Agreed. And nobody has defended this guy or what he has done.

First, life is not so black and white. Many women, including I don't doubt the ones that went to this "doctor" are not middle class college students. They don't always have access to birth control...or education.

Not to mention I know many women who have become pregant while having sex WITH protection. Again, this is not black and white. I would also like to point out that your definition of "handling the consequences in a responsible manner" is not the same as everyone else's.

Hi madmax!

LOL I assumed it was you whenever I noticed this username pop up on the "people who viewed my profile."

Someone didn't read correctly.

It also works perfectly with my plan to rid the country of economic statists. Just give in one little bit on this issue and alot of people who will be voting for welfare checks will no longer exist.

Please enlighten me on how I misinterpreted what you typed.

I said:
You said:
Unless you interpret these undesirables who break into my car as rampant pregnant mothers on a spree (which wouldn't make a whole lot of sense), you didn't read my statements.

Undesirables aren't the only people who get abortions. Perfectly desirable people do as well.

However, even perfectly desirable people who are not financially able to have kids and do, cause undesirable kids....who break into my car and steal stuff. Thus, undesirable children are born. I'm not sure how this doesn't make sense to you, but somehow I'm not surprised.

I hope you are aware that the "desirables" can (and sometimes do) have children who would also break into your car and steal stuff.

He's just doing a bad job of highlighting a link between legalizing abortion in the 70s and a decrease in the crime rate in major cities reported in "Freakonomics."

Of course - that's completely irrelevant to the issue though.

This is a total side-track to the thread (which is why I didn't pursue it further), but if you search, there are plenty of papers espousing the link between Roe v. Wade and reduced crime rates. Freakonomics also made the argument front-and-center. The issue isn't that poor people, or single parents, or any other crime correlates are the ones who have all the abortions - it's that the wide availability of relatively cheap abortions made those groups the largest increase in abortions, because they lacked any access before.

Less at-risk babies = less at-risk youth = ... and so on. The irony I alluded to earlier is that a good number who are gung-ho "SAVE THE BABIES!" wouldn't step foot in the poor part of town to cash a check and are in favor of denying poor folks health care. Why not just start earlier? [/cynicism]

There's no safe place to draw a line, as long as a fetus is dependent upon the woman's body to live, there is no ethical reason to force her to use her body to support another human life. The only argument people have is that she deserves it which, since neither pregnancy or a child is 'punishment' is specious at best.

I agree. Quite frankly the idea that women who have abortions aren't taking responsibility for their actions is ridiculous. Isn't it the definition of taking responsibility? Were I to find out I was pregnant tomorrow it is probably the choice I would make for multiple reasons - financial, relationship, living arrangements, etc. I'm not bringing a child into this world who I can't take care of, and I'm not going to bring a child into the world who I would unfairly resent for existing. If and when I have children it will be because my partner and I have agreed we want children. I'm not going to be pregnant for 9 months just to give a baby up for adoption, I wouldn't trust that I'd follow through and I'd probably never forgive myself for giving him/her up either.

And, I use birth control, condoms, Plan B, and in the past Depo. But none of that is 100% fullproof. I'm not going, nor do I expect others, to live up to the standards of groups like the Catholic Church where sex is only for procreation, and if you do it then you 'deserve' the consequences. But even having taken every reasonable precaution, I could still be pregnant. Abortion is birth control in the very literal sense of the word. It's not something people go do for fun, it's being responsible, just like how taking Plan B is responsible, or using condoms is responsible. Just because some people disagree with that choice, doesn't make it LESS responsible.


[/quote]I agree this case is horrific. I hope it serves as an example of what happens when access to reproductive choice is blocked for those who need it most.[/QUOTE]
Word.
Weak troll.
My people are never responsible for their own actions max. Centuries of irresponsibility, that's what my people are known for.
This is a correlation/causation problem though and not something that I think can have a true link drawn through it, although I've tended to avoid some of that literature.

It may well be - crime statistics are obviously VERY complex, and nobody has a firm grasp on the root causes of criminal behavior.

Still though, the correlation is interesting at worst.

This, though, I agree with completely:

Similarly, using anything other than viability to define what constitutes a 'person' really relies on some sort of God-imbued "spirit" or other, similar source of human-hood, something that creates a very difficult situation for basis of law.

When I was there (born and raised), I spent most of my days hanging out with friends, maximizing our time together on or near the playground, and playing basketball outside of our school. Occasionally, a couple of dudes who were from the wrong side of the tracks started engaging us in fisticuffs in our neighborhood.

Fortunately for me, after one such brouhaha, my mom got scared, and sent me to live with my auntie and uncle in Bel Air.

Win.

Cool story.