• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Personal Story

Legalization of abortion and related slides in common morality coincide with a slide in our vital signs, hardly reflection of how 'good' abortion is for society. Indeed, we can probably associate that same period and our desire to influence other to follow us into it as a major obstacle to developing countries. These days, US culture is pressed around the world, along with our sexual liberalization that and causes similar problems in other countries as it does here. Broken marriage and single parent homes increase with the liberalization of sexual morality, and these are known to be economic obstacles. Now that we have influenced and broken these cultures, some of us now propose that they take the same path we are taking. But, that path is not leading us toward stable marriages and procreation, how can we propose that it will for them?

And then there is Ireland.

This is really a matter of perspective:
According to other people in other countries we're very sexually reserved, not liberalized. I guess it depends on *what* you're talking about or how you define 'sexual liberation' (and so on).

Aside that: I don't think that permitting or not permitting abortion reflects the overall success or status of the country itself (meaning: I don't think it's THE determining factor). I think it's just showing one aspect of a country's values or beliefs.

It seems that - on a very basic scale - If a country values individuality and personal freedom they will be more likely to support abortion and other things that are considered a means of preserving said individuality and personal freedom. Those who don't feel it's as important have views and regulations that do the opposite. . . Hence: Greenland, Ireland, Germany, the Middle East - and so on.

And it's interesting that you mention 'stable marriages and procreation' - - I imagine that not having kids when you're not healthy enough to handle the responsibility or financially sound enough to support them is a means of ensuring a more stable family-life when said individuals DO decide to have children.

I'd much rather people just don't have kids - regardless of how they prevent it - unless they are ready and willing to do what's necessary for the children they're bringing into the world. IT is not an easy, solo responsibility and if you're immature and can't handle it right you risk destroying the very beings you've created.
 
Last edited:
Those countries are also smaller and much more homogeneous than we are. None of those countries have the impact on the world that we do (for good or bad). Very few of them have the same or similar history as us and none of them are comprised of the entire worlds ethnicities.

Well, I wouldn't agree on the homogeneous part. Western Europe is quite diverse. The borders are pretty much open with other European countries, and they have a large number of immigrants from Asia and the Middle East. There are *parts* of America that are more diverse, but there are also parts that are much less diverse.

But overall, I agree. And that's sort of my point - the social mores are very different in these countries (for a variety of reasons, including size of the country) and to say that they have adopted primary American vaues is false.
 
Well, I wouldn't agree on the homogeneous part. Western Europe is quite diverse. The borders are pretty much open with other European countries, and they have a large number of immigrants from Asia and the Middle East. There are *parts* of America that are more diverse, but there are also parts that are much less diverse.

But overall, I agree. And that's sort of my point - the social mores are very different in these countries (for a variety of reasons, including size of the country) and to say that they have adopted primary American vaues is false.

If anyone's adopting from another country - is us adopting from some of those European nations. Many of our measures and efforts have been put in place using at least one (or more) of their countries as an example. . . we see that in numerous debates: legalizing drugs, immigration blending concerns, nationalization, hate crime and homosexual marriages.

And so on.
 
I made up nothing. I'm not engaging trolls who I've seen in other threads have no interest in debate, just foolish rhetoric. The abortion debate is usually something I steer clear of. But when it became personal I posted the story to hear peoples views in this case (I even asked the permission of my friend).

None of you need to worry at this point anyway as she had a miscarriage yesterday.

I'm sorry, Jet... really sorry about the rude, indecent posts in this thread as well... but a first pregnancy frequently results in a miscarriage, especially when the mother is under severe stress. And being a rape victim is severely stressful. I hope you'll encourage her to get counseling. Rape isn't something one just "gets over", and when the violation of her body is compounded by the trauma of a pregnancy and miscarriage, the emotional scars can be devastating. She needs the help and support not only of her friends, but of professionals in the field. She... and you... have my best wishes.
 
That's because the more educated and independent women are, the less likely they are to have unwanted children. What the most right-wing States are trying to do is not only stop abortion but curtail education that empowers women. This is an ongoing battle.

