for those against abortion

[Lark]

I think a lot of people will agree with you, but getting through the legislation process is a killer. There are or were some similar bills here in the US, but things haven't worked out yet.

It'd be a simpler process in the UK, the decided to immunise the female population against cervical cancer, a sort which I dont think is that contractable by a sexually inactive population, it was being rolled out to an age group which included school girls and there only the very mildest of opposition along the lines of "what are you possibly suggesting?". I'm sure it has already saved the NHS a complete and utter fortune.

 

[5231311252]

Yes, I am a dirty baby killer. Tremble before me.

I support abortion for utilitarian reasons, myself. The kind of mother most likely to abort a child is the kind of mother we as a society shouldn't want raising children anyway.

And this one is?

 

[Aleksei]

This is a matter of education -- that sex does not equal children IF YOU TAKE PRECAUTIONS. But taking precautions is counseled against through various channels and besides, aside from condoms which nobody likes to use, it's hard to get birth control unless you have a free clinic nearby (and funding has been reduced).

This is all true and I'm in support of all of it, but education can only go so far. The kind of people likely to end up in those kinds of situations are generally idiots and won't listen.

 

[Aleksei]

And this one is?

Hell no. That woman should have been made to abort.

I happen to not be pro-choice, in addition to not being pro-life.

 

[Tiltyred]

I agree they won't listen. It would take a major campaign over at least two generations. (I have given this a lot of thought.) And there is so much opposition to the idea that woman does not equal mother that maybe it will never change even IF.

 

[Lark]

I was a clerk in the Child Support Enforcement Office in Virginia Beach for 2 years. What I saw was poor people, that's all. The putative fathers didn't pay child support because they didn't have any money. They could barely make enough to support themselves, much less the children they fathered. People won't stop having sex, and many people regard children as the inevitable outcome of having sex, and take for granted they will have children whether they are married and prepared or not.

This is a matter of education -- that sex does not equal children IF YOU TAKE PRECAUTIONS. But taking precautions is counseled against through various channels and besides, aside from condoms which nobody likes to use, it's hard to get birth control unless you have a free clinic nearby (and funding has been reduced).

I don't think it does any good to blame the men for not paying child support. May as well blame the women for not using birth control.

And I'm not sure the segment of the population who are having the most trouble supporting their children are the ones who would use abortion clinics if they had them. If they were of the mindset that they should not have children because they could not afford them, they would have prevented conception in the first place.

To a certain extent I agree with you but I'm not sure "education" is sufficient anymore, are there really still people who dont properly know the risks of unprotected sex, or any of the other reckless, risk taking behaviours for that matter, we've reached saturation point really. At this point I'm more inclined to believe is a case of "I knew, I just didnt give a shit" as "I didnt know".

A hell of a lot of this is a problem of the poor, repeated generation after generation, people do things when they're in the adventurous, adolescent phase, or they dont grow out of that phase like everyone else and keep on doing them, either way they're stuck with the consequences. Being stuck with the consequences isnt proving enough of a disincentive either, most of the unwanted pregnancies are had by people who're not even 21yrs old yet, you dont even develop consequential thinking until then, some say until 23yrs in the western world (and its getting later still).

So I'd say the contraceptive implants for females which, in all but a small percentage of cases work for between five and ten years and do not have major health consequences, roll them out as mandatory to everyone, unless you exercise an opt out for whatever reason you or your parents. Roll it out to cover the years when most accidential pregnancies occur when people are physically mature but not any other way.

It'd save the taxpayer a fortune, surely its a pro-life measure because it prevents abortions, only a small group of those faith communities who still actively reject artificial contraception actually adher to and practice compliance with those guidelines but if they want to opt out let them. It's not the people who're thinking hard enough about their sexual health and decisions that we need to worry about its the people who forget or neglect or who're impulsive anyway.

 

[Tiltyred]

I think that is a GREAT idea and I would be solidly behind it if someone proposed it in the U.S. But it would never fly.

But I don't think the pregnancies are unwanted or even unexpected. I think there is a fatalism going on and a horrific lack of vision that has to be addressed, for women who cannot imagine what else they would do but have kids.

 

[Sparrow]

Free birth control pills for everyone!!!!!!!

 

[Aleksei]

To a certain extent I agree with you but I'm not sure "education" is sufficient anymore, are there really still people who dont properly know the risks of unprotected sex, or any of the other reckless, risk taking behaviours for that matter, we've reached saturation point really. At this point I'm more inclined to believe is a case of "I knew, I just didnt give a shit" as "I didnt know".

A hell of a lot of this is a problem of the poor, repeated generation after generation, people do things when they're in the adventurous, adolescent phase, or they dont grow out of that phase like everyone else and keep on doing them, either way they're stuck with the consequences. Being stuck with the consequences isnt proving enough of a disincentive either, most of the unwanted pregnancies are had by people who're not even 21yrs old yet, you dont even develop consequential thinking until then, some say until 23yrs in the western world (and its getting later still).

So I'd say the contraceptive implants for females which, in all but a small percentage of cases work for between five and ten years and do not have major health consequences, roll them out as mandatory to everyone, unless you exercise an opt out for whatever reason you or your parents. Roll it out to cover the years when most accidential pregnancies occur when people are physically mature but not any other way.

It'd save the taxpayer a fortune, surely its a pro-life measure because it prevents abortions, only a small group of those faith communities who still actively reject artificial contraception actually adher to and practice compliance with those guidelines but if they want to opt out let them. It's not the people who're thinking hard enough about their sexual health and decisions that we need to worry about its the people who forget or neglect or who're impulsive anyway.

