Here's an interesting comment over there: "While there might not be 32,000 women terribly thrilled to be forced into having a baby, I'm sure the multinational corporations, drug cartels, booze manufacturers, slumlords, and human traffickers are overjoyed at the thought of 32,000 new wage slaves, addicted customers, captive tenants, and potential sources of revenue. I still don't understand why anyone thinks this is an issue of the religious against the secular. Everybody knows that unfettered late-stage capitalism requires a steady supply of impoverished individuals with many needs and inadequate support systems."
November 22, 2023
"The first data on births since Roe v. Wade was overturned shows how much abortion bans have had their intended effect."
"Births increased in every state with a ban, an analysis of the data shows.
By comparing birth statistics in states before and after the bans passed, researchers estimated that the laws caused around 32,000 annual births, based on the first six months of 2023, a relatively small increase that was in line with overall expectations.... 'This is an inequality story,' Professor [Caitlin] Myers said. 'Most people are getting out of ban states, one way or another, and more people in protected states are getting abortions. And at the same time, this shows something those data cannot show: There’s a significant minority of people in ban states that do get trapped.'"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
107 comments:
Shorter version of the "interesting" comment:
"How terribly inhuman it is for 32,000 children to be born."
The "law" is "causing" births. Not 2 individuals who mutually decided to act in ways generally understood by 6th grade health class to cause babies.
The underlying goal of eugenics has always been present but is getting more and more exposed
That's the idea, murder the children before the capitalist overlords can get them hooked on drugs and make slaves of them. No wonder they support Hamas.
What makes that comment ‘interesting’ other than more evidence critical thinking is out and political talking points are everything to certain people?
Click bait? Chum? I don’t get it…
Some states have enacted restrictions on abortion, but I don't believe there is any state with a ban on the procedure. If the people living in states with restrictions they consider too severe they can have the law changed.
There may be something fishy going on. The Guttmacher Institute estimates 916,000 abortions in 2019 and 930,00 in 2020, and that as of 2020, most were medication abortions. CDC estimates only 615,000 for 2019. So, 32,000 extra births isn’t much.
Unfettered late stage NYT reasoning. The baseline assumption is that states opposed to late stage abortions have identical fertility rates to the blue states that welcome abortions. I doubt that.
The quoted comment about the wickedness of capitalism says volumes about the anti human essence of the left.
Althouse writes, "Here's an interesting comment over there..."
Interesting in what sense?
Don't bother to clarify... the monkey house is a popular attraction in every zoo.
What a thrilling story. Or is it a case of hopeful confirmation bias? Only the data will tell us - but Wait! It's an estimate! Why would you estimate births instead of just checking the actual records, and produce the data to support your case? The NYT, doing what it absolutely does best.
Pretty soon the victim women in "ban states" may figure out what causes pregnancy and how to prevent it. Meanwhile, birth rates may rise to the level necessary to keep the country viable.
Do I have that right? Aborted babies are becoming a minority, therefore a problem of some sort.
I thought minority status was a holy grail.
This new world order sure is confusing.
Are you surprised that communists read the NY Times and comment ?
My understanding is that women who choose to have abortions in states with time limits are having them earlier, as was intended.
The sterility of the NY Times is heartening. Viva la revolución.
Births increased in every state with a ban, an analysis of the data shows. By comparing birth statistics in states before and after the bans passed, researchers estimated that the laws caused around 32,000 annual births, based on the first six months of 2023, a relatively small increase that was in line with overall expectations...
"Caused"?
How did this compare to the birth statistics in states without similar limitations?
Mightn't this be explained by a near simultaneous post-lockdown 'baby boomlet'?
"Everybody knows that unfettered late-stage capitalism requires a steady supply of impoverished individuals with many needs and inadequate support systems."
How come this Marxian analysis is never applied to Biden's immigration and border policies?
Hmmmm. Trapped ? Are they locked in their homes ? Chained in a locked cell perhaps ? Or, maybe, they are forbidden by law from leaving their state ? No ? Imagine that, they decided to not slaughter their offspring . What chutzpah ! These leftist harpies aren't satisfied unless they can murder every baby. Would that they were subject to a very late term "procedure" to remove them from the gene pool. The world would be a far, far better place.
I’m curious how ‘researchers’ determined 32k ‘extra’ births due to new laws? Just make it up?
Do I sense the curdling of the Mother's milk of human kindness?
