what would this country be like with no abortions?

[Mr.Fitnah]

I always see the number posted that 50 million babies have been aborted since some times in the 70s. Knowing that the USA has roughly 300million people living in it, what would it look like now if it had that extra 50 million living in it, many of the children being neglected and raised by unfit parents who did not want them in the first place?

That very point was addressed in a book called Freakonomics. If you're asking the question with an open mind, you might want to pick up a copy.

Freakonomics: a rogue economist ... - Google Books

 

[blu]

I always see the number posted that 50 million babies have been aborted since some times in the 70s. Knowing that the USA has roughly 300million people living in it, what would it look like now if it had that extra 50 million living in it, many of the children being neglected and raised by unfit parents who did not want them in the first place?

That very point was addressed in a book called Freakonomics. If you're asking the question with an open mind, you might want to pick up a copy.

Freakonomics: a rogue economist ... - Google Books

i have the book already and read it

 

[☭proletarian☭]

In addition, legalized abortion raises the pressure to have sex on people who are not otherwise inclined to do so.

What orifice did you pull that out of?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Better question-

What would this world be like if blu were aborted?

Today, or some-odd years ago before birth?

I think the law prohibits an abortion this late in the game.

No the Biodiversity believing Democrats consider you a "useless eater" & would love to abort you & 95% of the earths population at any time. They will even setup death panels to help shorten your stay.

Rachel Maddow did a special today.


Included was the history of the Deathers and how their cult was started by a healthcare industry lobbyist.

 

[tigerbob]

That very point was addressed in a book called Freakonomics. If you're asking the question with an open mind, you might want to pick up a copy.

Freakonomics: a rogue economist ... - Google Books

i have the book already and read it

Presumably that was, in part, what prompted your open question in the OP. You might want to quote a few of the arguments made in the book to give people something to chew over and respond to, otherwise this thread will turn into the usual USMB crap.

I've always found that particular chapter fascinating, and had wondered whether the conclusions were reached without a hidden agenda or whether the data had been manipulated à la Andrew Lang. Might be interesting to see them discussed. It would be a refreshing change to see a debate rather than the usual bullshit.

But perhaps I'm hoping for too much.

 

[Gunny]

I always see the number posted that 50 million babies have been aborted since some times in the 70s. Knowing that the USA has roughly 300million people living in it, what would it look like now if it had that extra 50 million living in it, many of the children being neglected and raised by unfit parents who did not want them in the first place?

What about the ones that would be raised by loving parents who decided to suck up the responsibility for their irresponsible behavior?

 

[PixieStix]

Obama would not have been the first "black" president .

Yeah, if margaret sanger had her way, he would not have born either. Good thing she was dead then. And burning in hell

 

[tigerbob]

Obama would not have been the first "black" president .

Yeah, if margaret sanger had her way, he would not have born either. Good thing she was dead then. And burning in hell

Why?

 

[PixieStix]

Obama would not have been the first "black" president .

Yeah, if margaret sanger had her way, he would not have born either. Good thing she was dead then. And burning in hell

Why?

“…apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted…to apportion farm lands and homesteads for these segregated persons where they would be…for the period of their entire lives.”

– Margaret Sanger, Birth Control Review, “Plan for Peace”, April 1932, Vol 26, Number 4




Black & Unwanted | TooManyAborted.com

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEa_RkzMQOI]YouTube - 1957-Sanger Still a Eugenist[/ame]


She was a nasty excuse for a human being
​

 

[PixieStix]

