Why We Should Not Use Abortion Statistics
When the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) releases teen birth rates, it always stirs up the debate about whether contraception or abstinence education improves this social issue. The “reproductive rights” advocates are quick to say that better education about contraception is to credit. The life-lovers are quick to point out that lower teen births do not mean that there were fewer teen pregnancies because we need to take into account the number of teen abortions too. And so it went last week when the CDC reported the “lowest teen birth rate ever.”
Amanda Marcotte at Slate predictably cheered ”Teen Birth Rate Down; Thanks, Contraception!”
Kristan Hawkins at Life News wrote that we should “Credit Abstinence With Helping Reduce Teen Birth Rates.”
Matthew Warner at National Catholic Register cited Kristan Hawkins to explain “Birth Rates vs. Pregnancy Rates” saying that abortion advocates like to pretend pregnancy and birth are the same when it’s convenient, to confuse people.
Tracy Clark-Flory at Salon cited Kristan too and said that “Abstinence isn’t working” because teen births are down, thanks to contraception use. “Why does the right ignore the facts and insist it’s abstinence?” she wondered.
Well, let’s talk about facts. I am in agreement with the nature of the points that Kristan and Matthew make. Kristan was generally right about the reported statistics and Matthew was right that they do seem to intentionally confuse people. We all knew the heralding of contraception that would be proclaimed. Still, I want to urge people to stop even citing abortion statistics as if they are meaningful in any way.
Kristan says that the abortion rates were higher and that, in part, accounts for the lower teen birth rate, an unacceptable solution for life-lovers. Tracy from Salon takes issue with Kristan from Life News for claiming that the teen abortion rate has increased, without citing any evidence. Tracy then sweeps in with the February article from Reuters: “Teen Pregnancy, Abortion Rates at Record Low“ that cites research from Guttmacher. Tracy says that the year 2008 is the most recent year for which data is available, and that the teen abortion rate was down 59 percent from its peak in 1988. And, on that technicality, Tracy is right. This will make your head hurt, but stick with me.
I’m trying to show why we should not even use abortion statistics.
Kristan says the abortion rate has increased from 17.8 per 1,000 in 2008 to 19 per 1,000 in 2010, but Tracy points out that there are no 2010 statistics reported, and again, she’s right. The report released in 2010 cites data from 2006 and that is where the number “19 per 1,000″ comes from. (Report is here, see Key Findings.) So really, according to Guttmacher (hang with me here), Kristan is wrong about 2008 and 2010. The reported abortion rate did not go up; it went down. The 17.8 is for 2008 but you have to go to the 2012 report to find that. (Report is here, see Key Findings). It’s an easy error to make. Reports are released two years after the data was collected because the Alan Guttmacher Institute takes time to work up the data.
But Tracy is wrong too, 2008 is the most recent year that data is available, but she cites it wrong, probably also an honest mistake. This figure was 56%, not 59%, lower than its peak in 1988. However, what she doesn’t also mention is the following sentence. “The 2008 rate is 1% higher than the 2005 rate.” Slight of hand? Seems so. So — Kristan really was right, the short term abortion rates were reported higher for teens. Anyway…
Why did I drag you through that?
To explain why we need, in my opinion, to stop using abortion statistics.
First, they are confusingly reported in weird ways that are hard to follow, and when a mistake like this is made, people get distracted from the real point. The real point is that one abortion is wrong. That’s a point Kristan makes a lot, and with poignant eloquence.
Second, the over-arching biggest real FACT is that abortion data is fundamentally suspect. This data originates from reports submitted by the abortion clinic workers, and the data is protected by law from investigation. A statistician worth his name would not trust that data. Why should we? That would have been the better point for Matt to nail with his characteristic cogency, and he did mention it.
Some states do have statutory penalties for clinics that report false information, but come on! How do you take a year’s worth of abortion data that exists only on paper and investigate it? The bodies of the children killed are gone. It’s not like they get social security numbers or anything. There is no way to know whether the statistics are accurate, or even what the error in reporting might actually be. You may as well pull numbers out of a bag.
What lesson can we learn? When the CDC reported the “lowest teen birth rates in U.S. history” all anyone needed to point out was that this number is meaningless unless we know how many abortions the clinics in the U.S. committed during the same year. The end. The onus is on the abortion providers to prove they are honest.
Now ask yourself, is there a reasonable expectation that people who profit from killing children in the womb are also trustworthy to tell us exactly how many they killed? Not to me. Instead of saying abstinence works because teen births are lower – a proposition that necessarily requires us to unreasonably trust abortion statistics – what we should say is that teen birth rates tell us nothing about the teen pregnancy social issue. Period. There never will be any such reliable data unless the clinics are willing to submit themselves to greater scrutiny and investigation so that outside sources can verify that they are telling the truth about how many abortions they do in one year, either medically or surgically. Remember, reporting is not even required by the CDC.
Maybe we should use these teen birth rate reports to urge for tighter regulations on abortion so we can actually understand the real problem better.
Look at it like this. If you car’s speedometer were broken and you could not know whether it really told you your actual speed, would you drive through a school zone staring at that untrustworthy speedometer to determine if you were driving a safe speed? Of course not! You would dismiss the instrument as unreliable, and instead watch what’s going on in the real world with your own eyes. Why? Because children’s lives are at stake, and it is absurd to rely on instruments that are meaningless.
Category: Abortion, Social Issues
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
Comments (61)
Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed
Sites That Link to this Post
- Why We Should Not Use Abortion Statistics | Foundation Life | April 18, 2012
- A few good links | eChurch Blog | April 18, 2012
- Three Ways to Win Every Debate with an Atheist | eChurch Blog | May 28, 2012
It’s been a long time, Stacy.
I believe the numbers are fine, when presented in the correct way. There are two main problem. 1) Most people are not statisticians…nor do they have a basic understanding of statistics, methodology, statistical significance, etc. 2) People that do not understand the statistics then try to draw conclusions THAT CANNOT BE DRAWN FROM THE AVAILABLE DATA. You simply cannot say only abstinence has helped reduced rates just as you cannot say only contraceptives reduced the rates. In reality, it is probably a bit of both, but we can’t ever know how much either played a role. The rate reduction is neither a victory for those against reproductive rights nor is it s victory for those for reproductive rights. It is a victory for the teens. Whatever is influencing them is working, and fewer are getting pregnant…and thus will never even have to be faced with the question of “What in the world am I going to do?” THAT is the victory.
If I remember correctly, you are well versed in statistics. You know that a 1% increase or decrease is not statistically significant in this case. It is within the margin of error. What would be the point of further confusing people by bringing up the fact the rate increased a statistically insignificant amount? Just curious.
