What is the most likely reason for abortions being at an all time low?

[Dragonfly]

My guess is demographics

Care to explain a little more?

 

[wbcoleman]

Care to explain a little more?

Fewer women in the relevant demographic group which tends to seek abortions. Just a guess.

 

[Ontologuy]

There is nothing to "allude" to. State science fact, not science fiction.

Meaningless subterfuge while addressing a strawman.

The facts are as I stated them.

 

[Ontologuy]

Aaaand that's about all we need to hear from you on the subject. Thanks for playing :2wave:

That's right -- pro-chioce ideologues don't want to hear the whole truth about abortion .. they never do.

So they request that those telling the truth remain silent.

The fact remains that chemical abortion is .. abortion.

When you accurately consider both chemical and surgical abortion, abortion is at an all-time high, obviously.

 

[Ontologuy]

That makes no sense - taking a precaution doesn't mean you've ended a pregnancy...aside that they DO include that number in the statistics, each MA pill does NOT represent one pregnancy - and apparently you think it does. Most women, like me, have taken it as a paranoid precaution. I did so after I had my tubal done and my husband came home 2 weeks later. It was too close for my comfort, so we used several forms of protection, including the MA pill. I don't believe I was ever actually pregnant, though.

Your presentation here is pure subterfuge, especially about counting the pills taken (meaningless), where you also attempt to obfuscate, implying that the morning-after pills don't kill newly concevied humans when in fact they do, whether or not you can count each time they do.

When you add these chemical abortions to the surgical abortions, the total makes abortion now higher than ever, obviously.

No amount of anecdotal rationalizing has the power to fantasize that reality away.

Pretending that you don't know whether a morning-after pill resulted in an actual chemical abortion when chemical abortion is the function of those pills, that women only take those pills when they suspect conception did take place, and that the sales of these pills are off the charts compared to even five years ago .. is simply self-deception born out of compulsive denial.

 

[minnie616]

Morning after pills/ plan b is not a chemical abortifacients it just delays ovulation.
Ontologuy is confusing morning after pills with RU 486 and other Chemical abortifacients .

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Your presentation here is pure subterfuge, especially about counting the pills taken (meaningless), where you also attempt to obfuscate, implying that the morning-after pills don't kill newly concevied humans when in fact they do, whether or not you can count each time they do.

When you add these chemical abortions to the surgical abortions, the total makes abortion now higher than ever, obviously.

No amount of anecdotal rationalizing has the power to fantasize that reality away.

Pretending that you don't know whether a morning-after pill resulted in an actual chemical abortion when that is the function of those pills, that women only take those pills when they suspect conception did take place, and that the sales of these pills are off the charts compared to even five years ago .. is simply self-deception born out of compulsive denial.

Put your sesquipedalian loquaciousness on hold - all you're saying is "don't try to justify the use of it" and a false accusation that I'm somehow claiming it's not some type of abortion.

That was not my point - don't pretend I said anything other than "a pill taken doesn't constitute as ending a pregnancy - you have to be PREGNANT for that to happen." . . . we have no idea how many pregnancies are chemically ended.

Yes - to abort you have to have something to abort.

 

[Ontologuy]

Put your sesquipedalian loquaciousness on hold - all you're saying is "don't try to justify the use of it" and a false accusation that I'm somehow claiming it's not some type of abortion. That was not my point - don't pretend I said anything other than "a pill taken doesn't constitute as ending a pregnancy - you have to be PREGNANT for that to happen." . . . we have no idea how many pregnancies are chemically ended. Yes - to abort you have to have something to abort.

Again, you simply repeat your digressive diversionary focus on "we can't know if a living prenatal human was killed when that was the intent of taking the morning-after pill and the woman rationally suspected conception occurred and the intent of the morning-after pill is to kill that living prenatal human and the sales of these morning-after pills is off the charts". :roll:

Notice how you use term ("pregnancy") instead of the accurate "living prenatal human" that's being "terminated" (read: killed).

Notice how you focus on an agnostic know-nothing about each specific use of a morning-after pill when it's crysal clear that the odds of a living prenatal human being killed per use are very high.

Notice how you try to minimize both the intent and reality of the killing of prenatal humans that reasonably occur the great majority of the time a morning-after pill is used.

Pure denial, couched in typical pro-choice ideologue misdirection, agnosticism, etc.

A conservative estimate is that 85% of the time the attempt to kill a living prenatal human with a morning-after pill is successful.

