Who Here Are Old Enough to Remember Back Alley Abortions?

If those "tertiary educations, good jobs, married and in a stable relationship" women choose/agree to have abortion, then they are still ignorant, at least for not using an appropriate contraception method (also the fault being bigger for those who can afford to have the child (those with enough wealth)).

 

Oh! Dear Oh1 Dear Oh! Dear

Tell me you do not believe that contraception is 100% effective?


When contraceptive methods are ranked by effectiveness over the first 12 months of use (corrected for abortion underreporting), the implant and injectables have the lowest failure rates (2-4%), followed by the pill (9%), the diaphragm and the cervical cap (13%), the male condom (15%), periodic abstinence (22%), withdrawal (26%) and spermicides (28%). In general, failure rates are highest among cohabiting and other unmarried women, among those with an annual family income below 200% of the federal poverty level, among black and Hispanic women, among adolescents and among women in their 20s. For example, adolescent women who are not married but are cohabiting experience a failure rate of about 47% in the first year of contraceptive use, while the 12-month failure rate among married women aged 30 and older is only 8%. Black women have a contraceptive failure rate of about 20%, and this rate does not vary by family income; in contrast, overall 12-month rates are lower among Hispanic women (16%) and white women (11%), but vary by income, with poorer women having substantially greater failure rates than more affluent women.
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3105699.html

And still there is this tendency to demonise women having abortions as "sluts, ignorant, stupid"

This is such an intellectually lazy course of action because it allows one to form an opinion without thinking the entire problem through fully

Now once again I ask - how terrified would a woman have to be to undergo a back alley abortion?

 

On the same page/URL you quoted is mentioned as a conclusion:
"Levels of contraceptive failure vary widely by method, as well as by personal and background characteristics. Income's strong influence on contraceptive failure suggests that access barriers and the general disadvantage associated with poverty seriously impede effective contraceptive practice in the United States."

However, those small percents of contraceptive failures (also the number of abortions), will become much smaller when people will get better education, and I keep my opinion that a "contraceptive failure" must NOT end with an abortion, especially for those who have enough wealth.

 

I am glad you read it - but it is only a statistical reduction not a complete reduction. Short of surgical intervention there is no guaranteed method of contraception. And a pregnancy from failed contraception is most often an UNWANTED pregnancy

So, who will be the arbiter of that decision about the unwanted pregnancy? Who defines if someone has "enough wealth"? The woman might be the only breadwinner for the family - does that mean she has to go through with the pregnancy and risk losing her family through loss of income and home?

And one more time I ask

How terrified must a woman be to face having to go to a backyard abortionist?

 

I can tell how evil must a woman be to choose/agree to have an abortion, because she cares to little about life generally, not only about her own unborn yet child's life (having sex just for pleasure, or/and for other interests, knowing and ignoring the possibility of an unwanted pregnancy);
If an unwanted pregnancy happened, then just start loving your child, and you will find the resources to raise him (you may need to work more but it will deserve).
Regarding those who cannot afford to have the child, they must use combined contraceptive methods, and more abstinence (to avoid unwanted pregnancy).

 

Roe was decided by a Republican majority. The Casey decision that affirmed it in 1992 was also decided by a Republican majority court.

 

Sorry but this is a declaration of your beliefs not an answer
You are making it sound like women are intentionally getting pregnant just so they can "kill" the child.

So I will state it again -

A woman finds herself pregnant and she has the choice - have the child or go to a back alley abortionist and risk her life and her health and maybe all ability for future reproduction

So, given that choice what is so terrifying that she would choose the abortionist?

How much do waitresses get paid in the states? And of course you have paid maternity leave over there do you not? Baby friendly workplaces where women can bring babies and have a place to breast feed? Federally funded "baby bonus" of $3000 to assist with the cost of a new born - no? Well, we have all of that and we STILL have a high abortion rate

I have already proven to you that there are only a couple of "certain" contraceptives, so are we going to dictate when and how people have sex?

Obviously we are - lols!!

So, how are you going to enforce this dictate?

Strap all women's legs together?

Better yet - why don't we force sterilise all men? Let them bank sperm first of course and then they can go out and earn enough to raise a child. When they make let us say $40,000 then they can sign a declaration saying they will support the child that is the result of impregnation with their sperm

 

I have never suggested such things (maybe you did not read carefully my messages).

For you, such a crime, is not terrifying enough?

You are exaggerating again, while it is nothing wrong with the suggestion/recommendation of using more/combined contraceptive methods.

The sterilization (for both men and women) is a personal choice of each individual, if/when to choose such permanent contraceptive method.
About the enough amount of money to raise a child, it is not so big as you think, while many highly educated people, are coming from average or quite poor families (those with more money having the tendency to act like parasites, remaining less educated).
Also I know that most good/educated men will loose their thrust into a women who choose/agree to have an abortion, and may prefer to stay away from her, having a high probability to consider her as an "easy women", even when she is not.

 

And again you have failed to answer - focussing instead on the fact that these women are "criminal" and "killing" instead of looking at WHY they would make such a choice

But then pro-lifers never want to look at that because they might find an answer they do not like

And how are you going to encourage that? Good luck with getting more men to take responsibility - we know they will not because of the disparity between female contraceptives and male

No, men who want to control a womans choice will often want to control other aspects of her life. Such men do not deserve to reproduce

And force sterilisations are going to the the only way you will get way you will get the control of fertility you seem to be calling for.