By your logic, we should not use or trust ANY statistic, because they would (and often do) confuse the average person. On the surface, this might seem to make life a bit easier (^_^), but it won’t.
I have no problem with either side using the statistics available, as long as they understand the methodology, findings and limitations of the data and do not use the data to draw false conclusions. Abortion/pregnancy stats from reputable sources are about as accurate as any other statistic. The limitations are not hidden from anyone. There *will* be a margin of error, which can be expected with any statistic. There is no expectation of 100% accuracy and neither should there be an expectation of it.
Your issue is that you do not trust abortion providers. That’s fine. I don’t trust CPCs. However, that is YOUR personal issue and MY personal issue. It has absolutely nothing to do with the accuracy of the data, the methodology, etc. Abortion providers gain nothing from underplaying the number or abortions they actually perform, because one could argue that fewer women are seeking abortion as a viable option and society doesn’t really need it. That would be devastating to the clinics’ bottom line, if clinics that provided abortion only cared about making a buck.
Facts are the most powerful weapon, whether you support reproductive rights or do not support reproductive rights. To say we should not bring facts to the table leaves absolutely nothing but speculation, emotional appeal and outright lies.
My question is, what do you propose we use in place of facts and statistics?
Nice blog, btw.
Hi Chris! Haven’t read the comment yet, but it’s nice to *see* you again in cyberspace!
Hi Stacy! Occasional lurker here. I enjoy your blogs. I wanted to mention that I also dislike the use of abortion, teen pregnancy, and teen birth statistics as indicators of the effectiveness of any type of sex education because it reinforces the perception that pregnancy is the worst possible outcome of teen sex. According to these statistics, a 15 year old girl who has sex with ten different men in a given year without getting pregnant has a favorable outcome. Too bad she caught and spread HPV, herpes, and gonorrhea along the way.
Hey Stacy,
I’ve lurked over in PL. It seems to be more of a haven now, which I respect and is the reason I haven’t joined. I’ve made SAWRTC a “page” and it seems to have become a haven also. With the destruction of the boards, real discussion seems impossible. The groups and pages are now just good places to post links and pictures.
I understand your point, Christine, but every stat isn’t meant to address every problem/question/concern. Pregnancy and abortion rates only give information about pregnancy and abortion. STD statistics only give information about STDs. It’s not rocket surgery.
OK, kids are fed, baby is sleeping
“You simply cannot say only abstinence has helped reduced rates just as you cannot say only contraceptives reduced the rates.”
Agreed.
“It is a victory for the teens. Whatever is influencing them is working, and fewer are getting pregnant…”
We don’t know if fewer teens got pregnant. We only know that fewer gave birth.
“If I remember correctly, you are well versed in statistics.”
I know enough. I trained in Six Sigma methods and I used statistical methods to do research. I learned the most from my husband though. He is an applied mathematician and executive.
“You know that a 1% increase or decrease is not statistically significant in this case.”
No, I don’t know whether it is or is not. First I want to know what the 1% actually represents and how it was calculated.
“It is within the margin of error.”
How do you know? It depends. Statistical significance isn’t determined by “Oh that doesn’t sound like too much to me.” It’s calculated from the data set.
“By your logic, we should not use or trust ANY statistic, because they would (and often do) confuse the average person.”
That is not even remotely what I said. Probably my own fault for not articulating it better.
“I have no problem with either side using the statistics available, as long as they understand the methodology, findings and limitations of the data and do not use the data to draw false conclusions.”
Bingo. The CDC and Guttmacher need to reveal their methods. I know that in the reports there is a “Methods” section, but what they include there is so vague it would cost an academic or professional his job. I’ve tried, my husband’s tried, to track down exactly what they do, and it is not disclosed.
“Abortion/pregnancy stats from reputable sources are about as accurate as any other statistic.”
No, they aren’t. There is a striking difference. You can verify births and deaths, you cannot verify the number of abortions.
“There *will* be a margin of error, which can be expected with any statistic. There is no expectation of 100% accuracy and neither should there be an expectation of it.”
In the statistical process, determining the margin or error comes towards the end. The first thing you do is assess whether the data set is valid. If it’s not, you toss it out. Why? Because you can’t get valid conclusions from flawed data.
“Your issue is that you do not trust abortion providers.”
That’s it.
“I don’t trust CPCs.”
CPCs don’t provide the government with any data for policy decisions though.
“However, that is YOUR personal issue and MY personal issue.”
If the data is used to make policy decisions and affect people’s lives, it is more than a personal issue.
“Abortion providers gain nothing from underplaying the number or abortions they actually perform,…”
I don’t buy that. There are too many scenarios to consider. They could also under-report to say that CSE is working and use that to push for more funding in those areas, for instance.
“Facts are the most powerful weapon, whether you support reproductive rights or do not support reproductive rights. To say we should not bring facts to the table leaves absolutely nothing but speculation, emotional appeal and outright lies.”
I’m requesting we not use questionable data, so that we can focus more on reality.
“My question is, what do you propose we use in place of facts and statistics?”
Well, consider this scenario. What if the state governments did receive data from CPCs, say they self-report the number of women who decide against abortion each year, and suppose a pro-life research firm took that state data and worked it up and published a report. Would you want those facts and statistics on the table to make policy decisions?
“Nice blog, btw.”
Thank you! It’s the equivalent of a new crayon box for me and I love writing and also playing around with the code to see what I can do visually. LOL.
Christine,
“…it reinforces the perception that pregnancy is the worst possible outcome of teen sex.”
BINGO! Thank you, excellent point, probably one I should address more often.
Chris,
“The groups and pages are now just good places to post links and pictures.”
Yes, I’ve noticed. You never know what’s around the corner for Facebook. I like the discussion on blogs, but it was nice the way FB discussion boards brought lots of people together. (It was kind of like being in a room with too many people yelling sometimes though.)
Firstly I must say that your blog is brilliant, modern and very well done.
Secondly, I’m suspect about everything the mainstream media says. These radical left wing members of the media are willing to twist statistics from any government agency to further their radical agendas. It really seems they go above and beyond to spread their absolute allegiance to a pro-abortion platform.
THANK YOU, Apostle! It makes my day when someone takes the time to show appreciation! Makes my day.
And yes, sad about the media. Infuriating actually.
Hi Stacy,
Hope you don’t mind me poking some whole in your story?
“The real point is that one abortion is wrong.”
That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to that. However, legally, ethically and medically this statement is as wrong as they come.
“It’s not like they get social security numbers or anything.”
Exactly. You know why? Because the foetuses are not individuals so no social security numbers can be assigned. These are only assigned to people who are, legally, a person. Thanks for admitting a foetus is not a person for the very first time.
