Let's face it. Making abortions illegal would not prevent them. It doesn't stop kids from drinking, or people from doing drugs. As a pro-life constitutionalist, I don't think we should make abortions illegal, because then women would be far more likely to attempt more drastic measures, or have an illegal potentially dangerous abortion. What we need to do is something radically different. Abortion is only an issue for 2 main reasons: 1) You have the high poverty rate, which leads to more poverty pregnancies, which is naturally where most abortions occur. 2) You have a TERRIBLY flawed adoption system. So what do we really do? It's quite simple. We get back to the basics and get our economy moving again. Move back to a free market and allow the market to compete for business again. This relatively fixes problem #1, or at least gets it under control. The 2nd problem might be more complicated. The current adoption process is flawed by illogical bureaucracy. I'm not sure how to fix the problem, because I am not sure if there would be a way to keep foster children safe with less government oversight, but one way or another something must be done. I think with a stable and strong economy, and a practical adoption system, we could basically get rid of abortions all together. How many would really feel the need to have an abortion with a perfectly successful adoption and foster care system? Thoughts on this?
Best way to combat abortion? Free contraception and sexual education. Less unwanted pregnancies, less abortions. Better economy would help, but if it would be that simple to get the economy going again, we would already do it.
The free market isn't possible, nor is it desirable (as a shift towards free market economics has been shown to increase child poverty). It would actually increase the negative externalities associated with fertility (e.g. more crime, more drug taking etc.)
I don't think the government should offer free contraception just like I don't think they should pay for abortions. If it is desired, then private charities will be more than capable of handling it.
I call bull. I think you confuse free markets with the crony capitalism we've had at least throughout my lifetime if not much much more.
I have no confusion. The free market is unattainable and free market economics has assuredly been associated with higher child poverty. Think up something that makes sense me ole china!
I'd love some proof. Seriously. Because frankly I don't believe you. Our economy is most stable when it is more free. and that can't produce more poverty babies.
First, the idea that the free market is possible is just inanity run amok. Second, for evidence of the child poverty link see the consequennces of Thatcherism. Following Hayek's influence that led to the worst child poverty rate in the developed world. The interesting point is 'how come you didn't know?'
My first thought...is that you are not pro-life. You view human life as disposable. And you have justified your reasoning...that some things are more important then some segments of human life. AND this is so wrong....: Couples wait years for babies. They aren't given up for adoption because a) the woman doesn't want the inconvenience of being pregnent only to give the baby away. b)Women who do plan to give the baby up for adoption selfishly change their mind. Its a hard thing to do and takes a person willing to do the best thing for the child. If you want to lower the rates of abortion---create a culture where the adults in the room are encouraged to do what is best for the human life they chose to create.
That is the situation I am trying to create. I AM pro life. I don't think that there is ever a reason to abort. But frankly its GOING to happen. And I would rather it be done safely. Better to have one death than 2. What I am basically saying is you can't fix abortions by simply making them illegal.
I think it's a noble idea, but you are highly underestimating the fickle nature of the liberal female. These people will throw every excuse in the book at you to justify killing their child instead of putting it up for adoption. Many of them won't want to go through 9 months of labor when they can just drive up the road and pay some sociopath a small fee to rip the little bastard out of their womb and toss it in a trash can. This is what you're up against. Good luck, my friend.
I'm just saying...that pro-choice people have your same argument. Most pro choice people will not at least openly, celebrate abortion---they simply put the convenience and the concerns of the adults as priority and delegate the unborn as disposable life. No crime is fixed by law---murders, rapes and burgleries still happen regardless of laws in place. Its just a matter of what society deems is right or wrong and who it decides to protect that puts together a law.
It isn't sufficient to merely protect the legality of contraceptions and sex education? Who pays for these things if they are to be provided free of charge?
Who pays for what if those things if they're NOT provided free of charge? WE DO pay for babies if birth control is not provided. We could pay for fewer babies if reliable birth control were MORE accessible and ALL young people educated about its use. Every $1 spent on family planning saves $3.80 on medicaid spending.
The choices are only two: 1. pay for birth control, or 2. pay for babies. Please remember that birth control will cost less than babies. You cannot save money by cutting funding for birth control. I suppose you're thinking that we should just not pay for babies either, but I'm pretty sure we're not going to let babies starve in this country.
You act like we need the government to prevent starving babies. No. The government only cares about statistics. The people care about starving babies.
I guess you forgot...the government IS the people. Our people will use our government to see that babies are fed and clothed. It's cheaper to pay for birth control with government funds.
Actually its cheaper to do neither. A government that is truly OF the people has no business in anybody's bedroom in ANY way. Even if they have the best of intentions.
It wouldn't be cheaper in the end. Riots in the streets because of starving children would be the inevitable result. I hope you're not talking about government mandating birth control, what I mean, is that government should see that young people are educated about birth control via the public schools, and see that reliable birth control is easily accessible and either free or very cheap. No one is forced to use it. One hopes that education would have the result of most choosing to use it.
