Why do Anti-abortion advocates ignore statistics.

[weaver2]

Research clearly indicates that children in families struggling with the stress of instability, insecurity, poverty, abuse and/or emotional issues do not do well as children and their futures' as adults are often worse. Conservatives surely are aware of the statistics since they have been posted several times. In the face of such statistics why isn't banning abortion, insisting on birth and denying access to effective LARCs just plain cruelty to children?

 

[Lursa]

Research clearly indicates that children in families struggling with the stress of instability, insecurity, poverty, abuse and/or emotional issues do not do well as children and their futures' as adults are often worse. Conservatives surely are aware of the statistics since they have been posted several times. In the face of such statistics why isn't banning abortion, insisting on birth and denying access to effective LARCs just plain cruelty to children?

We've also seen a small rise in abortions overall.

And several states have experienced a rise in abortions reflecting the so-called drop in abortions in neighboring states.

Let's face it, Dobbs enabled states to allow women to have abortions...and they are going to do so based on their needs.

 

[Lursa]

Abortions are up in the US

"Abortion has become slightly more common despite bans or deep restrictions in most Republican-controlled states, and the legal and political fights over its future are not over yet.​

​

“Abortion bans don’t actually prevent abortions from happening,” said Ushma Upadhyay, a public health social scientist at the University of California San Francisco. But, she said, they do change care.​

​

For women in some states, there are major obstacles to getting abortions — and advocates say that low-income, minority and immigrant women are least likely to be able to get them when they want.​

​

As the bans swept in, abortion pills became a bigger part of the equation. But now, it’s become more common for pill prescriptions to be made by telehealth.​

​

But a network of efforts to get women seeking abortions to places where they’re legal has strengthened and travel for abortion is now common.​

​

The Guttmacher Institute found that more than twice as many Texas residents obtained abortion in 2023 in New Mexico as New Mexico residents did. And as many Texans received them in Kansas as Kansans."​

 

[tshade]

Research clearly indicates that children in families struggling with the stress of instability, insecurity, poverty, abuse and/or emotional issues do not do well as children and their futures' as adults are often worse. Conservatives surely are aware of the statistics since they have been posted several times. In the face of such statistics why isn't banning abortion, insisting on birth and denying access to effective LARCs just plain cruelty to children?

How can it be cruel to children to ban the killing of children???

We should both discourage abortion, while at the same time heavily support children and families, unwed moms, etc, etc

 

[Atreus21]

Research clearly indicates that children in families struggling with the stress of instability, insecurity, poverty, abuse and/or emotional issues do not do well as children and their futures' as adults are often worse.

And therefore it follows that we should kill them to spare them such suffering that might happen? No.

Conservatives surely are aware of the statistics since they have been posted several times. In the face of such statistics why isn't banning abortion, insisting on birth and denying access to effective LARCs just plain cruelty to children?

Why can't we kill them at 2 days old for the same reason?

 

[Lursa]

How can it be cruel to children to ban the killing of children???

We should both discourage abortion, while at the same time heavily support children and families, unwed moms, etc, etc

What children are killed? If anything, we're helping to protect the kids the woman/couple already has if they are unprepared/cant afford more. Maybe the mother believes she will abuse it, or she's on drugs, risking birth defects, or her partner is violent and she doesnt want to endanger a kid. And we're protecting the ~100,000 up for adoption, waiting for a family...more unnecessarily produced babies just reduces their chances of finding a home.

Why not discourage producing more unwanted, unaffordable kids? Everyone is entitled to enjoy consensual sex, and sometimes birth control fails. That's no reason to automatically pump out more kids, is it?

 

[Lord of Planar]

Research clearly indicates that children in families struggling with the stress of instability, insecurity, poverty, abuse and/or emotional issues do not do well as children and their futures' as adults are often worse. Conservatives surely are aware of the statistics since they have been posted several times. In the face of such statistics why isn't banning abortion, insisting on birth and denying access to effective LARCs just plain cruelty to children?

It is simple. Murder is not the solution. Two wrongs don't make a right. Unless maybe you have little morality and want us to off all those poor souls.

 

[Lursa]

And therefore it follows that we should kill them to spare them such suffering that might happen? No.

Why not? Why produce a kid unnecessarily if you cant afford it? What about her suffering, maybe the suffering of the kids she already has? Is it your view that "no one else's suffering matters"? BTW, the unborn suffers nothing if it's not born. I dont think you need to lose any sleep over suffering if you respect a woman's choice...she's the one who knows best what that suffering may look like.

Why can't we kill them at 2 days old for the same reason?

Why is it only about the unborn/2 day old? What about the woman?

Because inside the woman, any govt interference trying to protect the unborn harms the woman, removes her right to consent to her own life and its direction, her health, it violates her 4th Amendment right to security of the person, due process, etc.