“There is no way to know whether the statistics are accurate, or even what the error in reporting might actually be.”
That’s true. You need to have a little trust in the people who report the data. However, I’d think that would be an area you know something about. After all, don’t you trust the claims by the Catholic church only a handful of children were abused and the guilty have been dealt with?
“When the CDC reported the “lowest teen birth rates in U.S. history” all anyone needed to point out was that this number is meaningless unless we know how many abortions the clinics in the U.S. committed during the same year. The end.”
Like I mentioned in a previous thread, teen pregnancy rates are not important in determining the status of a country’s developement and, therefor, of little interest. Organisations like the WHO or UNICEF do not give grants for projects that will decrease teen pregnancies but for projects that will decrease teen births. And, despite your previous objections, since these grants are numerous billions of dollars it’s quite important for any government to get as many of those as possible, even if they have to manipulate data (not that I’m saying they did, of course) or even promote access to abortion clinics for teens.
“There never will be any such reliable data unless the clinics are willing to submit themselves to greater scrutiny and investigation so that outside sources can verify that they are telling the truth about how many abortions they do in one year, either medically or surgically.”
Three questions:
1. Why should they, knowing religious and social conservatives will either manipulate the data, drawing conclusions that fit their PoV (like you accuse others to do as well) or not believe the data anyway?
2. Can you please explain to me how to perform a surgical abortion? I’ve witnessed my share of abortions but I never saw a surgical one.
3. By making a distinction between “medically” and “surgically” do you mean you don’t think a surgeon is a medical professional? I hope for your sake you don’t need any surgical help for a while because with that statement I guarantee you pissed off a lot of surgeons today.
“Maybe we should use these teen birth rate reports to urge for tighter regulations on abortion so we can actually understand the real problem better.”
Yeah, like that’s going to happen. Right now the State of Texas is facing a 1.2 billion dollar budget cut / fine for interfering with a federal fund for Planned Parenthood as well as federal charges from the US Surgeon-General’s office for interfering with federal policy. And you and me both know in the end Texas will yield because the federal government has more muscle (i.e. money) than Texas does.
I told you before and I’ll tell you again, this discussion ended 40 years ago at the US Supreme Court when they ruled in Roe vs. Wade. Roe vs. Wade will not be overruled, simply because the Supreme Court has decided not to accept any hearings that might cause a different view on Roe vs. Wade. So every single one of the fifty states will have but one option: comply with Washington D.C. in this matter unless they want to go head on with either the Justice department or the Sureon-General’s Office.
Apostle.
“I’m suspect about everything the mainstream media says. It really seems they go above and beyond to spread their absolute allegiance to a pro-abortion platform.”
Stacy,
“sad about the media. Infuriating actually.”
Ever occured to either of you the media is taking the point of view of the majority in these kind of affairs?
Stacy,
I am on a mobile device so please pardon the lack of quoting and possible errors.
I was specifically speaking on the falling pregnancy rates when I was talking about the ‘victory for girls’, not the birth rates. Two different statistics. Sorry if i wasnt clear.
You are preaching to the choirs about stats. I am Six Sigma certified, also.
As for the margin of error, I believe it was 3-5%. The 1% increase in rates would fall in the margin of error in this case. Thus the increase is statistically insignificant. In an academic paper, i would expect the author to disclose this. In a lay article, probably not.
As far as deaths, sorry, there is no way to verify them all to 100% certainty. A stillborn under a certain gestation is not required to have a certificate of birth nor death. There is also no requirement of how stillborns of a certain gestation are disposed. The rules vary from state to state with little to no federal oversite. Some people die and their bodies are never found. Even births cannot be verified 100%, because not everyone delivers in a hospital and some people go through great lengths to hide the existence of children.
As far as tracking down the methods or cdc and agi, what are you looking for exactly? What don’t they disclose? It seemed pretty straightforward to me. When i get home i will pull it up, or perhaps you can post the methods?
As for your last question, it is not 1:1 comparison. cpcs arent the only place where a woman can discuss her options and decide not to have an abortion. So I would be willing to accept the info as a part of the information used to make a decision, but not only it. Just the same, you can’t get birthrates from only hospitals. You have to check out midwife clincs. You can’t take abortion rates only from women’s because hospitals also perform them, etc.
This tablet is driving me crazy. Ill try to get to the rest later.
Edward,
~~~That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to that.~~~
That is the ethical pro-life position. It is the point of what we defend.
~~~Exactly. You know why? Because the foetuses are not individuals so no social security numbers can be assigned.~~~
This is beside the point, but I know fetuses are not considered people by our laws in the U.S. They are considered children though and we work to achieve status for all humans as persons. In this country, if I declared my unborn child a “person” he is protected as any other person though and if someone tried to murder him, they would be charged for such. It’s only the children the mother’s don’t want that lose that protection.
~~~You need to have a little trust in the people who report the data.~~~
Not people who profit by killing children in the womb. I fundamentally do not trust them.
~~~Like I mentioned in a previous thread, teen pregnancy rates are not important in determining the status of a country’s developement~~~
So what? It matters to us.
~~~Organisations like the WHO or UNICEF do not give grants for projects that will decrease teen pregnancies but for projects that will decrease teen births.~~~
Shiver. Chris Cardenas, does that bother you at all. I don’t think even some pro-choice people in the U.S. would agree with that Edward.
~~~1. Why should they…~~~
We can influence legislation and lawmakers. Why should they? Well hopefully because they are interested in the truth.
~~~2. Can you please explain to me how to perform a surgical abortion?~~~
http://www.americanpregnancy.org/unplannedpregnancy/surgicalabortions.html
~~~Texas will yield because the federal government has more muscle (i.e. money) than Texas does.~~~
Actually TX has recovered the funds themselves. There’s a saying in TX. “If you need a helping hand, what’s wrong with the one on the end of your arm?”
~~~I told you before and I’ll tell you again, this discussion ended 40 years ago at the US Supreme Court when they ruled in Roe vs. Wade.~~~
Apparently not!
Chris,
“In an academic paper, i would expect the author to disclose this.”
It won’t be, at least, not in medical papers since the standard margin of error in medical research is either 2,5% (in pharmaceutical sponsored research) or 5% (in university sponsored research). Only in genetic research the margin or error is set at a lower point (0.001% mostly). Otherwise too many genes might come out in statistical analyses as cause for a disease. Can’t tell much more than that, though, since I’m not in genetic research. Better said, never took the effort to get to know more about the procedures in that area of expertise.
Chris,
Meet Edward!