Factoring that into the chemical-plus-surgical abortion equation means that abortion is clearly at an all-time high.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Again, you simply repeat your digressive diversionary focus on "we can't know if a living prenatal human was killed when that was the intent of taking the morning-after pill and the woman rationally suspected conception occurred and the intent of the morning-after pill is to kill that living prenatal human and the sales of these morning-after pills is off the charts". :roll:

Notice how you use term ("pregnancy") instead of the accurate "living prenatal human" that's being "terminated" (read: killed).

Notice how you focus on an agnostic know-nothing about each specific use of a morning-after pill when it's crysal clear that the odds of a living prenatal human being killed per use are very high.

Notice how you try to minimize both the intent and reality of the killing of prenatal humans that reasonably occur the great majority of the time a morning-after pill is used.

Pure denial, couched in typical pro-choice ideologue misdirection, agnosticism, etc.

A conservative estimate is that 85% of the time the attempt to kill a living prenatal human with a morning-after pill is successful.

Factoring that into the chemical-plus-surgical abortion equation means that abortion is clearly at an all-time high.

Jesus Christ - you're one of those terminology nuts. Pregnancy and abortion isn't straight forward enough for you? :roll: Give me a break. I don't know why I bothered to make a SIMPLE point with you - you're obviously hell bent on ignoring it - it was just too simple, I suppose.

 

[Ontologuy]

Morning after pills/ plan b is not a chemical abortifacients it just delays ovulation.
Ontologuy is confusing morning after pills with RU 486 and other Chemical abortifacients .

False, obviously.

Plan b is a massive dose of progestin.

Progestin's primary function is to create a mucous coating around the uterus that prevents attachment of a newly conceived living human, and from the time the newly conceived living human is created to attachment to the uterus averages about 8 days.

So taking plan b after conception-risky sex where a newly conceived living human is rationally suspected to then exist functions to keep that newly conceived human from attaching to the uterus .. thus killing that human.

Plan b's greatly secondary function is to so disrupt the woman's hormonal system with the massive dose of progestin that it shuts down ovulation for awhile.

But Plan b's primary function is to kill the prenatal living human, because it is taken when ovulation is already suspected to have recently occurred.

I've corrected you on this many times in the past .. yet you continue to spout this falsity .. and it's simply egregious of you to do so and knowingly falsely state that "I'm" the one who's "confused". :roll:

Planned Parenthood continues to deny this crystal clear reality about Plan b as part of their ideological pro-choice agenda to keep women fooled and in the dark about these realities.

 

[Ontologuy]

Jesus Christ - you're one of those terminology nuts. Pregnancy and abortion isn't straight forward enough for you? :roll: Give me a break. I don't know why I bothered to make a SIMPLE point with you - you're obviously hell bent on ignoring it - it was just too simple, I suppose.

And rather than admit your pro-choice denialist's agenda is being exposed, you, once again, minimize the killing reality of newly conceived humans with your "pregnancy and abortion" euphemism, and, when you're called on it, you attack me for presenting the truth of it. :roll:

Typical pro-choicer.

Pro-choicers have a difficult time facing that their agenda is one of supporting abortion on demand, abortion which always kills a living prenatal human.

They can't bring themselves to tell the straight truth: that abortion kills a living prenatal human.

So they hide from it, self-deceptively, and in the hope of fooling others too, via the use of their terminology lexicon's minimizing terms, such as "ending a pregnancy" and "terminating" not the life of a prenatal human, but the emotionally safer for themselves term "pregnancy", that they're "aborting" a "pregnancy", not the life of a newly conceived prenatal human.

And, when you call them on it, when you call them on their obvious subterfuge and obfuscation as they employ it in the abortion conflict debate, they simply deny the obvious reality, and twist it into an attack on you. :roll:

What really bothers them is that you accurately called them on it.

That's why they get angry.

 

[minnie616]

Wrong.
During IVF doctors give progeterone to help the fertilized egg implant and stay implanted.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

And rather than admit your pro-choice denialist's agenda is being exposed, you, once again, minimize the killing reality of newly conceived humans with your "pregnancy and abortion" euphemism, and, when you're called on it, you attack me for presenting the truth of it. :roll:

Typical pro-choicer.

Pro-choicers have a difficult time facing that their agenda is one of supporting abortion on demand, abortion which always kills a living prenatal human.

They can't bring themselves to tell the straight truth: that abortion kills a living prenatal human.