"It's better that you never lived."
Glad you cleared that up.
"Why do the proles not listen to us?"
Maybe they're NOT too stupid and addicted to sense your contempt? Could that be it?
Regardless of where you stand on the issue of abortion availability,it's hard to see how 32,000 living human beings can be seen as a bad thing. I support abortion with a time limit, but 32,000 living children can only be a great thing.
Bwaha just so. To add insult to injury, 13 years later the unwanted teen asserts they didn't ask to be born, either.
The law didn't cause the births. The law avoided the deaths of 32,000 babies.
That is a pretty ridiculous comment.
A more actual problem for late-stage capitalism is that the Malthusian escape hatch no longer exists. While some huddled masses are needed for the grunge work, there are loads of volunteers hoofing it to take those covetted spots. Meanwhile our homegrown deltas just want some more meth (oops, just contradicted my premise).
"...researchers estimated that the laws caused around 32,000 annual births..."
The "laws" caused? The researchers need remedial biology class. And without seeing the methodology, it's anyone's guess how they came to that conclusion.
An "interesting" comment? Yes, I suppose it is interesting, but the word that springs to my mind is "horrifying". Such misanthropy is breathtaking.
"Here's an interesting comment over there.." Describing such Marxist claptrap as "interesting" is a disservice to your readers if not to yourself. Exactly what could possibly be interesting about regurgitating trite, anti-capitalist rantings from an financially illiterate and socially nihilistic moron?
"Here's an interesting comment over there: "While there might not be 32,000 women terribly thrilled to be forced into having a baby, I'm sure the multinational corporations, drug cartels, booze manufacturers, slumlords, and human traffickers are overjoyed at the thought of 32,000 new wage slaves, addicted customers, captive tenants, and potential sources of revenue. I still don't understand why anyone thinks this is an issue of the religious against the secular. Everybody knows that unfettered late-stage capitalism requires a steady supply of impoverished individuals with many needs and inadequate support systems."
That's a boatload of non sequiturs right there. A real stream of unconsciousness.
Better a wage-slave than a state-slave.
I had heard that about 90% of US abortions occurred within the first 16 weeks; and if that were the deadline, then I figure some 17 or 18 week procedures would happen sooner. Most European countries have limits ranging from 13-16 weeks, too.
So unless more than 10% of abortions are being prevented, there’s not much difference between the status quo and a 16 week limit.
But no one wants to admit that we’re fighting over that last 5%-10% of abortions, because that would be bad for fundraising on both sides.
Note that the Times refers to any statute not permitting abortion until the instant before birth as a “ban”.
Here is what I do not understand. Why aren't pro choice advocates organizing a system to get these multitudes of unwilling mothers out of the repressive states they inhabit, and on to a facility in California, Massachusetts, or New York? A modern day Underground Railroad.
It seems to me that this would be a better use of money than organizing to overthrow laws in states that do not want to.
Think of the goodwill that would generate.
Where do they get that data, 32K births? Seems like bullshit. They don't know.
How many pregnancies were prevented by overturning Roe because people decided to use birth control or at least try the yankus-interuptus method?
How do you have excess births when they tell us Generation Z is not having sex?
It is an interesting Machiavellian comment. But I wonder if the commenter feels the same about illegal immigrants who are exploited for low wages when they arrive in America. Reading between the lines I do believe the commenter thinks the 32K babies are better off dead.
That could be a new line of attack for the abortion at all cost left. "The right just wants you to have babies so they can make them their slaves!"
Now do excess deaths among the 'vaccinated'.
That’s not interesting at all. It’s utterly predictable and banal.
- Rafe
Caitlyn Meyers is a ghoul to believe that a child is punishment. She believes in a culture of death. God will recognize her at the end of her days.
"Everybody knows that unfettered late-stage capitalism requires a steady supply of impoverished individuals with many needs and inadequate support systems."
What does that suggest about open borders immigration? "That's different, because [reasons]."
Eeek.. fewer babies ripped apart, because bus ticket.
Amazes me what a terrible viewpoint about life that some people have. Life is a precious gift.
I don't feel like climbing around the paywall - did they control for the changes in birth rate from 2020-2021-2022? There was a big decline, then rebound, from early 2021 to early 2022, then a bust again with births down through the remainder of 2022 to below 2019 levels.
The increase cited within the article appears well within the surge/decline levels that were attributed to lockdown/unemployment related impacts over the past few years. I'm curious how they controlled for this to produce a predictive outcome.
