Abortion rates higher where procedure is illegal

[ZirconBlue]

To many people, yes. Is this not something self-evident from watching people?

Yes, many people are irrational. So. . . what? We shouldn't try to use rational arguments? I really don't understand your point.

If it could be shown that legalizing rape actually decreases the rate at which men and women are raped, I would absolutely support legalizing it.

The purpose of criminalizing behavior is to deter that behavior. Criminal laws without a deterrent effect are bad laws.

And I care more about protecting and helping people than I care about sending a message.

I quoted this just to agree with it.

I would see "nothing wrong" (meaning I would oppose changing the applicable laws) if the fact was that 100% of fetuses were aborted as long as the abortions were the result of the women's choices.

Now, I think that abortion is a poor substitute for proper use of contraception (it's more expensive and potentially dangerous to the woman), but taking that option off the table brings its own unacceptable dangers. Plus, I like freedom.

Ditto.

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

In what sense do you mean this statement? It's true if one speaks of biological facts, but not if one speaks of biologically-based desires or actions. It is a biological imperative for male mammals to try and fertilize as many females as possible, but that hardly means serial rapists should get a free pass.

I refer to biological facts. 'Making a point' is easily done in cases where ideology wishes to impose a made-up reality over reality itself, but biology refuses to give. The result is that women are crushed between ideology and reality.

 

[bookitty]

Abortion is (usually) not murder. But it's still not morally neutral. It can be a moral imperative -- as in cases of rape or incest, for example -- but it can also be morally wrong -- as in cases of abortion for sheer selfish convenience. Naturally there is a whole spectrum in between (e.g., what if the fetus had Down syndrome? At what stage is the pregnancy? Etc.)

The problem with a 40%-60% abortion rate is like the problem with a 40%-60% gunshot wound death would be. While it's logically *possible* all of those abortions (or shootings) are morally justifiable due to incest (say) or to actually stopping an attacker (say), it is very likely most of them are due to convenience, which makes them morally wrong.

P.S.

Abortion is a complicated subject, morally, and I must say that this discussion is quite helpful in challanging me to explain my views, not only to others, but, by articulating them, also for myself.

Where are you getting this 40-60% figure. The US national average for pregnancies that end in abortion is around 20%. If the rate of abortion in New York is that much higher than the national average, it would be better to look at the social issues which may be contributing.

If you are going to say " it is very likely most of them are due to convenience" than you will need to define convenience and then show evidence.

 

[Weird Science]

Where are you getting this 40-60% figure. The US national average for pregnancies that end in abortion is around 20%..

...which is bad enough, and hardly "rare" as we were promised, but as for the 40-60% figure, it's not hard to find it.

Incidentally, why not just google "abortion rate new york" or something similar?

 

[Weird Science]

If you are going to say " it is very likely most of them are due to convenience" than you will need to define convenience and then show evidence.

The evidence is in the staggering figures. Just like it's inconceivable that a 60% gunshot death wound would really all be due to self-defense, a 60% abortion rate is exceedingly unlikely to be all, or even significantly, due to serious considerations about, say, possible birth defects or incest, or other serious considerations or such nature (such as intolerable financial hardship in case of having a baby). It is far more likely abortion is used as de facto birth control. I say you're in a bit of denial here.

 

[bookitty]

The evidence is in the staggering figures. Just like it's inconceivable that a 60% gunshot death wound would really all be due to self-defense, a 60% abortion rate is exceedingly unlikely to be all, or even significantly, due to serious considerations about, say, possible birth defects or incest, or other serious considerations or such nature (such as intolerable financial hardship in case of having a baby). It is far more likely abortion is used as de facto birth control. I say you're in a bit of denial here.

Ok, so the abortion rate in NY is much higher than the national average, I'll give you that. I fail to see how that proves a culture of abortion as casual birth control. Obviously there is something going on in New York but, as of yet, we don't know what.

There are some clues.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/22/n...ew-york-city-residents-living-in-poverty.html

1 in 5 NYC residents live in poverty, as compared to the national average of 1 in 6. During the time that abortions increased in New York, the number of people living in poverty went up to 1.6 million.

Single mothers, blacks and adults lacking a high school diploma fared worst.

These groups overlap those which have higher abortion rates. The poor, those without a high school education and single mothers. As those groups increased in number in NY, abortion rates went up.

 

[Toke]

It kind of strikes me how the "pro-life" stance rarely coincidence with measures that could actually reduce the number of abortions. Like proper sex-ed and access to contraceptives.

It would make so much more sense if they just came out and admitted that it is really all about sex being evil, women should be kept under control, and that one measure to achieve that is to make sex as risky as possible.

I wonder what the reaction would be if we ever get an effective vaccine against STDs. Would it be banned/hampered as immoral?