So they hide from it, self-deceptively, and in the hope of fooling others too, via the use of their terminology lexicon's minimizing terms, such as "ending a pregnancy" and "terminating" not the life of a prenatal human, but the emotionally safer for themselves term "pregnancy", that they're "aborting" a "pregnancy", not the life of a newly conceived prenatal human.

And, when you call them on it, when you call them on their obvious subterfuge and obfuscation as they employ it in the abortion conflict debate, they simply deny the obvious reality, and twist it into an attack on you. :roll:

What really bothers them is that you accurately called them on it.

That's why they get angry.

I'm not denying anything.

Abortion is down.

Unwed mother statistics are up.

More kids are supported by the government than by both parents.

A large number of children in the over-populated adoption system will never find a family.

To be pregnant you have to be pregnant.

To abort you have to have something to abort.


....It all seems overly simplified in my view.

 

[minnie616]

Progesterone Can Help Women Conceive and Prevent Miscarriage

How Progesterone Can Help Women Conceive and Prevent Miscarriage

Results of a Lack of Progesterone


Many women who have trouble with conceiving or have suffered a miscarriage in the early months of pregnancy have a progesterone deficiency. Some women simply do not produce enough progesterone to sustain a healthy uterine lining, which makes it difficult for a fertilized egg to implant or to stay implanted.
If implantation is not facilitated, the pregnancy is then flushed out with the woman's next period. In this case, a woman who believes she is "infertile" may not realize that she is conceiving, but that she is having very early miscarriages. If the baby does implant, but the uterine lining is not provided with enough progesterone to sustain the pregnancy, a miscarriage occurs. Progesterone also has a role in preparing a woman's breasts for lactation, as well as altering the ligaments and muscles in a woman's body to facilitate birth.

read more:
How Progesterone Can Help Women Conceive and Prevent Miscarriage - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

 

[Ontologuy]

I'm not denying anything.

False, obviously. :lol:

Abortion is down.

Again, obviously false, as I've factually explained.

Again, you clearly deny that chemical abortion is abortion and that morning-after pills kill a newly conceived human conservatively 85% of the time they're used.

Repeating your denialist phraseology in no way makes it true.

Unwed mother statistics are up.

Topically irrelevant and misleading.

More kids are supported by the government than by both parents.

Again, another digressive diversion from the point that abortion is up.

Meaningless.

A large number of children in the over-populated adoption system will never find a family.

Here you simply make blatant implicit excuses for killing prenatal humans, yet you can't bring yourself to say "thus we should support abortion on demand and the killing of prenatal humans to prevent over-population".

Clearly you can't help but continue to reveal your pro-choice agenda.

To be pregnant you have to be pregnant.

Meaningless denialist statement.

To abort you have to have something to abort.

Again, another similar meaningless denialist statement.

....It all seems overly simplified in my view.

Of course it does -- it always does to pro-choice denialists.

When you can employ the phrase "kills a newly conceived prenatal human" in your presentations on the matter regarding abortion, then we'll know, not only that this highly complex situation that makes the abortion conflict the conflict that it is is no longer "overly simplified" for you, but that you're finally coming out of denial.

 

[Ontologuy]

Progesterone Can Help Women Conceive and Prevent Miscarriage


read more:
How Progesterone Can Help Women Conceive and Prevent Miscarriage - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

Topically meaningless diversion, typical of Minnie616 posts in the abortion threads. :roll:

 

[Aunt Spiker]

False, obviously. :lol:



Again, obviously false, as I've factually explained.

Again, you clearly deny that chemical abortion is abortion and that morning-after pills kill a newly conceived human conservatively 85% of the time they're used.

Repeating your denialist phraseology in no way makes it true.



Topically irrelevant and misleading.



Again, another digressive diversion from the point that abortion is up.

Meaningless.




Here you simply make blatant implicit excuses for killing prenatal humans, yet you can't bring yourself to say "thus we should support abortion on demand and the killing of prenatal humans to prevent over-population".

Clearly you can't help but continue to reveal your pro-choice agenda.





Meaningless denialist statement.




Again, another similar meaningless denialist statement.




Of course it does -- it always does to pro-choice denialists.

When you can employ the phrase "kills a newly conceived prenatal human" in your presentations on the matter regarding abortion, then we'll know, not only that this highly complex situation that makes the abortion conflict the conflict that it is is no longer "overly simplified" for you, but that you're finally coming out of denial.

Okay - whatever . . . abortions' up, inhumanity is up, the world is ending.

When are you checking out?