“Everybody knows that” with unfettered access to birth control, there’s no real excuse for having an unwanted child… no one to blame but people chronologically old enough to know right from wrong and that actions have consequences.
Grow the fuck up, take charge of your life, be proactive - not reactive - be responsible and accountable.
Who has more money to spend, rich people or desperately poor people? Who do those despicable multinational corporations make more money from, rich people or desperately poor people?
Who would a capitalist rather employ, a relatively responsible and competent middle class person or an "impoverished individual[s] with many needs and inadequate support systems"?
I am surprised that there are not "Freedom Buses" sponsored by Planned Parenthood. Illinois abortion providers will welcome all.
Rescue the trapped!
Can't the current wage slaves and drug addicts just off them selves if it is such a horrible life? I could never understand the argument "better aborted than growing up destitute." When all these destitute people think life is still worth living. The only difference is that these living people get to decide if they want to live. The aborted get no say.
32,000 in a nation of 330-370 million people.
Come on. Why is anyone talking about this?
The vast majority of Americans — as in more than 70% — believe in a woman's right to choose. The numbers that support birth control are even higher — more than 90%. Yet, today's GOP is out there talking about restrictions on both — then wondering why they keep losing elections.
They are in a trap they made for themselves. Outrage against legal abortion that no one can do anything about because it is determined a Constitutional right by an unelected Court is a great opposition issue. You can bark at that car as it drives past and it will get you base out to put you in office.....until you actually catch that car. It’s a messaging issue until you’re doing something more than delivering a “message”.
Republicans have long acted like an opposition Party and got away with it.. They are not getting away with it any more, but they do not know how to act any other way than as an opposition party.
“I'm sure the multinational corporations, drug cartels, booze manufacturers, slumlords, and human traffickers are overjoyed at the thought of 32,000 new wage slaves, addicted customers, captive tenants, and potential sources of revenue.”
Are there not enough prisons! Are there not enough workhouses!
What gets me as a baby wanting capitalist is that the net present value of these 32000 babies is to low. They have to be discounted at 10% per year for 16 years until they start taking drugs and buying booze and $300 tennis shoes.
About twice a week my wife runs across something like that “interesting comment” and asks me how anyone can think like that.
I’ve run out of plausible explanations.
Not I just tell her it’s satanic.
"The future belongs to those who show up."
"Demographics is destiny."
I've heard/read these quotes often but don't know original sources.
Crack finds the notion of 32,000 live children utterly uninteresting, but 4,000 imaginary dead in Gaza is a genocide. Odd.
"Everybody knows that unfettered late-stage capitalism requires a steady supply of impoverished individuals with many needs and inadequate support systems."
Oh, good grief. One can debate about the appropriate level of regulation on our economy, but to call it "unfettered" disqualifies the commenter as a serious thinker. The "Everybody knows" was amusing.
Interesting biases on display.
"Bans" not "restrictions" or "regulations", just from the get-go.
The whole polarized debate seems to me to stem from axiomatically phrasing the one side as "reproductive health" (educating, planning, equipping, testing, intervening when necessary) versus "homicide" (pre-meditated, or impulsive, or involuntary, or a foreseeable consequence of another crime, or very rarely sometimes "justifiable" homicide)
Of course the life and health of the mother matters. Just as the life of a home owner matters. Does the mother then have the right to abort/kill any embyro she perceives to be a threat, regardless of the degree of threat? Does the home owner have the right to shoot/kill any person he perceives to be a burglar, even if it's just some stranger grabbing a beer from the unlocked fridge in the open garage? We have degrees of law to deal with tiers of circumstances. Some states have rules that differ from other states. Why is this such a crisis?
BIPOC babies are overrepresented amongst the aborted.
Fewer abortions means more BIPOC born.
If it were the reverse, this would be yet another genocide.
Abortionists don't respect women's mental acuity and moral dignity. Women have four choices and six weeks until baby evolves until she reaches a legal state of viability along with granny and every other person. The wicked solution advocated by liberals is neither a good nor exclusive choice.
Keep women affordable, available, and taxable, and the "burden" of evidence sequestered at the twilight fringe.
That said, you can't select the baby, cannibalize her profitable parts, sequester her carbon pollutants, and have her, too.