Once born, anyone can care for or protect a baby and the woman's life, and health, rights, and responsibilities and commitments to others are not risked. The govt is obligated to protect women and our rights...it has no such obligation for the unborn. Why should the woman, with her part in society, her involvement with loved ones, her responsibilities to others, be placed at risk for the unborn? Who knows better than she what's at stake? Why demand risks to so many others for the unknown quantity of the unborn?

 

[Lursa]

It is simple. Murder is not the solution. Two wrongs don't make a right. Unless maybe you have little morality and want us to off all those poor souls.

Dobbs says states can allow women to kill their unborn with no due process. And many states do. Obviously it's not murder.

And why are you imagining "poor souls?" They suffer nothing. What makes you feel entitled to believe your myths should be forced on women that dont believe the same thing as you do?

The women suffer tho...what about taking away their consent to choose not suffer the pain and risks of pregnancy? I hope you dont believe you hold some moral High Ground here...believing you are entitled to do that?

 

[tshade]

What children are killed? If anything, we're helping to protect the kids the woman/couple already has if they are unprepared/cant afford more. Maybe the mother believes she will abuse it, or she's on drugs, risking birth defects, or her partner is violent and she doesnt want to endanger a kid.

So, because it is inconvenient for the couple, and to save a buck, they will kill the human life inside her.??????

So, to keep from "endangering the human, we kill it????

And we're protecting the ~100,000 up for adoption, waiting for a family...more unnecessarily produced babies just reduces their chances of finding a home.

oh---how noble

Why not discourage producing more unwanted, unaffordable kids? Everyone is entitled to enjoy consensual sex, and sometimes birth control fails. That's no reason to automatically pump out more kids, is it?

Nothing is more precious than life---yes, even more precious than having sex................................good grief...

 

[Lursa]

So, because it is inconvenient for the couple, and to save a buck, they will kill the human life inside her.??????

I just wrote reasons that are far beyond inconvenience. If YOU believe earning enough to keep a roof over your head, not losing your job or your apt, avoiding adding another life abused by violence, that is YOUR sad value of YOUR life but most people find safety, responsibilities, working hard and providing as important in life, not "conveniences.'

If you value everything in life so poorly, as mere conveniences, why do you want more lives brought into it?

So, to keep from "endangering the human, we kill it????

See above.

oh---how noble

Nothing is more precious than life---yes, even more precious than having sex................................good grief...

That's right...and the woman's life, which you feel entitled to put at risk, is precious as well. As are her loved ones who need her and depend on her. Why do you believe it's acceptable for strangers to demand she put all those others at risk just for the unborn?

I believe in quality of life, not quantity. Your belief considering all that we do in life 'conveniences' devalues us all but I recognize that most people believe their lives, their work, their ability to provide, their loved ones, their responsibilities are of greater value than that.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Dobbs says states can allow women to kill their unborn with no due process. And many states do. Obviously it's not murder.

Legally it isn't. I am just reminding people that a vast number of people do consider it murder.

Is you cannot afford to have a child, do not have sex. Problem solved, and irresponsible people wonder why others are rich a they get jealous.

Stop being irresponsible in life.

 

[Lursa]

Legally it isn't. I am just reminding people that a vast number of people do consider it murder.

People consider a lot of things very stupidly or selfishly or ignorantly.

Is you cannot afford to have a child, do not have sex. Problem solved, and irresponsible people wonder why others are rich a they get jealous.

See? This statement fits all three above. Why on earth should couples stop enjoying responsible sex?

Stop being irresponsible in life.

You assume that abortion is wrong. Who says? What authority that American women are obligated to follow?

 

[Lord of Planar]

See? This statement fits all three above. Why on earth should couples stop enjoying responsible sex?

It is not responsible sex if abortion is used as birth control.

 

[Lursa]

It is not responsible sex if abortion is used as birth control.

Dont make up your own definitions. Or if you do, dont expect other people to accept them. Using birth control is also responsible. I've posted the list of how abortion itself is a responsible option for you...have you forgotten?

Why didnt you answer my questions?

You assume that abortion is wrong. Who says? What authority that American women are obligated to follow?​

​

 

[weaver2]

How can it be cruel to children to ban the killing of children???

We've been over this before.
This is not a child.

It is an embryo at 8weeks. It has no nervous system, no brain, no digestive, respiratory, circulatory, systems. It cannot see, hear, or feel. It has no sense of it's existence. At 8 weeks or less 64% of women who know they cannot care for a child have aborted this embryo. There is no justification for interfering in the lives of women, their children, partners, parents and grandparents and forcing all of them into a state of poverty by legally requiring the woman to give birth. You have never given any justification for condemning families to even more stress than they currently are experiencing. Many are left in permanent and deep poverty. Your behavior is saying your religion gives you the right to intrude.