:lol: I'm done with this little back and forth - you're stuck in this loop of 'I'm right and everyone's wrong if they disagree with me, no matter what'

 

[Dragonfly]

Okay - whatever . . . abortions' up, inhumanity is up, the world is ending.

When are you checking out?

:lol: I'm done with this little back and forth - you're stuck in this loop of 'I'm right and everyone's wrong if they disagree with me, no matter what'

There's only one person in all of DP I have on ignore. Care to guess who? And why? :lol:

 

[Ontologuy]

Okay - whatever . . . abortions' up, inhumanity is up, the world is ending. When are you checking out? :lol: I'm done with this little back and forth - you're stuck in this loop of 'I'm right and everyone's wrong if they disagree with me, no matter what'

You have a typical pro-choicer's M.O. of capitulating in a debate.

They always leave with a statement about how wrong their debate opponent is rather than admit their subterfuge and obfuscation were revealed and they severly lost on all points, as if their opponents were so "wrong", it should have been easier to present how erroneous they were .. but, of course, that their opponent was wrong wasn't the case at all, obviously.

 

[Ontologuy]

There's only one person in all of DP I have on ignore. Care to guess who? And why? :lol:

People oftend tend to ignore those who employ rational cogent arguments to refute them in debate.

Thus, they can ostrich-with-its-head-in-the-sand never see when that happens after that .. though it still happens .. and others can easily see it happen.

 

[minnie616]

From Medline Plus:

In vitro fertilization (IVF)

Women who undergo IVF must take daily shots or pills of the hormone progesterone for 8 - 10 weeks after the embryo transfer. Progesterone is a hormone produced naturally by the ovaries that helps thicken the lining of the womb (uterus). This makes it easier for the embryo to implant. Too little progesterone during the early weeks of pregnancy may result in a miscarriage.

read more:

In vitro fertilization (IVF): MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia

 

[Ontologuy]

From Medline Plus: read more: In vitro fertilization (IVF): MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia

Complete pro-choicer subterfuge. :roll:

Here the pro-choicer is trying to obfuscate the fact that mass doses of progestin prevent the newly conceived living human from implanting in the uterine wall by presenting an irrelevant article that mentions that normal amounts of naturally created progesterone functions to aid in implantation.

The pro-choicer hereby attempts to delude the reader into thinking that mass doses of progestin found in morning-after pills therefore would not impede implantation of the newly conceived human in the uterine wall, which is absolutely false.

The pro-choicer doesn't, however, tell the reader that progesterone's effect in the matter is a sliding scale effect, in that too little progesterone and implantation is difficult, just the right amount facilitates implantation, and too much progesterone creates a thick mucous lining of the uterus that PREVENTS implantation.

The pro-choicer employs this subterfuge to try to fool the reader into thinking that the morning-after pills containing massive doses of progestin (a steroid hormone of progesterone) don't kill the newly conceived living human by preveting that human from attaching to the uterine wall when in fact these morning-after pills most certainly do.

Truly sad, how pro-choicers must resort to the presetation of purposeful misinformation to divert attention away from the facts that the policies and pharmaceuticals they support kill newly conceived living humans.

They must really be ashamed of that fact to put so much effort into their misinformation propaganda campaigns.

 

[year2late]

I will guess by your logic you are morally against many forms of female birth control.

 

[kerussll]

That's right -- pro-chioce ideologues don't want to hear the whole truth about abortion .. they never do.

So they request that those telling the truth remain silent.

The fact remains that chemical abortion is .. abortion.

When you accurately consider both chemical and surgical abortion, abortion is at an all-time high, obviously.

The facts are that the morning after pill is not a chemical abortion. It is birth control. Plenty of people are ignorant to that fact, but as a regular on this forum I have a hard time believing that you didn't know that.

 

[kerussll]

Your presentation here is pure subterfuge, especially about counting the pills taken (meaningless), where you also attempt to obfuscate, implying that the morning-after pills don't kill newly concevied humans when in fact they do, whether or not you can count each time they do.

When you add these chemical abortions to the surgical abortions, the total makes abortion now higher than ever, obviously.

No amount of anecdotal rationalizing has the power to fantasize that reality away.

Pretending that you don't know whether a morning-after pill resulted in an actual chemical abortion when chemical abortion is the function of those pills, that women only take those pills when they suspect conception did take place, and that the sales of these pills are off the charts compared to even five years ago .. is simply self-deception born out of compulsive denial.

I hate to ask, but where are you getting this crap? Why not site a reputable source that supports your claims? You are embarrassing yourself.