Demos-cracy is aborted in darkness. #HateLovesAbortion
Margaret Sanger's dream was to eliminate blacks via birth control, sterilization and abortion.
So the democrat party has that going for them...
Perhaps the 32,000 mothers (well, that's an estimate; we really don't know who they are) should be asked if they regretted not having an abortion. NYT might be surprised at the answers.
Old and slow said...
"Crack finds the notion of 32,000 live children utterly uninteresting, but 4,000 imaginary dead in Gaza is a genocide. Odd."
Yes, yes, I'm sure you're more informed than all the aid agencies on the ground in Gaza.
Fetus is a technical term-of-art used by medical staff, and abortionists to socially distance from the "burden" h/t Obama of their Choice.
Men, women, and our Posterity are from Earth. Feminists are from Venus. Masculinists are from Mars. Social progressives are from Uranus. #WarOfTheWorlds
There is no mystery in sex and conception. Rape... rape-rapists h/t Whoopi and selfiesh (sic) should be eligible for Capitol (sic) punishment under Democratic rules.
Women have been reduced to womb banks, men to sperm donors, and both to taxable commodities with social progress.
#SixWeeks to viability. #NoJudgment #NoLabels, right?
Everybody knows that unfettered late-stage capitalism requires a steady supply of impoverished individuals with many needs and inadequate support systems.
That's enough to discount their reasoning for everything else.
How come the answer isn't to keep from getting pregnant in the first place? What happened to personal responsiblitiy? Clearly, we're not talking about rape/incest here.
"I’m curious how ‘researchers’ determined 32k ‘extra’ births due to new laws?"
You could read this to satisfy your curiosity.
"Most people are getting out of ban states, one way or another, and more people in protected states are getting abortions."
In chemistry, we would call that a concentration gradient. As the ban states slowly fill up with humans, it's only reasonable that some of them should move into the surrounding depopulated areas. The "protected states" aren't actually different in any significant way, it's just that the women who happen to live there prefer to become extinct.
"Crack finds the notion of 32,000 live children utterly uninteresting, but 4,000 imaginary dead in Gaza is a genocide. Odd."
Perhaps not imagined, but the accuracy of quantity and attribution is suspect. Also, the absence of peace keepers to mitigate progress suggests trans/humane, trans/national interests.
"What a tragedy that these 32,000 children were born! Everyone knows that poor children are better off dead."
Or
"Yuck, more poors."
Lol
As someone who is against abortion rights, I'd say that 32,000 people not killed is a big win.
Criticizing Althouse for pointing her finger at the eugenistic Communist commenter at the Times is just fucking stupid.
The NYT, doing what it absolutely does best.
Manufacturing news that they want to print to further the narrative.
Perhaps the 32,000 mothers (well, that's an estimate; we really don't know who they are) should be asked if they regretted not having an abortion. NYT might be surprised at the answers.
This, plus "these laws cause neither babies nor abortions, dinguses" - dingi? - is what I came to say.
Will they follow up with these women? Oh wait, they can't, because they don't know who they are, because this number is an estimate based on a statistical expectation (of which we don't know the underpinnings). Too bad, since when people do follow up with women who intended to abort but for whatever reason couldn't or didn't, they overwhelmingly are glad they had their babies.Including in cases of rape.
Because you know that non-statistic is on the way: "Republicans would put all the onus on women to prevent pregnancy. But what about 13-year-old Amber, who hadn't even had her first period when she was raped and impregnated by an armed intruder, so she didn't even know she was pregnant until after her state's ban time limit [an oxymoron, surely] had expired?"
I'm sure there's an Amber. AN Amber. Awfully tough to make policy for that one individual. (There may be more than one young girl who's raped by her mom's boyfriend or husband. But that's not the non-statistic we will be presented with, for various reasons including the possibility that her abortion will also be coerced by the rapist.)
Oh, and - the GOP is going after both abortion and contraception? Where? Who? Is that idea getting ANY traction?
I'm guessing that having to be a little more proactive about having a quick abortion means that more women on the fence are deciding that they're happier keeping their baby.
“Everybody knows that unfettered late-stage capitalism requires a steady supply of impoverished individuals with many needs and inadequate support systems."
And who exactly are these Capitalists supposed to sell their goods and services to at a profit? These impoverished masses?
I didn't have to read very far.
This is not the way statistics work. If you are using time as one variable, ten years, not 10 months MIGHT show a statistically relevant move in birthrate.