Edward is a physician in the Netherlands. He can tell you more about himself. He’s been hanging around for several months. Very interesting man!
Edwawrd,
Chris is (I think we can say) old (well she’s young) Facebook friend who I enjoyed discussing the issues with. She’s knowledgeable and very calm tempered.
Chris, what are you doing these days? I was going to say you are a college student, but you may have graduated by now.
OK — carry on! Felt like an brief intro was in order.
Stacy,
“if I declared my unborn child a “person” he is protected as any other person though and if someone tried to murder him, they would be charged for such.”
I doubt that. If a woman is being assaulted and loses her baby in the process I think the highest the DA’s office can go is “assault with great bodily harm”. Murder is definately not a possibility.
“Not people who profit by killing children in the womb. I fundamentally do not trust them.”
Than I guess we have a problem, since there are a lot of people I don’t trust fundamentally either. Among them are Catholic officials while you have no problem trusting those. So I guess the best possibility than is to agree we’ll never agree.
“So what? It matters to us.”
Correct me if I’m wrong but do you think either your state’s of the federal government gives a rat’s ass about what does or does not matter to the Catholic minority in the US?
“I don’t think even some pro-choice people in the U.S. would agree with that Edward. ”
Never said I agree with it. I just stated the way things are.
“We can influence legislation and lawmakers. Why should they? Well hopefully because they are interested in the truth.”
But you already stated you fundamentally don’t trust them and won’t believe anything they say anyway. So, again, why should they cooperate to such an investigation?
Do you know the Serenity Prayer?
“God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.”
There’s great wisdom in these words. Maybe you should try them one day.
Stacy,
“Edward is a physician in the Netherlands. He can tell you more about himself. He’s been hanging around for several months. Very interesting man!”
And quite adorable, even if I say so myself (and quite likable if I don’t try to refute your every statement).
Edward,
The Unborn Victim of Violence Act uses the terms “children” and “murder.”
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=108&session=2&vote=00063
I’m not discussing Catholic priests with you. It’s a popular tactic for anyone atheist, and it’s irrelevant to this discussion.
Yes, I believe our lawmakers hear us. We are quite loud and effective.
~~~So, again, why should they cooperate to such an investigation?~~~
Ever heard the term “objective third party?”
I have a serenity prayer for blogging:
God, grant me the serenity
to ignore trolls;
courage to debate honest people;
and wisdom to know the difference.
Stacy,
“The Unborn Victim of Violence Act uses the terms “children” and “murder.””
I stand corrected.
“I’m not discussing Catholic priests with you.”
If I were in your shoes I wouldn’t either. They are pretty hard to defend nowadays.
“Yes, I believe our lawmakers hear us. We are quite loud and effective.”
“Loud and effective” or “loud and obnoxious”? So far the Catholic lobby has proven to be most ineffective in several areas, the most recent being marriage equality in the State of New York.
So thrown me another one.
“The Unborn Victim of Violence Act uses the terms ‘children’ and ‘murder’”, just as your sentence does, but it does not equate every killing of the unborn with murder.
Chris,
~~~I am on a mobile device so please pardon the lack of quoting and possible errors.~~~
Doing pretty good!
~~~I was specifically speaking on the falling pregnancy rates when I was talking about the ‘victory for girls’, not the birth rates. Two different statistics. Sorry if i wasnt clear.~~~
You were clear. I get your point and would agree — the thing is, we don’t really know what the pregnancy rate is. First, there are miscarriages. Fine, that’s unknowable. Second, there are medical abortions. We don’t know how many of those were sold or taken. Third, we don’t really know how many surgical abortions there were. You need to know the # of aborted pregnancies and # of births to know the # of pregnancies. To assess the social issue of teen pregnancy, it would be good to at least know how many medical abortion pills were sold to them and how many had induced abortions.
~~~You are preaching to the choirs about stats. I am Six Sigma certified, also.~~~
I haven’t told anyone that in a long time. I think I subconsciously remembered us discussing it before.
~~~As for the margin of error, I believe it was 3-5%. The 1% increase in rates would fall in the margin of error in this case.~~~
OK. But that all presupposes that the data set is valid. As far as disclosure, I don’t recall that even in the academic paper. Will look again.
~~~What don’t they disclose? It seemed pretty straightforward to me. When i get home i will pull it up, or perhaps you can post the methods?~~~
I got hung up on the word “proportion.” They add some magic number…
I’ll get it tomorrow, or later tonight.
Edward,
Alright, here, play your way.
You support castration, since you are a medical professional in the Netherlands and the medical community castrated 400 young men in the past. 8% of infants that die, are killed in the Netherlands so you support infanticide. No wonder you don’t defend the medical community of your country and just run away from those conversations.
I’ve shown you how the priest scandal is not Catholic doctrine. In the past the percentage of priest accused (just accused) is far lower than the male population in general that are known to abuse children. It’s not about children for you. It’s about bigotry. Now, stop using that to distract like all the rest of the desperate atheists do for every single argument they ever try to have.
~~~So thrown me another one.~~~
No, I’ll pass. Doesn’t matter what you think anyway. I’m moving to New York very soon! This issue is still a nationwide debate, and it’s not over just because a few states passed laws. Laws change all the time. God already wins, so I’m not worried. I’m just dedicated. Comes with being a mama.
Peggy Sue,
~~~…but it does not equate every killing of the unborn with murder.~~~
Right.
And also, Stacy, the 2004 federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act that you keep citing “applies only to certain offenses over which the United States government has jurisdiction, including certain crimes committed on Federal properties, against certain Federal officials and employees, and by members of the military” or “certain crimes of terrorism”, and it expressly excludes abortion. Generally, therefore, it is the state-level laws of each of the 50 states and DC that are going to apply to cases in the states, and they vary from state to state. For example, Massachusetts does not have a fetal homicide law, but a 2007 killing of the unborn (resulting from an assault on the mother) was chargeable as manslaughter because “the fetus was medically viable at the time of the trauma that ended its life”, said the Suffolk County district attorney’s office, otherwise it might not have been. Meanwhile, “California treats the killing of a [non-aborted] fetus as homicide, but does not treat the killing of an embryo (prior to approximately eight weeks) as homicide, by construction of the California Supreme Court”. Reportedly, only about half the 50 states protect the (non-aborted) unborn throughout prenatal development, and even those states do not all allow for a “murder” charge.
Peggy Sue,
I know it excludes abortion, already said that.
However, what I said is true. At any time in pregnancy if someone else kills my child against my will, it is murder.
I remember the 2007 case, it had nothing to do with viability. If I’m remembering wrong or missed something, could you please cite your sources.
