That's wildly optimistic. The harsh reality is that low-income women are more than five times as likely than affluent women to experience an unintended pregnancy, which has significant implications for social mobility given that unplanned childbearing is associated with higher rates of poverty, less family stability, and worse outcomes for children. So yes, they COULD be a doctor or an engineer or an astronaut but its far more likely that the fetus you're so desperate to save will grow up to be the very type of person I'm sure you resent - a burden on Mr. & Mrs. John Q Taxpayer. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/class_gaps_unintended_pregnancy_release.pdf
Common sense dictates “unwanted pregnancies” would of course tend to fare worse. There are many reasons a woman might be dead set against having a baby. Could be health, mental, or financial. Although women generally find their own way, not sure there would be some population boom of unwanted babies even in the craziest anti-abortion regimes. The studies of 3rd world countries with full “abortion bans” showed not much difference, it basically causes more complications in pregnancy and child mortality increases dramatically due to overall negative effects on prenatal medicine (so “pro-life” actually becomes “pro-death”). It doesn’t change the trajectory of women actually having babies. So even in 3rd world with poor education, women must be somehow self medicating or doing other means to terminate their own pregnancies.
I think if it constitutes rape and there is a rape excption it would legally fall under the exception. But it certainly shoots down the 11 year old argument that people like to fall back on.
No sure what this means. What I have stated about Christians, adoptions, sponsorship, fostering etc is 100% true. It's backed by data and not disputable. Christian's do more than any other groups by a huge margin.
That is t the reason. Cmon. I made a valid point. Abortion is generally an act of convenience. As in its the more convenient option for most people chosing it. Most people dont choose abortion because of health or violence. They chose it because of the burden it alleviates. Regardless of where you fall on the debate, I think most would agree.
Being 80 percent of the historical US population makes that easy. It works both ways the overwhelming majority of all criminals are xtians. That means pedaphiles, rapists, embezzlers etc etc. It’s said that over 99 percent of prisoners claim to be criminals.
I don’t presume to know why a woman and her medical provider make any decision. Mostly because it’s not any of my business.
Fortunately all of the plaintiffs in this lawsuit survived. Sooner or later the outcome will be far worse for a woman denied a medically necessary abortion.
I mean you are making that up, but OK. Regardless, tell the people claiming Christians wont help the life thats been born. Your "80%" number likely crushes their false narrative even more.
I'm just going on the reasons listed here on this board on the daily. What reason (outside of health and violence) would not fall under the convenience label?
This argument will never be totally agreed to by both sides. Simply put I can't convince you that an apple is an orange when you believe it is an apple and I believe it is an orange and same the other way. What I think we can all agree, that at some point in womb, whatever you may want to call it, becomes a human. Some prolife would like to eliminate completely while some pro-abortion would like zero infringement on the decision. I think it is safe to say, the majority of folks would like restrictions with some exceptions. Some will say 6 weeks, and some will say 16 weeks, but it is a fallacy to think the majority opinion doesn't fall somewhere in those terms. With that being said some states will be more restrictive and some less, that is how it works. This discussion and getting to an equitable solution will not happen though, if both sides continue with the hyperbolic name calling and bringing up of unrealistic situations that might happen.
I don’t know. I have never been pregnant. I trust people who have and their doctors to make reasonable decisions. You don’t who is on the side of right here? I am confident that no one uses my position to strip women of medical decisions.
I think that it's presumptuous to judge someone else's situation. Every unwanted pregnancy is not a potential Hallmark movie. In a perfect world every child would be wanted, loved, and safe. We both know that that's not the case. A child should not be a punishment for behavior that some folks disapprove of.
... and I say your position has stripped millions of women from ever getting to make a medical decision. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Deflection? Nah, just cognitive dissonance on your part. At the end of the day, you think that you have to right to dictate a major life decision for someone else.