We should both discourage abortion, while at the same time heavily support children and families, unwed moms, etc, etc

Great! Let's do that. Let's set up a program like Colorado did that gives free access to all women to LARCs and other effective methods of contraception. They increased the number of schools that had honest sex-ed programs and cut the number of Abstinence only programs in public schools. They offered free vasectomies. Colorado cut teen births by 50% the first year. More important the cut the second pregnancy in the same teen to almost 0. They cut overall abortion rate about 20%. This program increased HS graduation rates, increased enrollment in post secondary, decreased unemployment in young adult women and decreased welfare costs. The program paid for itself in state expenditures.

What is holding you back from starting a program like this. Why work for Catholic pregnancy centers a program that increases unintended children, poverty, foster care, incarceration, unemployment and welfare costs, refuses to teach your pregnant clients about birth control and increases absolutely the instances of your clients getting pregnant again within a year.

 

[weaver2]

It is not responsible sex if abortion is used as birth control.

Then quit voting for the conservative males that generate and pass laws that make effective birth control inaccessible to all women or allow companies to refuse to provide health insurance that covers all types of birth control that leave only abortion for birth control.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Dont make up your own definitions. Or if you do, dont expect other people to accept them. Using birth control is also responsible. I've posted the list of how abortion itself is a responsible option for you...have you forgotten?

Why didnt you answer my questions?

You assume that abortion is wrong. Who says? What authority that American women are obligated to follow?​

​

I specified "as birth control." Medical and other factors are different, and to kill over money... financial concerns...

I will leave this thread, and let all you immoral people have fun.

 

[Lursa]

I specified "as birth control."

If abortion is birth control and birth control = responsible sex...abortion is responsible.

Medical and other factors are different, and to kill over money... financial concerns...

Yes, people suffering in poverty or from lack of health care, or dependents suffering when there's no food or heat, children suffering unnecessarily in foster care, waiting fruitlessly to be adopted...what losers!

I will leave this thread, and let all you immoral people have fun.

See? You dont have an argument...you have an opinion. And one that you cannot support with legal or moral reasoning...just facile condemnation.

 

[weaver2]

Dont make up your own definitions. Or if you do, dont expect other people to accept them. Using birth control is also responsible. I've posted the list of how abortion itself is a responsible option for you...have you forgotten?

Why didnt you answer my questions?

You assume that abortion is wrong. Who says? What authority that American women are obligated to follow?​

​

Worse yet, who gave him the authority to intrude on the lives of women who are struggling and tell them they are immoral aborting a child they know they cannot give them the love and care all children deserve and need

..........and I'm not talking finances. If you think money is the only reason women abort you don't know enough about these women to intrude on their lives and condemn them as immoral.

 

[weaver2]

I will leave this thread, and let all you immoral people have fun.

Good. Wrap yourself up in your morality cloak and go talk to your priest about how moral you both are: one invading and violating children's innocence and one invading and violating the private lives of women you don't know and don't give a shit about.

 

[weaver2]

It is simple. Murder is not the solution. Two wrongs don't make a right. Unless maybe you have little morality and want us to off all those poor souls.

Yeah, we've heard all the morality argument your church has given you to spout at women they deem immoral. It's nothing more than juvenile semantics and illogical extremes. You don't have a single original thought in your head. The Church has crowded out most of your capacity to think and replaced it with lies about women, evil, immorality and murder.

 

[Jessie C]

Research clearly indicates that children in families struggling with the stress of instability, insecurity, poverty, abuse and/or emotional issues do not do well as children and their futures' as adults are often worse. Conservatives surely are aware of the statistics since they have been posted several times. In the face of such statistics why isn't banning abortion, insisting on birth and denying access to effective LARCs just plain cruelty to children?

And here we have a lofty GOP who's goal is to strip these same poor people and the children they can't afford of all of their benefits...yeah, that'll really help them now, won't it?? Deep sigh...I really hope there is a Hell for the GOP.....(Grand Old Party, MY ASS! It's more like the Gross, or Gangrenous Old Party, at best)

 

[weaver2]

And therefore it follows that we should kill them to spare them such suffering that might happen? No. Why can't we kill them at 2 days old for the same reason?

We've heard that stupid argument already too many times. It was stupid when the church first told you it's silly semantics were a powerful argument against the truth of statistics about children and stress, research, science, the law and even the bible and now 20 years later it is still nothing but twisted semantics.

 

[weaver2]

And here we have a lofty GOP who's goal is to strip these same poor people and the children they can't afford of all of their benefits...yeah, that'll really help them now, won't it?? Deep sigh...I really hope there is a Hell for the GOP.....(Grand Old Party, MY ASS! It's more like the Gross, or Gangrenous Old Party, at best)

Oh haven't you read .... they really really care and they support women and babies and their families ...... by setting up Catholic emergency pregnancy centers.