You can't stop abortion without making women more ignorant. Empowered women will fight tooth and nail to ensure their right to bodily sovereignty is preserved, which is the whole reason why abortion rights exist. It's because women got a clue about the patriarchal oppression and fought its control over their bodies.

Our country cannot afford to move backward. The more educated women are, the more powerful a civilizaiton is.

Whether you agree with Bachman or not, will you say she is not an empowered woman? How about feminist pro-life groups?
 
Well, I wouldn't agree on the homogeneous part. Western Europe is quite diverse. The borders are pretty much open with other European countries, and they have a large number of immigrants from Asia and the Middle East. There are *parts* of America that are more diverse, but there are also parts that are much less diverse.

You're talking about countries with a fraction of our population....and immigrant populations that are a fraction of that.

But overall, I agree. And that's sort of my point - the social mores are very different in these countries (for a variety of reasons, including size of the country) and to say that they have adopted primary American vaues is false.

I didn't imply that they should adopt American values. I just find it disingenuous to compare a country of 350 million with great diversity, to a country of 4.5 million with very little diversity.
 
You're talking about countries with a fraction of our population....and immigrant populations that are a fraction of that.

What does the relative size of their population have to do with whether or not that population is diverse...?

I didn't imply that they should adopt American values. I just find it disingenuous to compare a country of 350 million with great diversity, to a country of 4.5 million with very little diversity.

I didn't say you did. I was agreeing with you. Except the "very little diversity" part, which is factually wrong.
 
There's one problem with that: America is the exception among developed countries, not the rule.

In terms of social mores, most developed countries are totally different from America. And more developed. Here in the US, we're still battling it out with our Puritanical roots and there are lots of ways in which we are socially undeveloped.

Most other developed countries are in fact MORE socially liberal than we are. Guess what? Those countries have lower divorce rates than we do, and lower abortion rates than we do. They also have lower STD rates, less crime, better education, and a higher standard of living.

These things have all been somewhat stunted by the current state of the economy, but it's the same for the US - the comparison still stands.

You know what's really interesting about some of these countries? The most liberal amongst them - Sweden, for example - have lower marriage rates. However, they have high cohabitation rates. People are settling into life-long relationships, but they just aren't getting the piece of paper that goes with it (in part because they live in societies where unmarried people are treated better legally than they are here, so there's less need). So comparing marriage rates 1-to-1 is an inaccurate way to look at it anyway.

In these countries education in general, and sex-ed specifically, is also better. Therefore, use of birth control is more consistent and more correct, and accidental pregnancy is less common.

If you want to talk about high abortion rates in developed countries, America is actually leading the way. Reality is exactly the reverse of what you're saying.

We haven't broken these cultures. They have, wisely, decided to completely ignore our social mores and focus on their own. Our social mores are incredibly backwards to them.

And we're the ones with the higher abortion rate.

This is way simplified of the great variety that exists in Europe. Most are struggling from old age to pay pensions and make their youth feel comfortable enough to have children. They are relying on immigrants for labor, and their growth is stagnant. They have almost no babies, and that would make one expect that they are better brought up. They lack extreme left to some extent, and so women are given counseling before they get an abortion, no one lies to them and tells them there isn't a human being there, they are told a list of things that can happen due to abortion, they are offered further counseling services and advised to seek counseling if they have problems following an abortion. Some governments require full counseling and a waiting period before getting an abortion. In this country abortion operates almost outside the law, because it's legal bounds were not written with medicine in mind, but by the SCOTUS.

If you want to talk in terms of birth control, then we have governments that use birth control consumption rates to help budget for breast cancer treatment, because they clearly recognize the birth control causes breast cancer, as does the UN. In contrast, in the US, 40% of doctors don't inform women that birth control causes breast cancer, and in many cases I have run into pro-choicers who assert that it does not cause cancer, which is almost as ridiculous as denying that there are side effects of abortion.

We did not break Russia, its dying from the same disease.