Stacy,
What I am trying to convey is that very few things that are studies can be verified with 100% accuracy. We will never know the rate of teen pregnancy just as we will never know they rate of breast cancer. It is understood that you will not be able to document every case. However, even with the limitations in the collection of data, the statistics are still quite valuable.
This is why I asked do you think we should never use any statistic. Like it or not, we cannot 100% verify the number of miscarriages, abortions, stillbirths, births or even deaths. We cannot be 100% certain the rate of cancer, food allergies, autism, fetal abnormalities…any of these. Yet, statistics and studies for all of these exist.
I don’t expect abortion rates to include women who buy abortion-inducing drugs over the internet, just as I don’t expect cancer rates to include a person who has died but was never diagnosed with cancer. This goes in hand with what I mentioned earlier, with understanding the limitations of a study/statistic.
As far as UNICEF and such…I am not so sure that that how those organizations work. From my understanding, they do try to prevent pregnancy and that’s how is should be IMO.
OTS – Yes, I have graduated with my Master’s in Industrial Engineering and I am gainfully employed in my field. I’ve just been taking care of my dad and trying to settle down with the beau. Nice to meet you, Edward.
Stacy, if “at any time in pregnancy someone kills [your] child against [your] will,” it is not necessarily “murder” according to the laws of society, nor under every meaning of the word “murder” in the English language. For example, as “an unlawful killing with malice aforethought”, a “murder” requires more than just a killing against your will.
As to the Massachusetts case, it was actually in 2010 (don’t know why I typed 2007), and I cited (and quoted) the Suffolk Country district attorney’s office. You can call them yourself to confirm. Without a fetal homicide statute in Massachusetts, the prosecutor had to turn to case law which required medical viability of the unborn. Here’s a SBA story about it: http://www.sba-list.org/suzy-b-blog/massachusetts-unexpected-prosecution-death-unborn-child
Chris,
~~~”…very few things that are studies can be verified with 100% accuracy.”~~~
Of course. That is why we even have statistics in the first place. The data set has to be real though. That is the unknown for now. There’s no way to know if the reported abortions are even representative of real abortions.
I’m not even sure if this could be solved because of the nature of the problem. For now, I plan to encourage pro-life people to just disregard the abortion stats. 40% of pregnancies end in abortion in NYC? Well, we really don’t know. The data collection process is fatally flawed.
~~~”This is why I asked do you think we should never use any statistic.”~~~
In another thread someone cited that 8% of infant deaths in the Netherlands in 1997 from August to November were infanticide. Those were based on death certificates. I can believe those are real because the cause of death was not being recorded just for statistical scientific purposes. The children were at least considered living citizens.
Stacy,
“I’ve shown you how the priest scandal is not Catholic doctrine. In the past the percentage of priest accused (just accused) is far lower than the male population in general that are known to abuse children. It’s not about children for you. It’s about bigotry”
No, it’s about ethics and the lack thereof by several Catholic priests who have the audacity to tell other people how to live their lives. Guess what? It doesn’t work like that in real life. In real life you need to lead by example. These few priests have damaged, if not destroyed, the credibility of the Catholic church and Catholics all over the world for years to come. And the more the Catholic church keeps denying the problem and ignoring the facts the bigger the scandal becomes and the less credible the Catholic church will be. As long as the Catholic church keeps doing what it’s doing any and all debate Catholics want to get involved in will end with: “First get your priests under control and your affairs in order and then you can say what you want to say.”
Like it or not, when it comes down to ethics the Catholic church has the same ammount of credibility as an alcoholic who keeps telling he’s not addicted and can quit drinking whenever he feels like it.
LOL Edward, Yawn. Stay on topic please.
Peggy Sue,
Yes I see the distinction. It has to be a federal crime.
“Enactment of the federal Unborn Victims of Violence Act did not supersede state unborn victims laws, nor did it apply such a law for state crimes in a state that has not enacted one.”
From here: http://www.publiceye.org/ark/reproductive-justice/articles/key-facts-unborn-victims-violence-act.php
I hope you see my point about protecting my own child though. If I lived in a state that did not recognize a crime against my child just because he was not born yet, I’d hope and pray that the fight we’d have in court would change the law for the better.
“These few priests have damaged, if not destroyed, the credibility of the Catholic church and Catholics all over the world for years to come.”
Hopefully you’ll agree that Stalin, Pol Pot and Chairman Mao pretty much destroyed whatever credibility the “Enlightenment” possessed.
I’m not just playing tit-for-tat. I’m sincerely asking: where do we go from here? Basically, we’re dealing — metaphorically of course — with two imperfect cities: Stalingrad (the City of Man) and Rome (the City of God).
The terrible events of the 20th century have convinced me, and many others as well, that Rome — even with its faults — is the answer.
This is not just a morally good position, it’s a reasonable position.
It’s still me, Stacy.
You keep saying the abortion statistics are fatally flawed, but you still are not addressing a few things.
How is it any more “flawed” then other statistics/studies that rely on self-reporting I have mentioned? Do you dismiss all studies that rely on self-reporting, such as STDs, long-term cancer studies, miscarriage, food allergies, autism, etc? If not, why?
Thank you Jeff. I never know whether to engage or not, and it seems like this topic is addressed so much already – and you are right, it turns into tit-for-tat. You went above it all to the real question though. Thank you.
ChrisCintheD,
Haha!
It took me a while to get there. I used abortion statistics, as you know, for years. I used to ask pro-choice people who said they wanted abortion to be rare, why they were not in favor of making it illegal since statistics show us that is when the rates were the lowest. They sharply increased in the years right after RvW.
Then they’d cite statistics from pro-choice organizations that said they did a study during the years when it was illegal and the problem was that no one reported it because it was illegal, and that really rates were much, much higher. They support that with other pro-choice statistics currently in countries where abortion is illegal. The stats showed what? They showed that abortion rates were very high.
How did they figure that out? I checked the methods. They literally would interview a single hospital, or they’d take the numbers they got from a nearby country and extrapolate to the no-data country and add in some proportional magic, and come up with some number — always to prove the point. Abortion is not rare when it is illegal.
I didn’t just wake up and say, “Oh, I don’t trust them.” I’ve tried.
Last year when NYC issued its 41% abortion rate, pro-life people and even pro-choice people flipped out. I was curious how they got that number and looked up the forms for NYC. I started writing about it. The form for induced abortion says at the top that whatever is written on the form cannot be subpoenad and cannot be investigated, that it is for scientific purposes only. The clinic sends them to the local health board and they are compiled. No methods are given.