This is nothing but narrative setting, but I think it exposes one of the lies.(if you accept the stats) That Abortion in not being used as birth control.
More Babies. That's a good thing.
It is better to never have been born at all.
But they always mean others, not them.
Because theyre smart.
Everybody knows that sometimes it's hard to tell the difference between interesting and asinine.
Jersey Fled 10:48, "now I just tell her it's satanic." That is the conclusion I have come to as well. At first I figured abortion mania and other progressive hysterics had to be reasonable people misinformed on facts. Then I moved to insanity as the cause. But now I have wound up at satanic.
Further to my above comment:
Henry Ford demonstrated what a Capitalist is when he made the decision to pay his workers a high enough wage that they could afford to buy the product that they were producing.
It’s those like the “interesting commenter” that get that part wrong.
Aid agencies on the ground get their numbers from the Hamas health ministry like everyone else does.
Is it any surprise that crack believes the modern day SS?
"Here is what I do not understand. Why aren't pro choice advocates organizing a system to get these multitudes of unwilling mothers out of the repressive states they inhabit, and on to a facility in California, Massachusetts, or New York? A modern day Underground Railroad."
And abort nascent Democrat candidate campaigns? Surely you jest!
"all the aid agencies on the ground in Gaza"...got their numbers from Hamas, who we decidedly do NOT trust, because those "agencies" are not allowed independent means of verification. The "on the ground" part is the giveaway. If you are allowed on "ground" controlled by Hamas then you have to be controlled by Hamas, like the recently separated-from-NBC "journalist" who got the killer scoop as 10/7 was going down.
I've seen the paliwood videos where the one guy is "killed" or "injured" or in some productions plays the "doctor" or "MRI operator." Same guy, over and over. That's how Hamas produces "news" -- with actors. One of the news aggregators has nicknamed the guy I'm referencing Mr. FAFO. He's got a huge body of work online. You've probably seen him if you're as engaged with the "news" as you insinuate.
I should have referred to the dead children in Gaza (who unquestionably exist) as putative, not imaginary. There are an unknown number of dead children, and that is tragic. The fault lies entirely with the people who launched the attack on Israel.
NYT:
There’s a significant minority of people in ban states that do get trapped.
Or -- there's a significant minority of people in ban states who no longer felt the pressure from society and their friend circle to abort and so acted on their true feelings and didn't go to a non-ban state.
Some people look at the data only to validate their own conclusions.
Odd that anyone would accept the stats without verification...
Not to mention, the only thing banned is abortions after the first trimester, sooooo... Were there that many "late term abortions" happening before Rov v. Wade went bye-bye? I seem to remember being assured that they weren't happening to any serious degree by the pro-abortion folks.
The question here is, who is lying, and when did the lies start?
I happen to think that anyone taking this crap on face value needs their heads examined. The statistics agencies are all manned by Democrat shills, and the odds that they'd be telling us the truth about this issue? Slim to none. As well, the numbers are here from the first year or so past the change, so there's a bit of a learning effect that needs to take place before we can tell. I'd guess that maybe after five years, we might consider the true numbers to have been reached for actual effects...?
That, plus the post-COVID thing... Were people having more babies during the lockdown, or fewer? I seem to remember seeing that the birth rate dropped, so this number might well be the recoil from that.
On the other hand, who the hell knows, these days? I trust nothing I hear from the government. They tell me that inflation is only 3-4%, but when I go grocery shopping, it looks a hell of a lot more like prices have virtually doubled in the last two years, on a lot of things. And, that's not even counting the "shrinkflation".
You take the words and numbers coming out of these asshole's mouths at face value, you're making a mistake.
rehajm:
I’m curious how ‘researchers’ determined 32k ‘extra’ births due to new laws? Just make it up?
First, it's sociology so, yes. Second, it's leftist sociology so, definitely.
rehajm said...
I’m curious how ‘researchers’ determined 32k ‘extra’ births due to new laws? Just make it up?
They sure don’t seem interested in 20% higher than expected mortality rates among the very young as reported by insurance companies.
"Everybody knows that unfettered late-stage capitalism requires a steady supply of impoverished individuals with many needs and inadequate support systems."
Wait, a steady supply of impoverished individuals is now a bad thing? Wasn't that the prog point in opening the border? And don't we need new people to support the welfare state?
It's hard to keep up with progs sometimes.
