Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You're implying that we ought to kill off the "undesirables" in order to keep the poverty rate low?
How about allowing more education in school system on sex education and the importance of family planning, and allowing 16 and 17 year old girls access to birth control, and the availability of condoms in high schools..?? Oh no! Not in conservative Mississippi, even if it means lowering the abortion rate significantly.
What part was confusing about what I said? If you want me to get political in my response, I can. Like I said - I'm fine with the parasites of society choosing to kill their would-be children all because they don't want to take responsibility for their decisions in life.
What about doctors' or lawyers' wives, senators' or oil company CEOs' daughters, etc.? OK with those choosing to kill their zygotes, too?
Don't be preposterous! Doctors, lawyers, senators, and Oil Company CEOs (or their wives or daughters) don't have "abortions". They definitely would have never demeaned themselves by crawling through the picket lines of screaming anti-abortion protestors and counter-protestors at the Pink House.
No, they feel "under the weather" and take a trip to visit friends or family in a different state. Or they schedule an appointment with a private doctor who is a family friend and willing to help out with "a little menstrual cycle problem".
None of this changes with the recent SCOTUS ruling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscAlaMike
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9162
Yes, be prepared for Mississippi’s poverty rate to climb.
You're implying that we ought to kill off the "undesirables" in order to keep the poverty rate low?
No one is implying that, so just stop being obtuse.
Statistically, wealthy people have access to better birth control information and options so have fewer unintended pregnancies. If they go through with the pregnancy, they have the money to support and care for the child after it's born and have access to child care so they can continue to work or go to school.
Now, wealthy people still have enough money to travel to a state where abortion is allowed, or access to private doctors (see above).
Statistically, poorer people are generally less educated and have more unintended pregnancies. A unplanned pregnancy can destroy a young woman's potential climb out of poverty. They have to drop out of school or stop working to care for it, go on welfare, and drop deeper into poverty.
And now, because they don't have access to travel money or private doctors, there will be more poor people giving birth. In a state where taxation is considered "theft" and people on welfare are considered to "leaches" or even less than human.
Allowing full access to all forms of birth control, including early-term abortion, potentially allows a poor young woman to continue school or work. She can choose to wait until she's more financially stable and/or married and can raise a child properly. Or allows a mother of 3 already stretched too thin because minimum-wage jobs just don't pay the bills to avoid having a 4th child.
Eliminating abortion will raise Mississippi's poverty rate.
I wonder what will happen. I hope the government is ready to keep track of additional deaths, abandoned babies, abused children, and more welfare cases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suesbal
You already have those problems with abortion.
But the numbers will explode exponentially, with so many unwanted babies, neglected children, delinquent teenagers.
But the numbers will explode exponentially, with so many unwanted babies, neglected children, delinquent teenagers.
Nah. Won't make a darned bit of difference.
The responsibility of protecting yourself is back where it should be - the participants themselves. There were about 2500 abortions/year in Mississippi, and not all of them to Mississippi residents. Some people were careless because there was always abortion available.
As it is, the law bans abortion in all cases except where the mother’s life is in danger or a rape that’s been reported to law enforcement. We're hearing lots of nonsense from lots of uninformed people about birth control, but it'll get worked out.
Not all unintended pregnancies result in neglected children. Many. many of us were unplanned and we turned out just fine. It just meant our parents never got to take that hitchhiking trip across Europe after high school, that's all.
Is anyone else struck by the general superiority and haughtiness of those who believe that abortions, if not done, will result in poor desperate mothers with unwanted, uncared for children?
I looked up "Who get abortions". I was surprised:
* Half of the roughly 1.2 million U.S. women who have abortions each year are 25 or older. Only about 17 percent are teens. About 60 percent have given birth to least one child prior to getting an abortion.
* Mississippi is probably typical in that a disproportionately high number of patients are black or Hispanic.
My own feeling is that a lot of young women continue with their education after getting an abortion. Would having a child relegate them to poverty?... I dunno. I sort of doubt it since they come from middle class families and poverty is, for the most part, inherited.
The "Get ready for an increase in poverty" crowd needs to rethink their position.
Is anyone else struck by the general superiority and haughtiness of those who believe that abortions, if not done, will result in poor desperate mothers with unwanted, uncared for children?
I looked up "Who get abortions". I was surprised:
* Half of the roughly 1.2 million U.S. women who have abortions each year are 25 or older. Only about 17 percent are teens. About 60 percent have given birth to least one child prior to getting an abortion.
* Mississippi is probably typical in that a disproportionately high number of patients are black or Hispanic.
My own feeling is that a lot of young women continue with their education after getting an abortion. Would having a child relegate them to poverty?... I dunno. I sort of doubt it since they come from middle class families and poverty is, for the most part, inherited.
The "Get ready for an increase in poverty" crowd needs to rethink their position.
In the end, none of that matters. Who gets one, why they get one, what happens afterwards...
In the end, none of that matters. Who gets one, why they get one, what happens afterwards...
Bottom line, "My body, My choice".
That nonsensical phrase has been used so often there are people who believe it actually makes sense.
It doesn't.