NYC pro-choice health officials started a campaign to push contraception and abortion on more women. I read the propaganda. They taught abortion clinics how to council women. I found out that the clinics were getting a “national quality” stamp of approval from an outside agency, The Joint Commission, to verify they are safe, but the agency is in another state and charges thousands of dollars for a ONE DAY visit to assess the clinic. Then they get the stamp of approval. What’s it really for? The clinic with the JC approval gets tax dollars. And so it goes.
I look at all of that, see how they are all in bed together (as they say), and realize that it’s perfectly reasonable to conclude the 41% number was a fabrication to normalize abortion.
Sigh, well you asked.
No, I don’t trust the people who work in abortion clinics to be honest.
When I recalled the words of Dr. Nathanson, that pretty much sealed it for me. He admitted they lied by the thousands about the abortion stats to push the public to accept its legalization. I’m also reading a book by Dr. Frederick N. Dyer, who I stay in touch with and he is guiding me as I write about the abortion history in this country. They lied at every turn. They got public approval by lying about statistics. That was always one of the tactics used.
All those other issues require their own essays, but suffice it to say that no statistic should be taken for more than it is. Bottom line on this issue is, “Can I reasonably trust abortion workers to tell the truth about how many abortions they do?” The answer is no.
You can still call me “Chris”. This is just my normal interwebs handle.
I remember those debates all too well. And I frowned upon using data from propoganda sites, from either side. Even though AGI may be considered a PC organization, the methods they use for data collection and studies are pretty good and I find them to hold very little bias (IE withholding information if it is unfavorable or shouting triumph if it is favorable.) They just report what they get.
And, I do understand your concern. AGI can only work with the data given and relate any issues that might come with the data…which they do. The good thing is that the NY numbers can be challenged because it sounds like some fraud is going on. OTOH, it is sometimes hard to get an investigation going. The question becomes, does every clinic commit fraud? I do not think so. I have seen and known of doctors that lie. A former personal doctor of mine was a prescription drug dealer that had a network of doctors under his thumb. He went to jail, thank goodness.
A know of a former dentist, sadly, that raped his clients. He also went to jail.
There’s a lot of shady crap that can happen in the medical field. This does not cause me to distrust all doctors, or distrust stats on medications because I know fraud and illegal activity can and have occurred. I don’t put abortion doctors to any additonal scruitiny than any other doctor. But, that is because I see abortion as the medical procedure it is. You do not see it the same way.
“I look at all of that, see how they are all in bed together (as they say), and realize that it’s perfectly reasonable to conclude the 41% number was a fabrication to normalize abortion.”
Which was exactly my point when I said, “Abortion providers gain nothing from underplaying the number or abortions they actually perform, because one could argue that fewer women are seeking abortion as a viable option and society doesn’t really need it. That would be devastating to the clinics’ bottom line, if clinics that provided abortion only cared about making a buck.”
You said it is not that simple…but, at least according to what’s going on in NY, that’s exactly the school of thought. If a clinic is going to lie about numbers, they are going to pad the numbers so there is an appearance of “need”. They aren’t going to show reductions year after year after year, if all they cared about was breaking bread.
Higher numbers would have to justify all the costs of getting rid of dead baby parts…. If they can just throw them out into the trash – there is more profit to be gained.
There are also cash transactions that don’t go reported – because many people don’t want to be associated in any way with the abortion – or want anyone to ever find out about it… which gets back to another commenter mentioning the IRS….
if I have a cash transaction for $700 where I don’t have to report it and can toss the remains in the trash to maximize profit…..
You know the bastion of truthyness which is PP (underage reporting/mammograms/sex trafficking) – who happens to be the largest provider of abortions – let alone all the smaller practices – like Brigham – who owned and operated up to 15 facilities and was killing babies after the abortions didn’t take…… Oh yeah I believe them alright…..
As there is more and more outrage over abortion (more people have become prolife – and there are a majority of fence-sitters who don’t believe abhortion is right – except for case of incest, rape, the health of the mother – or they would never have one but they will never tell anyone what to do – will come to their senses)
It would make sense for abortion providers to show that abortions are only being done in extreme cases to placate the fence sitters – which probably nmake up about 80% of those labeled pro-choice – since their base has been eroding over time….. you know science showing that they are babies after all……
Hi AMC,
So, which one is it? Are clinics padding the numbers or downplaying the numbers?
And, clinic have/do report sex trafficking. Remember the so called pro-lifers that lied and said they were sex workers in an attempt to show PP were evil liars that got caught up because….the clinic reported them. A few bad workers doesn’t make the whole lot bad. Just like not all of those against abortion rights are liars that will do whatever it takes to prove a point.
Hi Chris
Long time – It seems that they were padding numbers to make the public accept it – and are now downplaying the numbers to keep the dwindling fence-sitters happy. But either way – they really aren’t telling the truth.
If you stand for nothing – you fall for anything. (Not you – the fence sitters)
As far as reporting – you mean a “few” good eggs does not make the whole lot good. There were a disproportionate amount of those who swept it under the rug, versus those that reported it…. but at least the employees had the decency to not lie about the mammograms they don’t do.
But according to Edward and many Prochoice advocates – yes, yes it does…… or why else throw the pedophile priest out there as an argument against life (again not you – but you’ve seen it countless times)
Also – doesn’t PP fudge their numbers… for %’s you know by handing out a box of condoms (or pills) and counting it as 12 (or 28) instances of contraceptive services. You know to make the numbers look better as a health care clinic and not an abortion mill. hmmmmmm
But you can go ahead and believe all their stories – you know that abortions don’t affect women, and it’s just a blob of cells… pick and choose which ones are lies and which ones aren’t……
“Think of the abortionist who was not the brightest bulb in the ceiling in medical school, who has washed out of pulmonology, oncology, pediatrics, etc… and has endured the ridicule from his/her peers (which is seering and brutal). Abortion is the last stop for these people. It is hard to impress upon such a person the intrinsic value of the baby when they have little sense of their own intrinsic value.”
Sure, they’ve made their deal with the devil, but why?
AMC,
What proof do you have that a majority of clinics lie? How did you come across the information that a “dispprortionate amount” of clinics lie? After all, this whole topic is about sound information and data collection.
Your comments take me back to the last bit of my original comment. “To say we should not bring facts to the table leaves absolutely nothing but speculation, emotional appeal and outright lies.”
Hmmm..
“To say we should not bring facts to the table leaves absolutely nothing but speculation, emotional appeal and outright lies.”
Brings to mind a famous quote – “Lies, damned lies, and statistics”
So what are the facts.
Life begins at conception – brought to you by science.
End of discussion then.
End of discussion no one is having and is irrelevant ? If the unborn was not alive there would be nothing to abort nor give birth to. But, whatever floats your boat, AMC.