 

From your messages it seems that you have met mostly bad (insufficient educated) men. Unfortunately, most women are also insufficient educated.
Conclusion: As I mentioned already, not only regarding abortion, but also regarding the human behavior generally, our lack of education is the main cause of all bad things.

 

Sorry but you are using what can only be called appallingly bad grammar to chide me on my education level?

LOL!!!

 

I am sure that my English, as a foreign language, is still good enough for everyone to understand my messages, so that please do not add wrong meanings, while I never tried to chide you.

 

The whole question is muddled by self-righteousness. A great many young women faced with pregnancy were in the past, and are now, desperate, and if the slavers have their way, a great many will kill themselves in attempts to induce abortion. That is a fact, and anyone who had even the beginnings of any sensitivity at all would know it. The argument is about choice, and the problem with the slaver's notion of the world is that they want to prevent women from having control of their own bodies. The record of the slavers in providing decent lives for those they insist of forcing birth on is hardly reassuring, is it: their victims fill their prisons and buy their drugs. What a glorious thing to extend these delights to yet more desperate people!

 

Too bad your sensibilties were offended.

That photo was published in a main line newspaper. As a product of it's time, it shows exactly how women suffer from draconian laws when abortion not safe and legal.

 

My grandmother, who was a 40 something in 1925 found herself pregnant.

She already had two sons, one was 11 years old and the other one was 19 and about to get married.

She went to a doctor who didn't know her, someone in a different neighborhood, in a state of panic and distress because she was I suppose, distressed and embarrassed to be pregnant at her age and circumstance.

The doctor said to her, "YOU ARE NOT MARRIED?" Of course, she was married, but the pregnancy was an inconvenient one.

Nine months later, my mother was born and, as they say, the rest is history. Should I be happy that abortion wasn't a legal or moral choice?

Well, I am glad to be on the planet, but truthfully, change of life babies were frequently born to those women of the day. If my grandmother hadn't been forced to "choose life", I wouldn't be here and I wouldn't know the difference, as it were, anyway,

My grandmother loved her daughter, my mom, RIP, very much and grew up with her niece, later on, after her brother had a daughter from a second wife, when my mother was about 5 years old. They both had red hair and looked like sisters.

The irony is that my mother's brother's first wife, had died when she was in childbirth!!!!

Having babies, back then, was a dangerous endeavor and to some extent, still is.

 

Funny thing is, in rather similar circumstances, the doctors tried to push abortion on us, and we weren't having any. Like so many others, what we believe in is choice.

 

Realistic thinking tells me to source out the positions of Margaret Sanger the founder of Planned Parenthood, and to source out the key locations of Planned Parenthood clinics in certain neighbourhoods of America.

Realistic thinking tells me the overwhelming percent of abortions are african americans.

Realistic thinking tells me leftist liberals, yet again, governmentally via the judiciary branch, championed abortion, this time under the guise of womens rights...and Margaret Sanger smiled all the way to her grave.

Pillars of society.

 

That's why it's called "Pro-Choice" and not anti-this or anti-that or pro this or pro that.

Choice is what it's about and everyone has the right to, as it should be, have a CHOICE, and not have anyone else make that choice for you.

 

If that is the best you can do with realistic thinking you are confusing realism with ignorant talking points. Just a bit of reading could reveal a lot of knowledge and better understanding of reality if you cared to pursue it.

 

Does any one support abortion for the purpose of sex selection? Planned Parenthood does.

 

Which are quite admirable. Now, the fictional positions you assign to her are kind of nasty, but that's your problem.

Go ahead. They're usually not in black neighborhoods, which is what you're dishonestly trying to imply. In general, you'll find abortion clinics in lower-middle-class mixed neighborhoods. It's a business. You want the rent to be cheap, but you still want a safe neighborhood.

And that's false, of course. It wouldn't have been that hard for you to look up the numbers. About 41% white, 32% black, 20% hispanic, 6% asian, 1% other. The common factor in women who get abortions is poverty, not race.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3422602.html

Well yes, Sanger was into liberty and freedom and women's rights. Those all go together. You can't have human rights without women's rights.

 

Got proof?

 

Yeah, let's see the proof. Your conservative "slip" is showing.

 

It is appalling to read your distortions of facts regarding the black genocide of which the disgusting Sanger was instrumental in orchestrating. Disproportional percentages to the afriican american populace is the glaring truth, and you already knew that...but chose to distort instead.

Noteworthy. Anyone actually interested in at least a glimmer of the truth
The Black Holocaust series gives a general breakdown of eugenics, inclusive of Sanger and her role, 2nd video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=v6Eist3wn0s&NR=1

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtLn3hyOxIo&feature=endscreen&NR=1"]THE BLACK HOLOCAUST PT. 2 - YouTube[/ame]

Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood is probably one of, if not the most incidious monsters the earth has ever experienced, bar none....and unfortunately and sadly, when stated that she is my problem, nothing could be farther from the truth.

And there are many black and white orgs, who fight everyday to make people aware of the real truth of that monster and what has been set up in our society.

 

If ignorance would hurt...