One of the things a pregnant woman will claim is that "Now she is eating for two". If a pregnant woman is murdered and her unborn infant dies, the killer is charged for that death, too. Nearly all states regulate the time when the unborn child can no longer be terminated, so at some point it no longer is just "the mother's body".
The bottom line is "State's choice". Every state will be a little different. The reason it matters who gets an abortion is because the answer to that question is a response to those who declare poverty will worsen in Mississippi because abortions are outlawed.
It seems pretty clear that the poverty rate will remain unchanged by outlawing abortions.
That nonsensical phrase has been used so often there are people who believe it actually makes sense. It doesn't.
One of the things a pregnant woman will claim is that "Now she is eating for two". If a pregnant woman is murdered and her unborn infant dies, the killer is charged for that death, too. Nearly all states regulate the time when the unborn child can no longer be terminated, so at some point it no longer is just "the mother's body".
The bottom line is "State's choice". Every state will be a little different.
First, only extremists believe it's a "choice" up until birth / first breath. The vast majority of pro-choice people agree with parameters of the original RvW decision: It's the woman's choice up until the point where the fetus is externally viable. This was the law for centuries before the Catholic Church started getting laws passed in the mid 1800's. Except then it was defined as the "quickening", which is when the mother can first feel the fetus move. Even current Mississippi law only allows civil compensation for the death of a fetus after quickening ("unborn quick child"). (Miss. Code Ann. § 11-7-13)
Arguing that all "pro choice" people want the ability to have an abortion up until just before birth is like anti-gunners arguing that all pro-2A people believe all criminals and wife-beaters have the right to drive a loaded M1Abrams tank on public roads.
Second, if someone kills a "pre-born child" they can be charged with a crime, but the punishment is significantly less than that for murdering a "born human" (Miss. Code Ann. § 97-3-37), and civil compensation is only allowed after viability (see link first paragraph). Pregnant women aren't eligible for tax deductions, child support payments, or extra SNAP benefits (so no "eating for two"). Pregnant women can't use HOV lanes.
Third, in reality every female in existence instantly becomes "pro choice" when that extra line shows up on the pee-stick at a bad time. Just broke up with the boyfriend; just found out the husband has been having an affair; in high school; was raped; just got laid off at work; 40-years-old, already have kids, and cannot go through the pain again, etc.
Every. Single. One. No exceptions.
Maybe they "choose" to carry the child to term, maybe they don't. But they will have an internal debate and they will make a choice.
I know multiple women who currently portray themselves as anti-abortion, but who have had abortions, or who have driven a friend/child to have an abortion. Their mental gymnastics on how their situation was different can be mind-boggling.
The reason it matters who gets an abortion is because the answer to that question is a response to those who declare poverty will worsen in Mississippi because abortions are outlawed.
It seems pretty clear that the poverty rate will remain unchanged by outlawing abortions.
Poverty will not "grow exponentially", but forcing additional unwanted births on ~0.1% of the Mississippi population every year will apply upward pressure to the poverty rate. Earlier I said this decision "will increase the poverty rate", but I need to retract that because this is just one factor in a state with an abhorrent history of dealing with poverty. Whether this decision will result in a statistically meaningful increase to the poverty rate is unknown.
Except to the actual women... to them it's definitely statistically meaningful.
Last edited by An Einnseanair; 07-10-2022 at 11:41 AM..
And like I said, living through “mistreatment” for me was far better than being killed in utero. I was poor, I was unwanted, I was beat constantly till I left home at 18.
Because I was unwanted I didn’t deserve to live? I and my family and friends now disagree. So the goal is to have less unwanted children around? There are many who are waiting to adopt babies. More than are available. Problem solved.
If you are religious and believe in the existence of a soul, then your mother's decision to abort or not is irrelevant to whether you would have been able to live. If she had aborted her pregnancy, then your soul, or "you", would have simply gone to another body. "You" would still have had the opportunity to live no matter what.
The "soul enters at conception" types baffle me. Approximately 50% of all fertilized human eggs don't make it to full birth (fail to implant, ectopic, miscarriage, still birth, etc.). They believe God "murders" 50% of all human souls that are created. This does not match up to the "good" God I believe in.
There are hundreds of thousands of frozen embryos abandoned in fertility clinics in the USA alone. Do all of these contain full human souls? Should they be discarded? Should they remain frozen forever (or until an unplanned power outage)? Should they be forcibly implanted into the original mother, even if she's in her 60's?
On the other hand if you are a strict atheist and believe that "you" are the random firings of the billions of neurons in your head and will simply cease to exist when you die, and your belief is correct, then "you" would have never existed had your mother aborted her pregnancy. But then, if she had done anything differently at all while pregnant, the baby's neuron patterns would have been slightly different and "you" would have likewise not existed. Consumed alcohol or drugs while pregnant, had sex in a different position affecting which sperm made it to the egg, had sex at a slightly different time of day, etc. Using this belief, the fact you exist at all is an astronomically astounding feat of random chance. Whether your mother has an abortion or not is just one of a billion-billion factors affecting that existence.
Last edited by An Einnseanair; 07-10-2022 at 11:54 AM..
That nonsensical phrase has been used so often there are people who believe it actually makes sense.
It doesn't.
I think it makes perfect sense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