Chris,
I always liked that you were sincere in your discussion, and you truly did seem to want to think about ways to reduce abortion.
So, if we just take statistics off the table because I’m irreparably hung up against them for this issue…
What reasonable suggestions do you have for reducing abortion?
I’ll give mine.
I don’t like the discussion of either CSE or AOSE in public schools. I find I’m actually against both because, simply, I wouldn’t want my own children to have any adult in a classroom setting talking to them about such intimate and private matters.
I also would not give my child (although my parents did to me, but they were going along with the times and I don’t fault them at all) contraception. It’s like saying, “Here, this is the responsible thing to do if you can’t be responsible in the first place.” I want to do better.
So — what I’m left with is the huge, but really natural, responsibility of teaching them to value themselves, to save themselves and control themselves for the one they marry, to know their worth as boys and girls and future men and women.
I already know that it doesn’t always work out perfectly, but over time if a parent holds FIRM to this, the child will find his or her way. They need that light in the storm.
Thoughts?
Chris,
This is what I’m talking about too.
Teen Births at Record Low Thanks to Improvements in Contraceptive Use
http://www.guttmacher.org/media/inthenews/2012/04/11/index.html
Thoughts?
Maybe it should have been end of discussion?
Yes – “Why kill an unborn child?” – what facts can one bring to the table to allow for the killing of an unborn child?
Every argument to end the life of an unborn child becomes an emotional ploy. They talk about quality of life, or viable life or potential life. Maybe it’s to talk about the baby as a problem, or a parasite. Maybe it’s the baby is just a blob of cells, doesn’t feel pain, has no real thoughts (is unaware of self) Maybe it’s to spare the baby from living a possibly miserable life?????
Where are the facts.
Seems to me that Prolifers start with the fact that life starts at conception and then have to discuss emotional issues with the PCers who have decided to take that emotional route….or the PCers use “Lies, damned lies, and statistics” to prove their position but claim any numbers the prolifers use are just that “Lies, damned lies, and statistics”
Isn’t Stacy just pointing that out – that in order to fight the Lies, damned lies, and statistics – we have to highlight them using the same numbers……
AGAIN – MSM is so liberaly biased that it is using “statistics” to convince the fence sitters to not continue leaving in droves…..
PC have done nothing to refute the claims of Lila Rose except to call her a liar or a cheat, or that there are only a few bad apples – isn’t that what a statistical analysis is…… or does it mean that we found the only bad apples in the bunch…. come on…. that’s a bit disingenuous.
If you put a small amount of doubt in a fence sitters mind – that’s all it takes to keep them… because no one who has taken the hippocratic oath could possibly be that awful as to look the other way, or to kill babies born alive, sell body parts…….
AMC,
You said the discussion was over. If you want to discuss abortion (right/wrong) I am sure there will be another topic for that. In the meantime, you are certain you are correct, so I will leave you with your belief and continue my discussion with Stacy about statistics and pregnancy/abortion prevention involving teens.
Stacy,
My main focus has always been reducing unplanned pregnancy. Let me be clear I am talking about my personal experience. I have found that many approaches work.
I am not against sex education in schools. Again, from my personal experience, not all parents will talk candidly with their kids about the basic biology of sex, much less go beyond “don’t do it” or “I don’t care as long as you don’t bring a baby home”. I want to go beyond the teens. I want there to be a way for parents to understand how important talking to their children about sex and sexual relations really is. I do not think parenting classes are offered enough and rarely go beyond getting a parent past the first few years. I wouldn’t go as far as mandating parenting classes, but I think being offered by schools/houses of worship would go a long way.
But, what about the teens now? I do think it is possible to have a comprehensive sex education course that is informational with as little bias as possible. The good thing about sex ed is that you can always opt your child out. As a parent, you can also review all the material to make sure you agree with it and can supplement what is being taught as the child goes through the class. As I mentioned earlier, information is powerful…and parents are powerful. Schools and parents should work together, IMHO.
What tore me and my mother apart was a lack of communication. I tried to talk to her about sex, but she would not have it. All she would say is “keep ‘em closed”. I wanted to confide in my mother, but she was either unwilling or uncomfortable with discussing anything with me. What if my mother had talked to me? Offered me information on contraception? Talked to me about WHY waiting was important…how different would things have turned out?
Because of my personal experience, I do not feel the availability of contraception gives a mixed-message, at least for me. My message is: Protected sex is responsible. Waiting is even more responsible. I would teach my child to wait until they were an adult in a long-term, monogamous relationship, but if she were 16 and old me she was engaging in activity, would I deny her contraceptives…knowing what the outcome could be? I don’t think I could.
“So — what I’m left with is the huge, but really natural, responsibility of teaching them to value themselves, to save themselves and control themselves for the one they marry, to know their worth as boys and girls and future men and women.”
And I really think at the end of the day, that’s all we can do. I just wish more people would focus on teaching young women and men their WORTH. It kills me to see these young girls basically prostituting themselves for attention. I want to grab them by the shoulders and shake them and say, “DON’T YOU KNOW YOU ARE WORTH MORE THAN THIS?!” But, then you see how her parent(s) act, behave and allow the girl to act and you immediately realize that no, they don’t know…because the people that are supposed to love them most don’t give a rat’s rear.
So, I don’t think we are really going to agree with how to prevent pregnancy outside of agreeing that it all starts at home. Strong, united parents that are not afraid to talk to their kids truthfully, candidly and often. I think it’s a good start.
So, let’s discuss the link.
From the website:
“The most recent decline in teen births can be linked almost exclusively to improvements in teens’ contraceptive use, according to data from another CDC survey, the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG). The NSFG interviewed a nationally representative sample of teens from June 2006 to June 2008, and again from July 2008 to July 2010. While there was no significant change over those years in the overall proportion of females aged 15–19 who were sexually experienced or engaging in sexual activity, there was a dramatic shift in teen contraceptive use.
Analyzing the NSFG data, Guttmacher researchers found an increase in teens’ use of any contraceptive method, in their use of the most effective methods and in their use of dual methods (condoms and hormonal methods simultaneously). Specifically, hormonal contraceptives were used by 37% of sexually active teens in 2006–2008 and by 47% in 2008–2010, while use of highly effective long-acting reversible contraceptive methods such as the IUD increased from 1.4% to 4.4%. Dual method use rose from 16% to 23%”
Sounds good on the surface. However, you know me, I wanted to look at the study/data itself. There is no direct link to it. I tried finding it on the CDC and all I got was a bunch of summary tables. So, as a statistician, I find this extremely disappointing reporting. Clearly from a statistical perspective, I would not be blazing this link without having the study to back it up. I wouldn’t be comfortable doing that and I will express my concern about it.