"Here is what I do not understand. Why aren't pro choice advocates organizing a system to get these multitudes of unwilling mothers out of the repressive states they inhabit, and on to a facility in California, Massachusetts, or New York? A modern day Underground Railroad."
I've said this since forever. If the pro choice activists truly cared about the women as people, surely their organizations have the resources to provide abortions to them in a pro choice state. IMO, that tells you what this is truly about; they want the issue as a political weapon.
n.n said...
"Crack finds the notion of 32,000 live children utterly uninteresting, but 4,000 imaginary dead in Gaza is a genocide. Odd."
Perhaps not imagined, but the accuracy of quantity and attribution is suspect. Also, the absence of peace keepers to mitigate progress suggests trans/humane, trans/national interests.
Does anyone else find it wild how many people, here, are self- selected to tell you what I think?
Shouldn't it be considered misinformation to say that states have banned abortion? Some have restricted it, yes, but not outright banned. It's absolutely disinformation by the gas stove standard.
Ann, can we turn this around and admit that the 32,000 women "forced" to give birth may have surrendered to "new mother joy" when the newborn was placed in her arms? After all, the 32,000 are statics not identifiable mothers.
The Crack Emcee said...
n.n said...
"Crack finds the notion of 32,000 live children utterly uninteresting, but 4,000 imaginary dead in Gaza is a genocide. Odd."
Perhaps not imagined, but the accuracy of quantity and attribution is suspect. Also, the absence of peacekeepers to mitigate progress suggests trans/humane, trans/national interests.
Does anyone else find it wild how many people, here, are self-selected to tell you what I think? FITFY
There have been no peacekeepers in GAZA except when the IDF patrolled the streets. Meanwhile the UN "peacekeepers" flood the Strip with so-called refugee giveaways that permit Hamas to finance their "kill the Jews" genocide built into their 1988 Hamas Covenant.
And Lord knows how much Hamas miliary support arrives from Arabic state sources in Iran, Qatar, Yemen, Syria, Iraq et al.
"It's hard to keep up with progs sometimes"
Hard? When the worst thing that can happen to you is you're a bit confused?
I'll tell you what's hard -- it's being an actual prog, where your entire status and worth in life is totally dependent on keeping up with The Latest Thing™!
I can understand the argument for abortion as protecting women's bodily autonomy, but the argument that the child is better off dead just seems like a death cult to me. I also get perturbed at people who argue for s specific abortion in a case where the child would be born with a disability like Down Syndrome. Some try to pretend like they are saving the child from a lifetime of misery. No, you are just trying to save yourself from a perceived burden of having to take care of that child. People try to dress it up as a noble goal but it is really just a self-interested motivation.
"Some states have enacted restrictions on abortion, but I don't believe there is any state with a ban on the procedure. If the people living in states with restrictions they consider too severe they can have the law changed'."
Good luck with that in states where the Republican Fascists are in power.
20% higher than expected mortality rates among the very young as reported by insurance companies
For both sexes. Pregnancy is a high risk medical procedure for a pregnant woman... couple.
NYT: There’s a significant minority of people in ban states that do get trapped
The people... persons of both sexes... genders: feminine and masculine, who would disarm citizens... arm criminals would argue that it is ethical to spay females, neuter males, and advocate for Levine's Dreams of Herr Mengele.
That said, six weeks #NoJudgment #NoLabels, but human rights should be encouraged, and women should be generally discouraged from elective planned parenthood.
"Everybody knows that unfettered late-stage capitalism requires a steady supply of impoverished individuals with many needs and inadequate support systems."
Socialism and other shared responsibility economic regimes.
Keep women affordable, reusable, and taxable, and the "burden" of evidence sequestered at the twilight fringe for social, clinical, political, criminal, and climate progress.
So id the increase from pre-covidiocy baseines? Or post-covidiocy baselines?
The covidiocy itself caused birth disruptions in every country in the world. And the birth dearth has yet to recover.
"Everybody knows that unfettered late-stage capitalism..."
Heh. Go rent a building and proceed to engage in whatever sort of capitalism interests you. A micro-brewery or food sales, maybe? Be sure to report back in six months about the lack of fetters you have encountered.
It's ridiculous that pro-abortion feminists think abortion is better than giving the baby up for adoption, if the woman doesn't want to raise it.
There should be some 16,000 more children put up for adoption if half those not wanting the children gave them up rather than keeping them.