Many of the countries there are trying to figure out how get people to have and raise children. There are ghost town... also, there are ghost towns in Japan, despite the often heard assertion of crowding... We have not really exported our pro-life culture until recently, so many of the countries only accepted poison, and have little resistance... which is ironic considering the initial settling of the Americas... now that I think about it... Of course, much of this stuff was developed in Russia and Germany along with propaganda used to propel it.

Of course, the post you are responding to was in an even wider context, discussing the failures of the West, and how we can't reasonably assert that they will solve the problems of the developing world. China says look how well we're doing. And thanks to breaking international laws, slave labor, and forced abortion, they are having some success. But, it is unclear how the country is going to avoid collapse in the near future due to the low number of young people, the already existing high rate of unrest, and the related extreme rate of executions and imprisonment (sometimes slavery).

If you look at the world, objectively, we see that we are in the depth of darkness propagated primarily by Bolsheviks and communists, seized hold of by radical feminists who are intent on destroying the very foundations of Western society, such as Church, women being sacred, life, and fertility.

When we survive this we will have a very dark period of time where we are ruled over by the radical feminists pushing a culture of death over the world.

Would we give other cherished creatures, such as endangered species, birth control? Does it not objectively poison and harm humanity in the same way?
 
What does the relative size of their population have to do with whether or not that population is diverse...?

you don't see the difference between 2 ethnicities present in a geographical area vs 300 ethnicities present in a geographical area?

I didn't say you did. I was agreeing with you. Except the "very little diversity" part, which is factually wrong.

It's not factually wrong. Compare the ethnic diversity of the US to the ethnic diversity of Norway..
 
This is really a matter of perspective:
According to other people in other countries we're very sexually reserved, not liberalized. I guess it depends on *what* you're talking about or how you define 'sexual liberation' (and so on).

Aside that: I don't think that permitting or not permitting abortion reflects the overall success or status of the country itself (meaning: I don't think it's THE determining factor). I think it's just showing one aspect of a country's values or beliefs.

It seems that - on a very basic scale - If a country values individuality and personal freedom they will be more likely to support abortion and other things that are considered a means of preserving said individuality and personal freedom. Those who don't feel it's as important have views and regulations that do the opposite. . . Hence: Greenland, Ireland, Germany, the Middle East - and so on.

And it's interesting that you mention 'stable marriages and procreation' - - I imagine that not having kids when you're not healthy enough to handle the responsibility or financially sound enough to support them is a means of ensuring a more stable family-life when said individuals DO decide to have children.

I'd much rather people just don't have kids - regardless of how they prevent it - unless they are ready and willing to do what's necessary for the children they're bringing into the world. IT is not an easy, solo responsibility and if you're immature and can't handle it right you risk destroying the very beings you've created.

It is a misunderstanding of human nature to ignore neighborly responsibility for families with children. This is caused, in part, by family diaspora, and immigration, internal and external, in general, and in no small part on vehicular travel (actually a or the main reason by the Amish don't use cars).

Let's say that sexual morality is like a sword. In this context talking about the abortion, is like arguing about how much damage the hilt can do.
 
you don't see the difference between 2 ethnicities present in a geographical area vs 300 ethnicities present in a geographical area?

What are you even talking about? Have you been to Western Europe? I have. There are people from all over the world in European cities. The most common are Turks, Indians, Africans, various flavors of Middle Eastern, and in some places a surprising number of South Americans. Rural areas not as much, but that's true in the US as well.

It's not factually wrong. Compare the ethnic diversity of the US to the ethnic diversity of Norway..

I could pick out states with very little diversity as well. Wyoming is over 90% white. It varies place to place, just like it does here.
 
This is way simplified of the great variety that exists in Europe. Most are struggling from old age to pay pensions and make their youth feel comfortable enough to have children. They are relying on immigrants for labor, and their growth is stagnant. They have almost no babies, and that would make one expect that they are better brought up. They lack extreme left to some extent, and so women are given counseling before they get an abortion, no one lies to them and tells them there isn't a human being there, they are told a list of things that can happen due to abortion, they are offered further counseling services and advised to seek counseling if they have problems following an abortion. Some governments require full counseling and a waiting period before getting an abortion. In this country abortion operates almost outside the law, because it's legal bounds were not written with medicine in mind, but by the SCOTUS.

