What Actually Happens When a Country Bans Abortion

I'd be curious to see those statistics adjusted for race and income of the women's parents, relative to women who received care.

Often correlations can be due to some third outside variable, which is the cause of both statistics being looked at in a study.

(For example, people who ride bikes are statistically more likely than an average person in the population to have more muscle mass and be stronger. Is it bike riding that causes this? Well, for one thing all the people in the population who are incredibly weak and frail probably have inadequate strength to even ride bikes in the first place, so already a substantial portion of the population has been eliminated from the statistics. Or maybe people who are more athletically oriented in the first place are both more likely to lift weights and ride a bike than the average person in the population.)

 

Well that is actually the point it is a poverty cycle but feel free to post a study showing otherwise as I know there are multiple studies out there demonstrating this

 

It's shocking to me that anyone could say that and think it was a rational argument.

 

Why? What's your stake in this issue? You can't get pregnant, so why such a strong opinion?

 

Facts are not tactics.

 

Homeless Americans, adults and children, tend to be in cities because rural areas have no resources like shelters or free meals. Becomming homeless is not restricted to cities, they just go there because they can't live off of what they could scrounge or beg in rural areas. It has nothing to do with partisan politics.

 

You agreed with me on my comments.

 

What science do you mean?

Easy solution: men should all get vasectomies when they reach 18. It's as foolproof as can be, and easily reversed if and when they decide they want children. But that would require men to take some responsibility, instead of slut-shaming young women for giving them exactly what they want. I'm not holding me breath.

 

I am not holding my breath that I can deal with the above remarks.
Any activity were the vast majority of doctors refuse to do it shows they have ethics and follow the science.
Abortion fans do not seem to like hearing that.

 

I agree with nothing you've posted on this thread. Your only point is that cities are run by Democrats, and since cities are where the homeless people are, then somehow homelessness must be the fault of Democrats. That's such a fear-filled, hate-filled argument that it requires no thought behind it. It's a very simplistic view of the homeless problem.

 

There is no such thing as "abortion fans." The abortion is not the whole point; a woman's right to personal privacy under Section 1 of the 14th Amendment should be the same as your right to personal privacy. It should not be the government's business.

Please show me a link to back up your claim. Are we talking about a percentage of all doctors in the U.S.? Or just the ob/gyns?

 

If a woman is pregnant, why should she be under any government mandate about it? Do we report to the government when we have to have a hysterectomy? Should we be required to report the removal of an appendix? Are tubal ligations and vasectomies reported to the state? Don't we all have a right to complete privacy and confidentiality where our medical records are concerned? Where is the law that dictates we must report a woman's pregnancy? Isn't that part of her private medical records? How does the state even know if we see an ob/gyn for the "condition" of pregnancy? How does the government know we've chosen to abort?

Seriously, how is a woman's pregnancy anyone's business but her own? Roe v Wade was about the right to personal privacy. It's based on Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. Does that not apply to women in their child-bearing years?

 

Scan back on the posts since I have already provided a link to the doctors.
I believe there are plenty of abortion fans who never think to defend privacy, but defend abortion.

Abortion removes a living human so it is an innocent third party.

 

Damn you are right! We should probably just kill all homeless people then to spare them suffering.

Good call!

 

Wade changed her mind and fought against Roe v Wade.
Abortion is not about the woman. It is about a third party not born yet.
Were it only about her, nobody would give a fig.

 

So what ? She doesn't rule on law...her opinion doesn't count.

No, there is no third party....there isn't even a second party ( how TF many people do you think are involved in a pregnancy?)

There is only one person involved in the pregnancy, the pregnant one.

It IS only about her body......certainly not yours...nor the Big Government's...


...and I thought you didn't want to talk about abortion...didn't you say those who talked about it loved it??

 

I believe there are plenty of Anti-Choicers who want their own right to privacy but want to see it destroyed in others....very UNAmerican.

 

I believe that two Justices wrote up that Roe v. Wade tried to invent a new "protection" in the constitution. So please learn what rights are.

 

Ahem, certainly not with you. Have a nice day.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
I believe there are plenty of Anti-Choicers who want their own right to privacy but want to see it destroyed in others....very UNAmerican.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
So what ? She doesn't rule on law...her opinion doesn't count.

No, there is no third party....there isn't even a second party ( how TF many people do you think are involved in a pregnancy?)

There is only one person involved in the pregnancy, the pregnant one.





It IS only about her body......certainly not yours...nor the Big Government's...


...and I thought you didn't want to talk about abortion...didn't you say those who talked about it loved it??

AHEM, NO, you just said people who talk about abortion LOVE it ....and then you keep talking about it ..

But is IS a good excuse to not have to answer my INCONVENIENT questions...LOL!

 

Are YOU a going to support an increase child welfare payments? Paid maternity leave? You obviously think that foster care is not viable

 

Okay - you want to see a study on the poverty cycle - go find it and post it

I do not do other people’s homework for them

 

Yeah! That would be a good RW strategy - especially since that is effectively built into most RW platforms I mean how else do you justify cutting social security but ooops, kill them all off by starvation through lack of government resources and there would be no one to point at and shout “welfare queens stealing my tax dollars” so there has to be a continual supply of needy and those so desperate they will work for starvation wages - hence the anti contraception stance from the right

 

I just don't see how anyone can think banning abortion will lead to mass poverty in a country but not believe mass unskilled immigration will cause the same thing.

Seems like a major inconsistency there.


Maybe some view aborting them before they are poor as the compassionate thing to do.