It is unfair of LIFE that women get pregnant but men do not.
You can't really argue that it's unfair that women bear the offspring as that's the biological definition of female. It's like saying it's unfair that the two toed sloth doesn't have the same number of toes as the three toed sloth. It just is.
If you really want to argue fair, don't discount that men have basic programming that impels them to take a step over to stand between danger and a woman. And if you want to test it, take a general survey of women and ask "Would you rather carry a child to term or risk death protecting a man?" and go with that as the answer to the balance issue. Sounds fair to me.
Fairness is an emotion and life does not give one crap about your emotions.
This post is an example of how to lie with honest numbers, and this comment thread is a disappointment. Unless I missed it (my apologies in advance if I did) no one asked the simple question of how many births were there in total? Answer: 3.66 million. So 32,000 looks like a large number, but it’s less than 1%. Do I need to point out that a less than 1% year over year difference could be an utterly random variation. Attempting to pull meaning out of a less than 1% difference is foolishness, done by fools.
"The "law" is "causing" births. Not 2 individuals who mutually decided to act in ways generally understood by 6th grade health class to cause babies."
Remember Sandra Fluck equating pregnancy with affliction.
""Everybody knows that unfettered late-stage capitalism requires a steady supply of impoverished individuals with many needs and inadequate support systems."
How come this Marxian analysis is never applied to Biden's immigration and border policies? "
Raaacciiisssstttt!
Just keep giving jabs. Great way to fuck with fertility.
"Good luck with that..."
Robert Cook, baby murderer, speaks his mind.
Old and slow said...
"Crack finds the notion of 32,000 live children utterly uninteresting,..."
I'd like to make it clear I DID NOT SAY THIS. Old and slow just decided to say that is what I think. That is what Old and slow took from reading what I wrote, though I said nothing of the kind, and Old and slow - clearly - has no idea what I meant. I'm a very-vocal foster child. Figure out my concern level for kids yourselves.
Old and slow is revealing thoughts about me, and not my thoughts about children. Probably because they're Old and slow. Remember: it is important that the rest of us make accommodations for the elderly. Mine is having to put up with these outbursts. So, if you know Old and slow, go over and pat 'em softly on their old bald head for me. Tell 'em I love 'em. Tell 'em it's all good and everything will be fine. Blacks are now allowed to speak for ourselves. Old and slow will get used to it.
That said, this is what I see happening to the Palestinians as well. Self-appointed western spokespeople, here and elsewhere - usually hostile and ignorant - tell us what they think. And they insist it's true, because they know access to actual Palestinians has to be sought out, and most dumbshits can't be bothered, so - viola! - these morons almost have a total monopoly on framing our view of reality.
They try to make the concerns of actual Gazans, Arabs, Muslims, and Jews for peace "utterly uninteresting,..."
Everybody Knows.
Argumentum ad populum
In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument which is based on claiming a truth or affirming something is good because the majority thinks so.
Wikipedia
"Trapped"
*eyeroll*
“I saw a number, therefore it proves my theory”. Textbook of Modern Statistics.
One of the bylines on the article is Margot Sanger-Katz.
Margaret Sanger established organizations that evolved into the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
Esther Katz is the Director/Editor of The Margaret Sanger Papers Project at NYU.
Any relation, I wonder?
32,000 people is a whole town. Imagine thinking, "Someone should have wiped out that whole town--it's full of poor people." What a bunch of creeps.
Freeman Hunt said...
'Imagine thinking, "Someone should have wiped out that whole town--it's full of poor people."'
Isn't that Israel and Palestine?
It should be 320,000 extra births.
It should be 320,000 extra births.
Freeman Hunt said...
'Imagine thinking, "Someone should have wiped out that whole town--it's full of poor people."'
"We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it employment in our country. The property owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discretely and circumspectly. Let the owners of the immoveable property believe that they are cheating us, selling us things for more than they are worth. But we are not going to sell them anything back."
- Theodor Herzl, the founder of Zionism (1895)
I think we should have more abortions.
Up to the 72nd trimester.
"Mrs. Thing how come Heather wasn't in school today?"
"We had to abort her."
"Oh. That's too bad. What was the reason?"
"Well Mr.Thing and I wanted to go to Hawaii this year and we just couldn't afford to take her."
I think we'd wind up with some pretty well behaved kids.
I'm ashamed to live in a country that promotes the genocide of unborn babies.
Post a Comment