Abortion statistics that people ignore

[bnew]

we're living in a time of massive wealth inequality and dudes are seriously giddy at the thought of parenthood being forced upon people who can't afford it just because they disapprove of a women's choices regarding sex.

 

[pawdalaw]

No...keeping black people in perpetual poverty and strife is. Life is not a 'Good Times' sitcom where you pop out as many kids as possible and hope a couple are smart enough to get the whole family out of the ghetto.

Agreed, no one wants to talk about birthrate being down across the board because people can't afford to raise children. So now we are stuck with a Gov. That's more oppressive than ever, an economy in the tank for the next 5-10 years and a segment of society who once used abortion and pulling out as a form of birth control.

 

[xXOGLEGENDXx]

34 thousand lives don’t matter? You’re human gutter trash

34K our of 36K is alarming. 34K out of 600K+ is not a lot when it comes to legislature.
I'll put it to you like this. 25 Million people in the US have asthma. How would you feel if asthma pumps were banned because they killed 34,000 people?

You can ignore the context and continue to ignore the majority and get emotional about the 4%. Kinda similar to an anecdotal person who ignores data and statistics and insists what they are arguing is worth making huge changes for....

The anecdotal evidence crew are annoying because they get highly emotional and think their experience is all that matters. Damn the studies, damn the actual successful programs we’ve seen. Just their anecdotal experience and if shyt ain’t in line with that they get mad and act like we should listen to them over all the evidence that says otherwise

 

[The Fade]

We need more couples.... More married couples having children. Married people have a much better shot.

Must be willing to live like Mexicans and Indians and pack into living Spaces like sardines then and go OD with group economics

 

[xXOGLEGENDXx]

Why are women post 25 allowing men to nut in them if they do not want the possibility of having a child?

 

[Reflected]

@xXOGLEGENDXx

The probability of an innocent man being sentenced to death is 4%, that means the overwhelming majority of death row inmates are guilty of their crimes.

With that said, since you deem 1-4% to be low enough to promote a ban on abortion. Would you be fine upholding the death penalty if you fell into the 4% of innocent men on death row and were to be sentenced to death?

It's a simple "yes" or "no" question. I just want to see where you stand. If you are going to obfuscate and suggest these are not equivalent, although they are in this hypothetical, just pretend you are the woman that has been raped and impregnated, w/e, but I just want the "yes" or "no".

 

[RickyDiBiase]

we're living in a time of massive wealth inequality and dudes are seriously giddy at thought of parenthood being forced upon people who can't afford it just because they disapprove of a women's choices regarding sex.

Just ignore them. They're idiots.

Must be willing to live like Mexicans and Indians and pack into living Spaces like sardines then and go OD with group economics

And that money usually ends up right back into white people's hand after awhile. Unlike black folk.

 

[Amestafuu (Emeritus)]

The only women mad are HOES.

incel logic

 

[21stCenturyColiMascot]

at these talking points about black women having abortions destroying the black family. As if all these single mothers, with in and out or outright MIA dads has been wonderful for the past 5 decades. I'm seeing folks posts about we need to increase our birth rates as if they've never heard the saying quality of quantity. Amazing

not true.... left leaning racist posts arent tolerated here

 

[Jazzy B.]

The hoes and the dusty pro abortion men won't answer it.

You would think every woman is still under the age of 19 and as naive as Forest Gump with how how they talk.

 

[Reflected]

34,528 deaths don’t mean shyt right? Go fukk yourself you piece of shyt

Some of us can do math bytch

These people are really fukking stupid, thank goodness they aren't in charge of anything important.

But the numbers don't matter for this discussion, I would rather people not bring that up, but instead propose the hypothetical that I have presented to OP. Honestly, if we are allowing women to abort in the response to rape, it really is no different than allowing abortion simply because the woman doesn't want the child. We recognize that the woman is acting on her bodily autonomy and if both pregnancies are treated as an invasion of the autonomy, then we can proceed with that reason.

And the reason why I equalize this is because there is currently no way to quantify mental anguish, so if a woman wants to abort in response to a rape, we can empathize because we can imagine the anguish that might be associated with that situation. But that mental anguish isn't going to be equivalent for all women across the board, some women have better coping mechanisms, better access to mental health services, etc. But what if the woman who was not raped but instead fears rearing her child in an unsafe environment holds a hypothetical quantifiable mental anguish value equivalent or higher to that of the woman that was raped? Who are we to tell her she can't have the abortion if her anguish is the same as or more than the rape victim?

You see, it is on that question that we just grant the right to abort on the basis of bodily autonomy, because at the end of the day, whether the rape victim is an 8/10 on a scale of anguish and the mother fearing an unsafe environment for her potential child is a 6/10, both of these still fall under their bodily autonomy, and I think they both have the right to protect the wellbeing over the being that isn't sentient within their body.

I could go on for days on the contradictions these idiots espouse and act on every single day, but they aren't worth it. I only type this just to get people heading in a better direction for argumentation and critical thinking.

 

[xXOGLEGENDXx]

@xXOGLEGENDXx

The probability of an innocent man being sentenced to death is 4%, that means the overwhelming majority of death row inmates are guilty of their crimes.

With that said, since you deem 1-4% to be low enough to promote a ban on abortion. Would you be fine upholding the death penalty if you fell into the 4% of innocent men on death row and were to be sentenced to death?

It's a simple "yes" or "no" question. I just want to see where you stand. If you are going to obfuscate and suggest these are not equivalent, although they are in this hypothetical, just pretend you are the woman that has been raped and impregnated, w/e, but I just want the "yes" or "no".

No. Of course not. I would go against it because I am human and don't want it to happen to me. But that is just me. You cannot expect changes to be made when you are apart of a small percentage, just because it's happening to you. Yes it sucks and in that moment I would hope the death penalty is abolished, but facts are still facts. 4% is not enough to eliminate the death penalty. We cannot make or break laws based on anecdotal evidence. As an individual, fukk the other 96%. But our country and law makers don't put things into motion based on anecdotal testimonies and minority percentages. Fortunately and unfortunately, majority will always rule.

No different than knowing a man brutally rapped and killed my child. Let's flip it and say 96% of men on death row were actually innocent and they abolished the death penalty because of that. Would I want them to reinstate it for this man who murdered my child? ABSOLUTELY! But guess what? The law and reality don't work like that.

 

[Reflected]

No.

All I needed, on the moral issue, you are in contradiction. The rest of your post, which I did glance at, is all over the place, it isn't needed. Or, I don't feel like dealing with it, see my most recent post.

edit: I do respect and appreciate you for answering the question though. Most dodge either intentionally or unintentionally.

 

[Jazzy B.]

we're living in a time of massive wealth inequality and dudes are seriously giddy at thought of parenthood being forced upon people who can't afford it just because they disapprove of a women's choices regarding sex.

Why are women post 25 letting men nut in them in which the backend is potential pregnancy and a child if they're so worried about Wealth Inequality and what they can and can't afford?

 

[xXOGLEGENDXx]

All I needed, on the moral issue, you are in contradiction. The rest of your post, which I did glance at, is all over the place, it isn't needed. Or, I don't feel like dealing with it, see my most recent post.

edit: I do respect and appreciate you for answering the question though. Most dodge either intentionally or unintentionally.

Great. But I don't respect you ignoring the context and/or glancing at it. That is very dangerous. And that is not contradiction. A single person does not dictate what goes and stays. That is why we collect data and statistics. We see trends and we move accordingly.

You don't want to go to prison I assume right? But you probably still think we need prisons as well. By your logic, that could be a contradiction.