I say, the recession effected abortion rates, and here's a study to back up my claim, and your response is "Nahuh!"
Typical of you.
Yes, dumb *****, I KNOW you say that. I saw your post. What you don't understand is that what you say has as much meaning and value as the air exiting the OTHER end of your body, so stop wasting my time with your empty, vapid emanations, and say something SUBSTANTIAL.
I'm going to have to start charging you useless leftist twats if I have to keep doing your thinking for you. It's not that my brain isn't more than capable of doing the work for several people at once, you understand; it just bores me senseless.
Here's what you gave me, and why it doesn't constitute proof. Let me know if the words get too big for you at any point:
Rise in abortions during recession stalls longtime drop - Washington Times
The long-term decline in the U.S. abortion rate stalled as the recession took hold, according to the latest comprehensive survey of America’s abortion providers.
Just for starters, "surveys" are not "studies". They do nothing more than what you did, ie. stating correlation (and I will NOT be defining "correlation" for you, Mensa Girl. Get a dictionary).
The Guttmacher Institute, which periodically surveys U.S. abortion providers, reported Tuesday that there were 1.21 million abortions in 2008 and a rate of 19.6 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44.
Both figures were up slightly from the 2005 survey, ending a steady decline since 1990, when U.S. abortions peaked at 1.6 million and the abortion rate was 27.4.
One possible factor was the recession that hit in 2008, altering the financial prospects for many families.
Once again, we see a repeat of the exact same thing you did, ie. citing blank statistics, and then stating a premise of causation based merely on opinion.
“Abortion numbers go down when the economy is good and go up when the economy is bad, so the stalling may be a function of a weaker economy,” said University of Alabama political science professor Michael New. “If the economy does better, you’ll see numbers trending down again.”
Please note that at no time has anyone offered any evidence that the economy has anything to do with abortion numbers, other than the fact that the number of abortions took a SLIGHT dip at the same time that the economy went in the crapper. By that "logic", Barack Obama's administration is responsible for Sandy hitting the northeast, because both took place at the same time.
Moving on to your next link:
“Abortion numbers go down when the economy is good and go up when the economy is bad, so the stalling may be a function of a weaker economy,” said University of Alabama political science professor Michael New. “If the economy does better, you’ll see numbers trending down again.”
Here we find the exact same damned thing: reporting blank statistics from a survey, and then stating an extrapolation based on personal agenda as a fact. I have no quarrel with the Guttmacher Institute's survey numbers, as a rule, but I am under no obligation to accept their opinion as to what those numbers MEAN, any more than I am obligated to accept yours.
And, of course, a survey is not a "study".
Otherwise, this article is a word-for-word repeat of the first one, and contains not a single shred of actual EVIDENCE (you might want to look that word up after you look up "correlation" and "causation") that the two are related, much less that one caused the other. Might as well state that a decreasing abortion rate caused the tanked economy. Makes as much sense.
And your third link is also the exact same, word-for-word article following the initial headline. In short, you presented no evidence that the economy had anything to do with the abortion rate; all you proved is that you leftists only have one brain amongst you, and IT doesn't function very well.
If Susan B. Anthony had known what a bunch of piss-stupid broads modern-day left-leaning women were going to turn out to be, she'd have stayed home and skipped the suffrage march, I swear.