If you want to talk in terms of birth control, then we have governments that use birth control consumption rates to help budget for breast cancer treatment, because they clearly recognize the birth control causes breast cancer, as does the UN. In contrast, in the US, 40% of doctors don't inform women that birth control causes breast cancer, and in many cases I have run into pro-choicers who assert that it does not cause cancer, which is almost as ridiculous as denying that there are side effects of abortion.

We did not break Russia, its dying from the same disease.

Many of the countries there are trying to figure out how get people to have and raise children. There are ghost town... also, there are ghost towns in Japan, despite the often heard assertion of crowding... We have not really exported our pro-life culture until recently, so many of the countries only accepted poison, and have little resistance... which is ironic considering the initial settling of the Americas... now that I think about it... Of course, much of this stuff was developed in Russia and Germany along with propaganda used to propel it.

Of course, the post you are responding to was in an even wider context, discussing the failures of the West, and how we can't reasonably assert that they will solve the problems of the developing world. China says look how well we're doing. And thanks to breaking international laws, slave labor, and forced abortion, they are having some success. But, it is unclear how the country is going to avoid collapse in the near future due to the low number of young people, the already existing high rate of unrest, and the related extreme rate of executions and imprisonment (sometimes slavery).

If you look at the world, objectively, we see that we are in the depth of darkness propagated primarily by Bolsheviks and communists, seized hold of by radical feminists who are intent on destroying the very foundations of Western society, such as Church, women being sacred, life, and fertility.

When we survive this we will have a very dark period of time where we are ruled over by the radical feminists pushing a culture of death over the world.

Would we give other cherished creatures, such as endangered species, birth control? Does it not objectively poison and harm humanity in the same way?

This is mostly incomprehensible, but I'll have a go.

1. Abortion is easier to obtain in most of Western Europe than it is here. It is not a "lie" not to give a woman an anti-choice lecture about how the 6-week-old clump of cells embedded in her uterine lining is a "human being," because it isn't by any definition of "human," or even "organism."

2. I'm not sure what you're talking about. Quite a few states here have waiting periods and manditory anti-choice "counseling." You're right about one thing - many states do operate outside the law by limiting abortion in ways that are illegal as per Roe V. Wade. There is nothing medically unsound about Roe V. Wade,

3. Your birth control = breast cancer thing is one of those thoroughly debunked conspiratorial heaps of BS that only tin foil hat-wearers believe. In truth, giving birth (not never using birth control) causes a very slight, not-even-worth-thinking-about decline in breast cancer rates. However, giving birth also increases your risk of ovarian cancer, which is far more deadly (but again, by a very slight, not-even-worth-thinking-about degree).

4. I don't even know what you're talking about with Russia. Russia is still considered by many to be developing, and at the very least it is certainly far less developed than Western Europe. Much of Russia is not even considered European - it's more accurately Eurasian.

5. I don't know what you're talking about with ghost towns either. Both Europe and Japan are much more densely populated than the US.

6. I don't know what you're talking about with China either. It has nothing to do with anything brought up by me. Also, China's birth rates are still at replacement. The reports they release are false, as most Chinese reports are. This is due in part to the fact that they actually don't force abortion - they just incentivize limited fertility. And if you knew anything about the crisis China was having due to its population, you'd realize how insane it is to say they are underpopulated.

7. Oh man, you're one of those "the commies and feminists are out to get us, they're under every floorboard!!" people, aren't you?

8. No, birth control doesn't harm humanity. Places without readily accessible and highly used birth control are the poorest, most disease-ridden, most miserable places in the world. Birth control allows us to keep our population at a level where we can actually maintain it. It is incredibly ignorant of global realities to say otherwise.
 