This is just fucking brilliant.

Free birth control pills for everyone!!!!!!!

This is a good idea too.

 

[Randomnity]

To a certain extent I agree with you but I'm not sure "education" is sufficient anymore, are there really still people who dont properly know the risks of unprotected sex, or any of the other reckless, risk taking behaviours for that matter, we've reached saturation point really. At this point I'm more inclined to believe is a case of "I knew, I just didnt give a shit" as "I didnt know".

A hell of a lot of this is a problem of the poor, repeated generation after generation, people do things when they're in the adventurous, adolescent phase, or they dont grow out of that phase like everyone else and keep on doing them, either way they're stuck with the consequences. Being stuck with the consequences isnt proving enough of a disincentive either, most of the unwanted pregnancies are had by people who're not even 21yrs old yet, you dont even develop consequential thinking until then, some say until 23yrs in the western world (and its getting later still).

So I'd say the contraceptive implants for females which, in all but a small percentage of cases work for between five and ten years and do not have major health consequences, roll them out as mandatory to everyone, unless you exercise an opt out for whatever reason you or your parents. Roll it out to cover the years when most accidential pregnancies occur when people are physically mature but not any other way.

It'd save the taxpayer a fortune, surely its a pro-life measure because it prevents abortions, only a small group of those faith communities who still actively reject artificial contraception actually adher to and practice compliance with those guidelines but if they want to opt out let them. It's not the people who're thinking hard enough about their sexual health and decisions that we need to worry about its the people who forget or neglect or who're impulsive anyway.

This is a great idea. Too bad it probably wouldn't be passed, too many would cry oppression.

 

[Aleksei]

This is why we need a dictatorship, led by me.

 

[Arclight]

This is why we need a dictatorship, led by me.

I would assassinate you.

 

[Mole]

I used to be against abortion until I discovered that the number of spontaneous abortions far outweigh the number of induced abortions.

 

[Aleksei]

I would assassinate you.

You'd need to get to me first.

I used to be against abortion until I discovered that the number of spontaneous abortions far outweigh the number of induced abortions.

That's stupid. If you are against abortion, then you should support outlawing abortion as it results in less abortions being carried out regardless.

 

[Arclight]

You'd need to get to me first.



That's stupid. If you are against abortion, then you should support outlawing abortion as it results in less abortions being carried out regardless.

I wouldn't be alone.

 

[Aleksei]

I wouldn't be alone.

You should hope...

 

[Giggly]

To a certain extent I agree with you but I'm not sure "education" is sufficient anymore, are there really still people who dont properly know the risks of unprotected sex, or any of the other reckless, risk taking behaviours for that matter, we've reached saturation point really. At this point I'm more inclined to believe is a case of "I knew, I just didnt give a shit" as "I didnt know".

A hell of a lot of this is a problem of the poor, repeated generation after generation, people do things when they're in the adventurous, adolescent phase, or they dont grow out of that phase like everyone else and keep on doing them, either way they're stuck with the consequences. Being stuck with the consequences isnt proving enough of a disincentive either, most of the unwanted pregnancies are had by people who're not even 21yrs old yet, you dont even develop consequential thinking until then, some say until 23yrs in the western world (and its getting later still).

So I'd say the contraceptive implants for females which, in all but a small percentage of cases work for between five and ten years and do not have major health consequences, roll them out as mandatory to everyone, unless you exercise an opt out for whatever reason you or your parents. Roll it out to cover the years when most accidential pregnancies occur when people are physically mature but not any other way.

It'd save the taxpayer a fortune, surely its a pro-life measure because it prevents abortions, only a small group of those faith communities who still actively reject artificial contraception actually adher to and practice compliance with those guidelines but if they want to opt out let them. It's not the people who're thinking hard enough about their sexual health and decisions that we need to worry about its the people who forget or neglect or who're impulsive anyway.

I don't know about other countries but here in the US, these poor people that you speak of who are getting pregnant are also responsible for helping the US keep up with birthrates necessary to keep the population thriving. As you probably already know, the affluent have half as many children as the poor do, and that number is decreasing, mostly due to selfishness.. The goal of welfare is to help poor families [slowly, over a couple of generations if need be] break out of poverty and become productive taxpayers. The government will continue to make the affluent subsidize the poor ( through welfare taxes) as long as the affluent do not reproduce as often as the poor.

 

[Coriolis]

Blame the criminal, not the taxpayer.

It is not a matter of blame, but rather of attaining a desired goal, whether that be reducing crime, reducing abortions, or something else.

 

[Aleksei]

I don't know about other countries but here in the US, these poor people that you speak of who are getting pregnant are also responsible for helping the US keep up with birthrates necessary to keep the economy thriving. As you probably already know, the affluent have half as many children as the poor do, and that number is decreasing, mostly due to selfishness.. The goal of welfare is to help poor families [slowly, over a couple of generations if need be] break out of poverty and become productive taxpayers. The government will continue to make the affluent subsidize the poor ( through welfare taxes) as long as the affluent do not reproduce as often as the poor.

Why would high birthrates be necessary for a thriving economy? What's more why would dysgenic high birthrates (such as poor people having more kids than rich people) be good?

 

[highlander]

Why would high birthrates be necessary for a thriving economy? What's more why would dysgenic high birthrates (such as poor people having more kids than rich people) be good?

Growth in people = growth in productivity = growth in the economy. If the birthrate doesn't increase fast enough, growth slows down.