 

[AvalonXQ]

I wonder what the reaction would be if we ever get an effective vaccine against STDs. Would it be banned/hampered as immoral?

By some, yes. Remember the bruhaha over giving the HPV vaccine to underage girls.

 

[Toke]

By some, yes. Remember the bruhaha over giving the HPV vaccine to underage girls.

Good point, those medieval nuts still exist.
And give a bad name to the rest.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Good point, those medieval nuts still exist.
And give a bad name to the rest.

Yes, they give a bad name to the rest of us medieval nuts.

 

[SezMe]

Abortion is (usually) not murder. But it's still not morally neutral. It can be a moral imperative -- as in cases of rape or incest, for example --

I don't understand the rape exception. Why would the morality of abortion depend on how the pregnancy came about. Can you explain that?

 

[Weird Science]

It kind of strikes me how the "pro-life" stance rarely coincidence with measures that could actually reduce the number of abortions. Like proper sex-ed and access to contraceptives.

That's because a lot of pro-lifers really mean, "she had sex? She better be punished with a child!". I am anti-abortion (in general, not universally) and I certainly don't see it as a "right"; but I'm certainly pro-sex-ed and pro-contraception.

In any case this is an argumentum ad humanum. Even if all anti-abortion people were pedophilic mass murderers, it would still not (in theory at least) affect the quality of their argument.

Those who oppose abortion are hardly served by those whose argument is "God doesn't like it" as a be-all and end-all, to say the least.

 

[Toke]

Yes, they give a bad name to the rest of us medieval nuts.

It is perfectly possible to both a theist and a good person. I know several personally.

 

[Toke]

That's because a lot of pro-lifers really mean, "she had sex? She better be punished with a child!". I am anti-abortion (in general, not universally) and I certainly don't see it as a "right"; but I'm certainly pro-sex-ed and pro-contraception.

In any case this is an argumentum ad humanum. Even if all anti-abortion people were pedophilic mass murderers, it would still not (in theory at least) affect the quality of their argument.

Those who oppose abortion are hardly served by those whose argument is "God doesn't like it" as a be-all and end-all, to say the least.

This post reminds me of a cat-fish factory where management fought hard on the subject of ladies rooms and time to use them. It was very useful in keeping the nasty subject of actual pay scale at bay.

The whole US abortion debate looks like a way to avoid the issue of whether sex is evil and if women should have rights.

If the theist really cared about the actual abortions they would have supported ways to reduce them.

 

[sadhatter]

The anti abortion crowd, because the world doesn't have enough folks with 2 kids they can't afford.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Yes, many people are irrational. So. . . what? We shouldn't try to use rational arguments? I really don't understand your point.

Should you use rational arguments?

Depends.

Are the rational arguments useful in advancing an objective goal?

 

[Weird Science]

The issue [of those who question unrestricted abortion -- W.S.] of whether sex is evil and if women should have rights.

...and all skepticism of affirmative action's benefits is really a plan to bring back slavery, and everybody who questions the pope's infalliability is a tool of Satan.

Sorry, such attempts at intimidation of anybody who questions the current holy writ no longer work, having lost all power to intimidate due to massive oversue.

 

[WildCat]

You might want to factor in demographic and cultural influences. I say this with regard to a national leader in teen prego stats, Southern Texas, with which I have some familiarity.

Some of the leadership comes from habits that have nothing to do with whatever misguided policies arise in Austin from time to time.

To further clarify, as of 2006 (the most recent stats I could find) the rate of pregnancy (per 1,000) among non-Hispanic whites was 44, among blacks it was 126.3, and among Hispanics it was 126.6.

Thus, from demographics alone you would expect states with high percentages of blacks and Hispanics to have higher pregnancy rates. Indeed, this is exactly what we see with border states (New Mexico, Arizona, Texas) along with states with large black populations (Mississippi, Delaware, Georgia). And that's generally what we see, with a few outliers. I have no idea what's going on with Nevada and Arkansas...

Sex education can have an impact, but the cultural differences/attitudes appear to have a far greater impact. And not so easily reversed with a few hours of class time.

 

[Toke]

...and all skepticism of affirmative action's benefits is really a plan to bring back slavery, and everybody who questions the pope's infalliability is a tool of Satan.

Sorry, such attempts at intimidation of anybody who questions the current holy writ no longer work, having lost all power to intimidate due to massive oversue.

Really?

If the theist really cared about the actual abortions they would have supported ways to reduce them.

So you don't think that this indicate that there is massive dishonesty on the part of the "pro-life" side?

 

[ZirconBlue]

...which is bad enough, and hardly "rare" as we were promised, but as for the 40-60% figure, it's not hard to find it.

Incidentally, why not just google "abortion rate new york" or something similar?

I know you're new here, but in this forum, those making claims are expected to provide their own evidence. If you post unsupported figures, you will likely be asked to provide sources for them.