Last edited:
This is mostly incomprehensible, but I'll have a go.

1. Abortion is easier to obtain in most of Western Europe than it is here. It is not a "lie" not to give a woman an anti-choice lecture about how the 6-week-old clump of cells embedded in her uterine lining is a "human being," because it isn't by any definition of "human," or even "organism."

When the abortionist believe the abortion is complete, he is to inspect the remains, and ensure that all the limbs and parts of the head and body are present along with the placenta.

2. I'm not sure what you're talking about. Quite a few states here have waiting periods and manditory anti-choice "counseling." You're right about one thing - many states do operate outside the law by limiting abortion in ways that are illegal as per Roe V. Wade. There is nothing medically unsound about Roe V. Wade,

3. Your birth control = breast cancer thing is one of those thoroughly debunked conspiratorial heaps of BS that only tin foil hat-wearers believe. In truth, giving birth (not never using birth control) causes a very slight, not-even-worth-thinking-about decline in breast cancer rates. However, giving birth also increases your risk of ovarian cancer, which is far more deadly (but again, by a very slight, not-even-worth-thinking-about degree).

4. I don't even know what you're talking about with Russia. Russia is still considered by many to be developing, and at the very least it is certainly far less developed than Western Europe. Much of Russia is not even considered European - it's more accurately Eurasian.

5. I don't know what you're talking about with ghost towns either. Both Europe and Japan are much more densely populated than the US.

6. I don't know what you're talking about with China either. It has nothing to do with anything brought up by me. Also, China's birth rates are still at replacement. The reports they release are false, as most Chinese reports are. This is due in part to the fact that they actually don't force abortion - they just incentivize limited fertility. And if you knew anything about the crisis China was having due to its population, you'd realize how insane it is to say they are underpopulated.

7. Oh man, you're one of those "the commies and feminists are out to get us, they're under every floorboard!!" people, aren't you?

8. No, birth control doesn't harm humanity. Places without readily accessible and highly used birth control are the poorest, most disease-ridden, most miserable places in the world. Birth control allows us to keep our population at a level where we can actually maintain it. It is incredibly ignorant of global realities to say otherwise.

Have you ever typed 'forced abortion in China' into a search engine? If even one of those stories is true, then it would seem to indicate the tip of an iceberg, if all of them are true, we must be talking about a really huge iceberg.

If you're wrong about that, then maybe you have other things wrong as well.

If birth control is good for people, it must be good for bald eagles too!

Does birth control objectify women?

Thank you for reading.
 
Last edited:
When the abortionist believe the abortion is complete, he is to inspect the remains, and ensure that all the limbs and parts of the head and body are present along with the placenta.

That is patently false. The majority of abortions are performed with medication. Those that aren't are performed by a procedure that compacts the fetus. It would be impossible to count the "limbs." The rare exceptions are abortions performed for medically necessary reasons. Regardless of any of that, the shape of something's membrane has nothing to do with what's inside it. My cat's monkey toy has limbs. Is it a real monkey?

Have you ever typed 'forced abortion in China' into a search engine? If even one of those stories is true, then it would seem to indicate the tip of an iceberg, if all of them are true, we must be talking about a really huge iceberg.

If you're wrong about that, then maybe you have other things wrong as well.

If birth control is good for people, it must be good for bald eagles too!

Does birth control objectify women?

Thank you for reading.

Yes, I have. I've also studied it a bit. Most of it is American propaganda. Reports from Chinese people (not government) are very different. Like I said, the government incentivizes the one-child policy. Do they encourage abortion of second children? Yes. Do they force it? No.

Is it right? No. But it's a far cry from "forced abortions."

The rest of this is more incomprehensible drivel.

First off, unlike humans, other animals have environmentally imposed limits on their population growth. They have no need for birth control. Their numbers are limited by their environment, which human numbers are not.

Does personal empowerment objectify women? That is an inanely stupid question. I suppose you think war is peace?
 