The Negro Project was initiated in 1939 by Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood. It was a collaborative effort between the American Birth Control League and Sanger’s Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau.1 For a eugenist, it wasn’t controversial, it was integral to the implementation of eugenics to eliminate the ‘unfit’. Eugenics is “the study and practice of selective breeding applied to humans, with the aim of improving the species.”2 Negative eugenics focused on preventing the birth of those it considered inferior or unfit. This was the foundation of Sanger’s Birth Control Policy and advocated throughout her writings, speeches, and her periodicals including “Pivot of Civilization”, “Plan for Peace” and countless Birth Control Review articles. The pseudo-science (racial hygiene theory) of negative eugenics influenced social policy and eugenics-based legislation (Immigration Act of 19243, segregation laws, sterilization laws) and led to the racial hygiene theory adopted by the Nazis. Noted eugenist, Eugen Fischer, was funded by The Rockefeller Foundation (one of many same organizations that also financially supported Sanger’s work), was responsible for the Nazi adoption of racial hygiene theory at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute that led to the eugenics implementation of the holocaust.4 The connection between American Eugenics and the horrors of Nazi Germany are irrefutable. The preponderance of evidence of where Sanger wanted to go (although she decried the atrocities of the holocaust after WWII) shows the ignorance and naivete of Eugenics philosophy and its eventual conclusion, left undeterred. The Negro Project was but a precursor to what eugenists wanted to implement on a much larger scale.

Black & Unwanted | TooManyAborted.com

 

[PixieStix]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEja-1emRic]YouTube - Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood's Racist Founder[/ame]

Any questions? Anti lifers???

My question is only this, Dear God, would you please forgive me for hating this evil woman so badly?

Amen

 

[Mr Natural]

Did I hear her say something about eliminating organized efforts to help the poor?


That doesn't sound very Liberal to me, in fact, it's right out of the republicans' playbook.

 

[goldcatt]

Did I hear her say something about eliminating organized efforts to help the poor?


That doesn't sound very Liberal to me, in fact, it's right out of the republicans' playbook.

A lot has changed since the 1930's, 40's and 50's.

I'm no Sanger fan, by any means. But what she stood for then and what the pro-choice movement in general stands for now are two very different things.

 

[tigerbob]

Did I hear her say something about eliminating organized efforts to help the poor?


That doesn't sound very Liberal to me, in fact, it's right out of the republicans' playbook.

A lot has changed since the 1930's, 40's and 50's.

I'm no Sanger fan, by any means. But what she stood for then and what the pro-choice movement in general stands for now are two very different things.

You'll have a hard time convincing some people that pro choice means anything but pro murder.

I'd never heard of Sanger until earlier in this thread.

 

[goldcatt]

Did I hear her say something about eliminating organized efforts to help the poor?


That doesn't sound very Liberal to me, in fact, it's right out of the republicans' playbook.

A lot has changed since the 1930's, 40's and 50's.

I'm no Sanger fan, by any means. But what she stood for then and what the pro-choice movement in general stands for now are two very different things.

You'll have a hard time convincing some people that pro choice means anything but pro murder.

I'd never heard of Sanger until earlier in this thread.

Sanger was pretty much everything Pixie said she was. That was also during Jim Crow and the Democratic segregationist South, when such views weren't as far out of the mainstream as they sound today. The political landscape changed rapidly first with desegregation via Brown v. Board of Ed., then passage of the Civil Rights Act - the two taken together abolishing Jim Crow and separate but equal.

Now of course the vestiges of the white supremacy mentality exist mostly (but not entirely) in certain religious and/or conservative strongholds. Religious conservatives also being the same people least likely to believe choice is anything but murder. While I respect the fact that they vote their beliefs, I disagree from a legal as opposed to a moral standpoint.

All that aside, what would the US look like today without legal abortion? The biggest question that comes to my mind is, how (or would) policies on everything from welfare to family laws to education to adoption be different? With 50 million or so babies many of whom would remain unwanted, would adoption laws be less complicated and restrictive? Would we have a stronger safety net for families struggling to support these children? How would it have affected the legacy of the sexual revolution in terms of everything from education to family law to medical developments? Since many parental rights stem from the same source as the right to privacy articulated in Roe, would repudiation of one choice affect other areas? Interesting questions.

 

[KissMy]

Today, or some-odd years ago before birth? I think the law prohibits an abortion this late in the game.

