseeable expenses. Birth control is cheap, repetitive, and almost everyone uses it. Mandating insurance pay for it just makes insurance more expensive which hurts poor people who have trouble paying for insurance.
Only source for women who can’t afford 10 bucks for condoms?
I remember all the Republicans who went nuts when Trump said birth control pills should be available over the counter, or when the Senate Republicans triedto pass a bill so birth control pills could be available over the counter.
It is good you recognize your initial claim was wrong.
People stopped getting money and got jobs which lead them to get out of poverty.
It is conceivable to design a program that would benefit children and poor mothers, but we do not live in the ideal world of welfare so we have to evaluate what has happened in the real world.
What’s wrong about that? There is a very high correlation between pro-life views and opposition to contraception. Both are taught in a great many churches in the U.S.
There is almost no political opposition to contraception in America. The poll I found said that 8% of Americans want to legally restrict contraception. That is about the same as believe the moon landing is a hoax. Given that 55% or so of America is wants legal restrictions on abortion mathematically the overwhelming majority of pro-life people do not want to restrict contraception.
Politically there were 57 anti-abortion laws passed at the state level in 2015 alone. There have not been any anti-contraception laws passed at any level. Yet in every abortion debate someone tries to bring up the canard that pro-lifers want to ban contraception. Yet they never cite a poll or any actual legislation. It is just a way to change the subject.
And the proportion among those who oppose abortion is much higher, which negates your claim that Annie-Xmas was wrong in her observation.
What you just posted is true…and does not in any way refute what I said. There is a significant church opposition to contraception. (Ever heard of the Catholics?)
I haven’t read the entire thread yet, but up to the point of the quoted post you haven’t established that “abortion disproportionately effects baby girls”, at least insofar as the U.S., Canada, Aus/N.Z., and Europe* are concerned.
*i.e., the locations of almost all of the people reading this thread.
There’s a far more insidious reason for the ‘abortion=murder’ slogan. If pro-lifers can associate abortion with murder they have a societally acceptable way to try to outlaw it. Hence the argument that life begins at conception. That way, all abortion is bad and can be outlawed to their minds, because the Church says so…whichever Church it happens to be. (Notice that the Bible doesn’t.)
Just another way for conservatives to control others’ lives, probably their favorite pursuit, aside from keeping theirs.
Sex-selective abortion/gendercide has actually boosted feminism in China, IIRC. The outnumbered gender holds more clout, at least in dating and marriage.
There is also a segment that is white nationalist etc…
They can’t humanize it as a right because they need this foreign enemy to keep their group whole. And that is a common thing for lots of mass movements.
Wonder why there isn’t a movement whereby KKKers would try to increase black abortions as much as possible and Black Panthers would try to increase white abortions as much as possible.
The Aryan Nations believes there is one going on, but just “race mixing” is enough for them to call it that, no abortion required to commit “white genocide”. This is why you can’t use just addressing fears with that extreme view like you can with most people.
An anti-abortion protester once asked me “Suppose that science identifies the gay gene, and a strict Christian couple find out their unborn child has this gene. Should they be allowed to abort it?”
When I said “If that’s what they want to do, yes” his jaw just dropped. “You would support abortion a child for being homosexual?” “Yes, if that’s what they want to do” I repeated.
I also have no answer for that. I think it’s messed up. I’m generally ok with very early term abortion or any case where the mother’s life is in real danger, but I do think there’s a point in fetal development where it’s wrong. I don’t have that point nailed down to a perfect definition. And it’s not about wanting to control anyone’s body. It’s about a human’s right to live.
Obviously, we’re not going to see eye to eye and we’re not going to change anyone’s mind. I’m not utterly dumbfounded that you and others feel the way you do and I think I’m probably in the minority. Especially as I’m not religious. All that said, that’s why many pro-lifers are willing to give some ground on special cases like rape or incest.