Last edited:
It is a misunderstanding of human nature to ignore neighborly responsibility for families with children. This is caused, in part, by family diaspora, and immigration, internal and external, in general, and in no small part on vehicular travel (actually a or the main reason by the Amish don't use cars).

Let's say that sexual morality is like a sword. In this context talking about the abortion, is like arguing about how much damage the hilt can do.

I'm not following your point, here. . . what do you mean by neighborly responsibility? Do you mean that neighbors are partially responsible for someone else's children? Explain please - I don't want to interpret this the wrong way.
 
I'm not following your point, here. . . what do you mean by neighborly responsibility? Do you mean that neighbors are partially responsible for someone else's children? Explain please - I don't want to interpret this the wrong way.

Normally, the family would chip in with babysitting, parties, and cooking... and it would be very easy because the distances would not be great. Further, because people spread so much less, neighbors would be much more familiar, not just with the children, but with the entire family, creating a much larger support network.
 
That is patently false. The majority of abortions are performed with medication. Those that aren't are performed by a procedure that compacts the fetus. It would be impossible to count the "limbs." The rare exceptions are abortions performed for medically necessary reasons. Regardless of any of that, the shape of something's membrane has nothing to do with what's inside it. My cat's monkey toy has limbs. Is it a real monkey?

After the abortion, the dead baby is looked at to ensure that they removed the entire thing, it is about ensuring that the abortion was complete and 'safe'.



Yes, I have. I've also studied it a bit. Most of it is American propaganda. Reports from Chinese people (not government) are very different. Like I said, the government incentivizes the one-child policy. Do they encourage abortion of second children? Yes. Do they force it? No.

Is it right? No. But it's a far cry from "forced abortions."

The rest of this is more incomprehensible drivel.

First off, unlike humans, other animals have environmentally imposed limits on their population growth. They have no need for birth control. Their numbers are limited by their environment, which human numbers are not.

Does personal empowerment objectify women? That is an inanely stupid question. I suppose you think war is peace?

Does birth control objectify women? Does it create an atmosphere where sex is more expected from the woman?
 
Normally, the family would chip in with babysitting, parties, and cooking... and it would be very easy because the distances would not be great. Further, because people spread so much less, neighbors would be much more familiar, not just with the children, but with the entire family, creating a much larger support network.

Well thank heavens for family diaspora - not being so reliant on family and friends has forced people to become more self reliant and independent. Most definitely a positive thing.

I also don't believe in falling back on your neighbors for support or help, either - people should help their selves. I enjoy my privacy - apparently there are many people worldwide who probably think I'm a little nutty for this need for aloneness.

There's a neighbor who lives down my road and has chosen to stay with her abusive boyfriend - and she's always knocking on my door asking for rides and to use the phone and even get a light for her cigarette when he beats her. But she never leaves him like I told her many times she should do. Instead - she's willing to force her domestic issues onto us and make our entire family unsafe. . . unfortunately: that type of unsafe interaction is the only thing I have experience with when it comes to 'community and neighborly involvement' - people's troubles, problems and issues.
 
What are you even talking about? Have you been to Western Europe? I have. There are people from all over the world in European cities. The most common are Turks, Indians, Africans, various flavors of Middle Eastern, and in some places a surprising number of South Americans. Rural areas not as much, but that's true in the US as well.

Yes, I have. Having a few people from an area in one city, is not exactly the same thing. Specially when you consider many of them are not citizens, they're there to work and then go home.

I could pick out states with very little diversity as well. Wyoming is over 90% white. It varies place to place, just like it does here.

Wyoming has a large Native American and Mexican population, regardless you are crossing streams. We're talking about countries, not states.
 
After the abortion, the dead baby is looked at to ensure that they removed the entire thing, it is about ensuring that the abortion was complete and 'safe'.

No, it isn't. Like I already said, the means through which abortions are performed make this impossible. You obviously know nothing about how abortions are typically performed.

Does birth control objectify women? Does it create an atmosphere where sex is more expected from the woman?