No the Biodiversity believing Democrats consider you a "useless eater" & would love to abort you & 95% of the earths population at any time. They will even setup death panels to help shorten your stay.

Rachel Maddow did a special today. Included was the history of the Deathers and how their cult was started by a healthcare industry lobbyist.

I saw that. She twisted all the facts & blamed Republicans for political fear mongering. The truth is Clinton signed the US up for Biodiversity, Codex Alimentarius, (WHO) World Health Organization, (FAO) Food & Agriculture Organization & Carbon Cap & Trade. The Repubs had so save us from the One World Government that would allow the world to be run by a dictatorship & not elected representation. These people Worship Earth & believe humans are a Cancer upon it. They want population reduction. http://sovereignty.net is an excellent resource tool.

On June 4th, 1993, President Bill Clinton signed the Biodiversity Treaty and Vice President Al Gore was already constructing his White House Task Force on Ecosystem Management in preparation for implementing the Treaty. The Biodiversity Action Network (BIONET), a coalition of environmental organizations, assumed the task of promoting the Treaty's passage in the Senate. How the Convention on Biodiversity was defeated

 

[KissMy]

Yeah, if margaret sanger had her way, he would not have born either. Good thing she was dead then. And burning in hell

Why?

“…apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted…to apportion farm lands and homesteads for these segregated persons where they would be…for the period of their entire lives.”

Margaret Sanger, Birth Control Review, “Plan for Peace”, April 1932, Vol 26, Number 4
Black & Unwanted | TooManyAborted.com
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEa_RkzMQOI]YouTube - 1957-Sanger Still a Eugenist[/ame]She was a nasty excuse for a human being
​

It's a good thing for Obama that he was born in Kenya then.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

YouTube - Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood's Racist Founder

Any questions? Anti lifers???

I've a question: Are you familiar with the definition of an ad hominum attack?

I've a second question: What does Sanger being vermin have to do with whether a fetus at a given point of development or exhibiting given characteristics possesses the attributes one considers necessary for legal protections?

Third question:

Okay, this is somewhat broad and I think that's what's needed. Looking at how people view homicide- willful and otherwise- and also matters pertaining to other animals, there seems to be great confusion over the underlying question: when is it acceptable to end life and when is it not?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...ty-and-ethics-of-the-termination-of-life.html

 

[Anguille]

In addition, legalized abortion raises the pressure to have sex on people who are not otherwise inclined to do so. This also increases the number of unwanted pregnancies by increasing the opportunities.

So now you've decided to wholeheartedly reject the entire concept of peer and societal pressure, flying in the face of accepted psychiatric practice and reams of studies on both subjects? God complex much?

See "Divorce, Fertility, and the Shot Gun Marriage", Alesino and Giuliano, Harvard University Institute for Economic Research, 2006, or "An Analysis of Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing", Akerloff, Yellen, and Katz, both of which found that reductions in abortion restrictions increases out-of-wedlock births, which OBVIOUSLY means it increases the number of unwanted pregnancies in general.

But hey, you've got your little twirly finger, so that's all the rebuttal needed, right?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

YouTube - Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood's Racist Founder

I call bullshit at 1:12

That is not what Eugenics means.

Princeton:

S: (n) eugenics (the study of methods of improving genetic qualities by selective breeding (especially as applied to human mating))
WordNet Search - 3.0

As used by Eugenicists:

Eugenics-
The study of how the fitness of the human species can be improved or the prevalence of desirable traits increased; the belief that it is morally good to pursue such studies and implement policies to achieve this goal.

Positive Eugenics-
The study of how the fitness of the human species or the prevalence of desirable traits increased by selective breeding, genetic manipulation, or policies which encourage the proliferation of desirable traits and DNA; policies designed to achieve these goals
See: Fitter Families Contest; designer babies

Negative Eugenics:
The study of how the fitness of the human species can be improved by reducing the prevalence of undesirable traits increased by discouraging reproduction, genetic manipulation, etc; policies designed to achieve these goals
See: United States Forced Sterilization; genocide

​