For me, these types of (data) issues have absolutely nothing to do with PL or PC. It is either sound or it is not. I will neither give a pass nor undue scrutiny because the information may be favorable or unfavorable, (depending on your perspective). I don’t know if this has served to my benefit or detriment.
Hello Stacy.
I’d like to challenge you to a debate on your blog as to whether Jesus existed or not. You argue for and I against. As it is your blog, and you are a lady too, I will let you go first.
First, AMC was just saying that unless we start with this fact:
Life begins at conception – brought to you by science.
End of discussion then.
There’s no point in discussing anything else. I know you get that Chris, but a LOT of young (and not so young) people today just will argue that this is not a fact. It gets frustrating to us. I don’t think he meant that personally directed at you, it’s just a straightforward statement.
Tim
Haha. I just saw that.
Yes, we can do that. I’ll set up a post, but it’ll have to wait a few weeks because I’m going to be very busy writing theology papers.
Can you give me a reminder in a week or so? Thanks!
That is correct.
Otherwise Chris, I enjoy your conversations with Stacy.
Welcome.
Chris,
To the first part: ” I want there to be a way for parents to understand how important talking to their children about sex and sexual relations really is.”
I agree with so much of what you said. This is, for me, one area where my conversion to Catholicism was so profound. The respect, dignity and worth are infused in everything parents are taught about raising children. We are taught that there is a huge responsibility to teach catechize children (teach them about God) and why they have worth and why they have freedom only by being obedient to God’s rules. I’ve seen it work with my little children, and I remember how badly I failed my older children when I didn’t understand these things.
Like you said though, it takes generations to change. I advocate for the legal stuff, but my greatest contribution to the future is hopefully in these children I’m raising. It is my vocation, my purpose. As hard as it is, I have found great peace and joy in ordering my priorities this way.
But yes, I wish all parents saw their children for the gifts that they are. It is heartbreaking at times. Even though I will make mistakes (and I have and I do and I will) I know I’m getting the big stuff right. Maybe your mom did the best she could, and I’m sure she’d do things differently if she could too.
Anyway…look who she raised? You seem pretty alright to me!
Chris,
I agree with you about Guttmacher’s analysis. I tried to find the study too. But even if we take it as true that more teens used contraception, it isn’t a fact that this is the cause of lower teen births. I know — you get it. I get upset with Guttmacher for doing this because then at the end they tie in the political message.
If more teens are using contraception so they can have sex all they want, then I am very concerned that more teens may actually also be having abortions. They’re kids, for crying out loud.
AMC,
Our time for debate will come soon. I feel it, LOL. I like to stay on topic as much as possible.
I also apologize if I have confused you with someone else. There was another AMC I debated with on FB and assumed you were one in the same.
Stacy,
Thanks for your kind words. We may not agree on a lot, but I think what you, I …and most people can agree on is that we cannot fail our kids. Our methods may vary, but no matter what religion (or lack thereof) a family might be, there are commonalities between good parents and good families. It starts with teaching and practicing RESPECT. Respect yourself. Respect others. Be kind. Be mindful. Be truthful. Stick together.
It doesn’t seem that because teen are using more contraception they are having more relations. They are having about the same amount of relations but using contracpetion more often. Now, what is thet “same” amount…we won’t know until we get the study. I’m going to email AGI and ask them to provide it.
I think that brings us full circle, LOL.
Hi Chris,
Currently, the one and only.
Also – Stacy ahs an excellent post on the math used in contraception failure rates. A very good read.
http://www.acceptingabundance.com/mathematical-proof-that-birth-control-fails/
AMC,
Geez, reading that was like being in class again. Thx. I’ll drop a comment over there.
Abortion
I think statistics at their base level are simply a very useful tool, which can either support or not a particular outcome or hypothesis.
When it comes to using statistics in determining or influencing social policy I think they can contribute something to any discussion. I would always want all information available and included, otherwise we run the risk of missing something. Granted the more information can sometimes lead to more confusion, but as stated better to have and peer review and even then discount it, than not have it at all.
However we obviously have to be on guard and not to fall into the confirmation bias trap, in justifying our own preferred options. I agree the general populous have quite low ability in analysis techniques and this coupled with bad journalism and sensationalism causes great problems with public perception.
Social policy can become a sliding scale, with each one of us trying to find where we feel comfortable on that scale. The scale may also be different from country to country, depending on the socio/political/religious protocols that may exist.
Let’s take one culture: Typically generic, say a developing nation where teenage women have arranged marriages and childbirth is usually in wedlock through arranged marriages, with many marriages producing typically large families increasing global population. Let put aside for the moment that many issues arise like girls been killed due to social pressure preferring boys, let’s also assume that the abortion rate is very low. Therefore for all tense and purpose in our discussion one could make the claim that this culture works very well and although the women in this society have very little say in their role, with reference to abortion the end justifies the mean!
Let’s take another culture say: Typically generic, say a western European country, where freedom in social policy and welfare facilities have ironically increased abortion rates and declining family size. As regards abortion it could be considered that this culture has failed terribly on the abortion issue.
Granted the above examples are gross over simplifications.
However abortion I think is an unfortunate bi-product of society. The first culture stated will likely develop into the second type, through the so called ‘civilising process’.
It is odd that we consider death in animals acceptable and we happily kill/eat meat, undertake euthanasia or terminate unwanted offspring without much concern. I wonder if it turns out that certain animals do have perceived higher consciousness and language abilities we will change our views/relationships on this?
Certainly the issue of time periods for abortion is controversial and when we look at a foetus of 20 weeks plus it is difficult to not to invoke the emotion of empathy or loss.
I believe that science coupled with education are the only alternatives we really have and we will have to continue to live with a certain level of abortion in the meantime, it seems the price we will have to pay for having freer societies. Its seems that the female of our species is caught between a rock and a hard place, where society wants to continually dictate whether they truly do have dominion over their bodies. Even removing the teenage pregnancy element form the equation, we are still left with so called adults having to make difficult decisions and for me as a male, there is something unpalatable about telling women about absolutes. This is more about actions and consequences……………causality in its cruellest form, where the females in particular will have to come to terms with the hard decision to terminate.
As I know that you are religious and I do not wish to overtly offend, for me the universe is both cruel and beautiful and we are surrounded by the cycle of life and death. If there was an omnipotent being, then to allow its creation to have a fundamentally flawed reproduction system in the first place seems a little perverse?
As a bi- question and slightly off topic, may I ask how you came to choose the Catholic faith? Why not Jainism? Just curious?
Interesting post!
Peace & love
-1′