No. If anything, it increases empowerment, which increases women's ability to say no. It didn't used to be a crime for a husband to rape his wife, in the days before birth control. Now it is.
 
And you know - JMJ is also assuming that there's *a developed baby* to view.

I support mostly early abortions - as early as possible - I don't support abortion after a certain point in gestation - most abortions are already done within the first trimester. A large percentage. And at that point there's really nothing much to 'view'

Sort of defeats his purpose. :shrug:

In fact - it might nullify the desired effect completely if there's nothing to actually see - and bring comfort by reassuring that 'it's not really a baby'
 
Last edited:
Yes, I have. Having a few people from an area in one city, is not exactly the same thing. Specially when you consider many of them are not citizens, they're there to work and then go home.

A few people? In Germany, about 20 of the population is immigrant or non-German. In France, it's almost 30% immigrant or non-French. The US has to be looked at a bit differently since the majority of the population is ethnically non-native. In our case, we're about 30% non-white native and/or first-gen immigrant of any race, which is a comparable way to measure as the stats for Germany and France I gave above. Many countries in Western Europe are very diverse.

By the way, for France? The highest percentage of immigrants to France are African, not other Europeans.

Wyoming has a large Native American and Mexican population, regardless you are crossing streams. We're talking about countries, not states.

That doesn't change the fact that they're more than 90% white. We're talking about comparable geographical areas. And furthermore, Wyoming has considerably less diversity than the US as a whole, as stated above.
 
Last edited:
And you know - JMJ is also assuming that there's *a developed baby* to view.

I support mostly early abortions - as early as possible - I don't support abortion after a certain point in gestation - most abortions are already done within the first trimester. A large percentage. And at that point there's really nothing much to 'view'

Sort of defeats his purpose. :shrug:

In fact - it might nullify the desired effect completely if there's nothing to actually see - and bring comfort by reassuring that 'it's not really a baby'

Yup, good point. There's not much to look at with an 8-12 week old ZEF, even if it were possible to try. And most abortions take place around that point. Abortion is not uncommon up to 15 weeks - which is early in the 2nd trimester. But after 15 weeks is uncommon, and after 22 is pretty much unheard of except in medical emergencies (and this was still true when elective late-term abortion was legal - no one did it).
 
A few people? In Germany, about 20 of the population is immigrant or non-German. In France, it's almost 30% immigrant or non-French. The US has to be looked at a bit differently since the majority of the population is ethnically non-native. In our case, we're about 30% non-white native and/or first-gen immigrant of any race, which is a comparable way to measure as the stats for Germany and France I gave above. Many countries in Western Europe are very diverse.

By the way, for France? The highest percentage of immigrants to France are African, not other Europeans.

You're forgettting that that 73% of European-Americans come from diverse nationalities. What's going on in France right now? Stemming from one minority, immigrant, ethnic group?

That doesn't change the fact that they're more than 90% white. We're talking about comparable geographical areas. And furthermore, Wyoming has considerably less diversity than the US as a whole, as stated above.

No, I'm talking about countries. That's where federal laws reside. Countries...not states. Are you going to compare what happens in Wyoming, a state, to what happens in France...a country?
 
You're forgettting that that 73% of European-Americans come from diverse nationalities. What's going on in France right now? Stemming from one minority, immigrant, ethnic group?

Yeah, which is why it has to be measured slightly differently. There's no direct equivalent, unless you use Native Americans as the baseline. The "American mutt" is the majority ethnicity in the US. And most of them have been here long enough that they are much more American than anything else, so it's irrelevant where their families came from. We're talking about culture, not genetics.

What does that matter?

No, I'm talking about countries. That's where federal laws reside. Countries...not states. Are you going to compare what happens in Wyoming, a state, to what happens in France...a country?

No, but we're not talking about that. You insisted that somehow a smaller population inherently means they are homogeneous, which is patently false. This has nothing to do with what level of politics the territory belongs to. I made my point that parts of America are homogeneous.

I forgot how enthusiastic you are at strawmen and intentional density. Welcome back to DP, to me. :roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom