What do you think about abortion

Post Reply New Topic

“Sex all over the Internet and TV” doesn’t in any way ensure kids learn how to use a condom. It only lets you know people—other people, mind you—do have sex and lets you envy them. I, for instance, still don’t know how to use a condom. I’ve never bothered to try to find it out, because it seems a complete waste of time, considering I’ll most likely never get to do it for real.

Last edited by Spiderpig on 07 Apr 2016, 1:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

You can't prove a negative like that, there are other factors and crime was already falling by the time of the Roe V Wade decision. Correlation ≠ causation. Illegal abortions and deaths from illegal abortions had fallen greatly since the advent of birth control and antibiotics. To say that these children's lives aren't worth living, that they were all going to be a bunch miscreants anyways and that we're better off I find offensive and a very callous prejudice view of humanity, I should note where the disproportionate amount of these abortion clinics are located and the racial/eugenic views of the early abortion movement. You don't get to make quality of life assessments, a lot of people don't think those on spectrum have lives worth living either so be careful about depriving others of their humanity.

There is no benefit to the 60 million aborted children since 1972, yet we're suppose to believe their is a net positive to immigration? Now we have too many people? Doesn't make a lot of sense. We have such a "labor shortage" because we kill so many of our own children, that's the only reason. We don't have too many people in America, our birthrates are below replacement level and this is a trend in Europe and Japan who are like half of replacement level.

This country is filled with so many lost souls entering their middle age now, people wandering with nothing to show for their lives but guilt and regret. Who will take care of them when they grow old, who will carry on their lineage? I do not believe most women at the end of their lives would be content with the 'choice' they had made. Drugs, mental illness, lack of upward mobility, we are being punished. Not by some divine force but a punishment of our own design, we can think we know everything but we obviously don't. America has been in state of decline for 50 years now, history really does repeat itself, we're seeing the fall of Rome once again.

But you know condoms exist is my point. If you don't know how to use one, there's plenty of bananas available.

Sex Ed in school is seriously useless, maybe in a totally ignorant backward culture but the kids are doing these things here younger than they even give the class. We have failure of parenting in this country, it's hard to parent when you have multiple kids and both have to work 40-60 hours a week. There was a time where is was possible for someone to stay home and take care of the home and the kids, some people think that's oppressive but I see it as sign of wealth and prosperity. That's not possible anymore, my grandfather had a house built for himself at age 24(mind you, he was a war hero and live 10 lifetimes compared to extended adolescents that is stretching into our 30s now.

In our sex ed class we watched a movie about the mechanics, giggles and jokes, we watched some very hirsute woman give birth(I think this was to scare us since it was disgusting ) I really don't feel like anybody learned anything in that week of class except class clownery. You could get condoms if you wanted from the school, getting free condoms in general is easy as they're given out free a lot of places. We need more vocational, relationship, empathy, and peace education. The sex stuff is so prevalent in our culture, it's really pointless to teach "penis goes where?" because it's stupid. This isn't Indonesia, this isn't Afghanistan, there are some ignorant people out there but some are beyond help. Sex ed shouldn't just be able just sex, it should encompass the whole relationship. Is this disposable hook up culture good for society?

Wrong.

Comprehensive Sex education works:

https://wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopi ... 3#p6917593
https://wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopi ... 5#p5853895

"There is no benefit to the 60 million aborted children since 1972, yet we're suppose to believe their is a net positive to immigration? Now we have too many people? Doesn't make a lot of sense. We have such a "labor shortage" because we kill so many of our own children, that's the only reason. We don't have too many people in America, our birthrates are below replacement level and this is a trend in Europe and Japan who are like half of replacement level."

" we're suppose to believe their is a net positive to immigration?" Who says this, our corporate overlords with their "trickle down" lies?

"We have such a "labor shortage" because we kill so many of our own children, that's the only reason." There is no labor shortage, only greedy liars.

"We don't have too many people in America" What we have is called overpopulation,,,and it's only the beginning stages. It will become MUCH worse as our population continues to explode. (From 2.25 hundred million in the early '60s to over 3.25 hundred million now....how long do you think this can go on, with the curve trending more to the vertical now?).

"this is a trend in Europe and Japan who are like half of replacement level." These countries are aware of the reality of over population. Why would they want to make things worse?

Is what I say true? Ask the most populated country in the world...China. And learn of their reasons for thinking this way. In the U.S. we're supposed to stick our heads in the sand and not know about overpopulation so we'll welcome incoming, low wage workers with open arms (like trade agreements...right?).

But what happens is the incoming wage slaves get no benefits from their corporate owners so you see in the news (last night) how another regional hospital has closed nearby (country hospital losing over 8 mil. a year). It gets worse every year.

Anyway, Pew Research just released a fresh poll on abortion attitudes in the US :




Source: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... parties-2/

As demonstrated above there appears to have been an increase in the support for legal abortion in recent years.

This support will likely continue to increase in the coming years due to the increasing share of religiously unaffiliated voters, and because younger US citizens are more in favor of legal abortion. Furthermore - also demonstrated above - it is only among conservative Republicans that a majority is against legal abortion in the US... and this subgroup will make up a smaller and smaller share of the US electorate due to demographic changes.

Those questions depend on how the question is asked, you can get them to say what you want them to say. Gallup's poll says that 50% of Americans believe abortion should only be legal under "certain circumstances" with an additional 20% saying it should be completely illegal, only 30% say it should be legal under any circumstance. So another way of saying that is that 70% of Americans believe that abortion should be more regulated and restricted. 70% is a mandate I think.

What mandate? It is none of the People's Business what an individual woman does with the contents of her own body, which by the way, is private property. The are areas of human life that at not subject to government regulation and removing material from one's own body is one of the them.

I'm afraid you've misinterpreted the figures shown in the charts you supplied.

It's shown 51% of responders indicated abortion was OK with some limits,as we have now. But you neglect to say what circumstances/limits we're talking about.

And 29% wanted no restrictions at all (in other words: Go beyond the legal limits we now set). So 51% plus (+) 29% equal (=) 80% who feel abortion is justified in some (most?) circumstances.

And the number of people against ALL abortion is only 19%. Ignoring the 51% who believe abortion SHOULD be allowed in some (almost all?) cases, the 29% who would allow ALL abortion is overwhelmingly greater than the opposed 19%.

It doesn't make any difference how you try to fiddle with the numbers, the number of people who believe abortion is a viable choice (80%) greatly outnumber the pro-life people, but "Yes" to your comment about the questioner affecting the tested; this has been known for many many years, as has misinterpretation of statistics.

There's no question the wording of the poll influences the results. For example, it's not the same to give the voter this option ...

... than this:

I have long suspected large segments of the so-called "Pro-Life" crowd of being insincere in their political beliefs.

Far too often have I seen pro-life individuals express concern about the unborn while simultaneously being against policies that (1) improve maternal health care and (2) reduce teen pregnancy rates.

Since these policies are effective at preventing miscarriages, infant mortality *and* abortion, this would suggest a certain level of hypocrisy that one late, great comedian famously described as "Live Babies, Dead Soldiers".

However, it would be unfair to impute less than sincere motives to others without some sort of evidence. Fortunately, such evidence actually exists.

Here are the predictors of attitudes towards several social policies (N=460) based on the respondent's answers to questions in 5 moral categories (Harm/Fairness/Ingroup/Authority/Purity):



Source:
Koleva, Spassena P., et al. "Tracing the threads: How five moral concerns (especially Purity) help explain culture war attitudes." Journal of Research in Personality 46.2 (2012): 184-194.

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/do ... 1&type=pdf

Anyway, here are the questions people were asked in the study in order to evaluate their respective "Harm" and "Purity" scores.

Harm:
EMOTIONALLY—Whether or not someone suffered emotionally*
WEAK—Whether or not someone cared for someone weak or vulnerable*
CRUEL—Whether or not someone was cruel

COMPASSION—Compassion for those who are suffering is the most crucial virtue.*
ANIMAL—One of the worst things a person could do is hurt a defenseless animal.*
KILL—It can never be right to kill a human being.

Purity
DECENCY—Whether or not someone violated standards of purity and decency*
DISGUSTING—Whether or not someone did something disgusting*
GOD—Whether or not someone acted in a way that God would approve of

HARMLESSDG—People should not do things that are disgusting, even if no one is harmed.*
UNNATURAL—I would call some acts wrong on the grounds that they are unnatural.*
CHASTITY—Chastity is an important and valuable virtue.

Source:
Graham, Jesse, et al. "Mapping the moral domain." Journal of personality and social psychology 101.2 (2011): 366.

https://webfiles.uci.edu/phditto/peterd ... iq=-5wjp2s (see page 385)

So... If people were genuinely against abortion out of concern for the unborn child, one would expect their answers to questions in the "Harm" category to be predictive of their tendency to oppose abortion. They are, as demonstrated above, not... as there is no significant association between the "Harm" category and views on abortion.

Instead, their answers to the "Purity" questions are not only better predictors than the Harm category, they are *the best predictors* of anti-abortion attitudes, outperforming both (1) religious and (2) political views.

The "Purity" questions focus heavily on the concept of "disgust sensitivity", which has shown itself to be quite predictive of a range of social attitudes.

Summary:
It would seem that my suspicions about lack of sincerity in the pro-life crowd are not entirely unwarranted, as anti-abortion attitudes - at least in the US - are apparently more likely to be the product of moral disapproval of the women seeking an abortion than the product of a genuine "pro-life" sentiment.

Food for thought...

i have long scratched my head over the fact that anti-abortionists seem to care only for them in the womb, once they're outside it's every man for himself. why does their caring seem, for all appearances, to end at birth?

It always comes down to men wanting to control woman's bodies, period...

I wonder what is the REAL agenda of female versus male anti-abortionists?

I'd say being a woman doesn't preclude wanting to control other women's bodies.