Free Birth Control access can reduce Abortion Rate by More Than Half

This should make angry all conservative, mainly the social conservative. Yes free Birth Control access has a positive effect in the reduction of the abortions, like it or not. And the fact is that the less conservative states have less abortions than the more conservative states. And how easier access to the birth control methods less necessity of the use of the abortion.

But no, social conservatives want to make harder the access to birth control, increasing the risk of unwanted pregnancy and in consequence abortions. The reality is cruel against neoconservative and their bad ideas for the society.

[URL="http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2012/10/04/free-birth-control-access-can-reduce-abortion-rate-by-more-than-half/"Free Birth Control access can reduce Abortion Rate by More Than Half/[/URL]

 

American birth rate lowest ever...

CDC: U.S. Birth Rate Hits All-Time Low; 40.7% of Babies Born to Unmarried Women
October 31, 2012 - The birth rate in the United States hit an all-time low in 2011, according to a report released this month by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

 

NOT true!!!!!!!!!!!!!

most artif birth c methods CAUSE abortion

the Pill

the IUD (if they are still using that??? they shouldn't be since it causes health problems)

and other methods

and condoms are defective a lot of the time, have small holes in them

and break

and besides all that artif birth control is immoral

God did not make pleasure and procreation to be separated by an artificial barrier

 

No one wants to restrict access to birth control. They just don't think it should be "free" because in reality it's not "free". Someone has got to pay for it. I'm not speaking for all conservatives but I believe that most think the people using the birth control should be paying for it and not "society", the taxpayers, the employers, the 1% or whoever liberals think should pay for it.

Besides, I thought abortion was already supposed for be safe and "rare". That's what we were told anyway.

 

Who is going to be paying for the services required to rear the unplanned children?

 

More birth control, condoms and morning after pills. Then more screening of adopting parents. Then get rid of abortion.

 

Who is going to be paying for the services required to rear the unplanned children?

 

How about the people that make the kid in the first place you idiot. I cannot seriously believe that you just asked that question. How addled in the head are you?

 

I'll say it again, if you really want to lower the amount of unwanted pregnancies, stop being a slut. Stop teaching your daughters to be sluts. Stop teaching your sons to have no respect for women. Stop having sex with people you hardly know. Stop going to orgies. Have some self respect and use some self restraint.

 

Duplicate

 

It should be the parents but sadly for low income people it will be the taxpayers, just like it is now.

 

And when they can't afford to do so?

(Personal attack noted and reported, by the way)

 

Responsibility. A novel idea.

 

Bold is mine. Is anyone else alarmed by this stat?

 

You bolded more than one stat, so you can't be surprised when people ignore it.

 

The formatting police have arrived. We will be saved. Already corrected.

 

Personal attack aside, he does have a point. Are you not supposed to be responsible for the children you give birth to/father?

 

this is the real problem... all birth control is a immoral sin to the the fanatical pro-life folks


.

 

Would you rather have the fetus aborted or raised on the public dole? Bristol Palin has already shown that abstinence doesn't work.

 

yep and 2\3 of all abortions are by Christians... amazingly enough

some think just have the baby and it will all work out, not always, look at Andrea Yates, she should never be allowed to have more children

if Andrea had been on birth control or aborted the last child, 4 children might be alive today

 

yep, Palin said Abstinence was not realistic....

 

not the right that is for sure, all their tax contributions go to pay for wars (ironically... to kill people)

 

you mean the ones pro-lifers want to force them to have... if they wanted a abortion, obviously they were not ready or willing to have another child at their point in their life

 

I know lots of poor people making around $12 and hour who manage to raise more than one kid just fine without public assistance. It's called having two jobs and not having amenities like cable or Air Jordans. When you have kids you have to make sacrifices the problem is that some people are to selfish/lazy and don't want to give up stuff so they go on public assistance.

And if you try and bring up the lame minimum wage argument I have zero sympathy for anyone still making minumum wage who isn't either a high school or college student or is a part time retired worker.

Even if it is more expensive to have the kids taken care of it is the ethical thing to do. Seriously, by your insanely stupid logic we should just kill all of our prisoners because a bullet to the head would be alot cheaper than paying for their room and board.

 

1) Anecdotes are not evidence. Try again.

2) It doesn't surprise me that you're pathetic enough to have no sympathy for the children of people making minimum wage

3) Fetuses aren't human beings. Even the bible says so. Check out Exodus 21.