Roe v Wade is on deck

[Loren Pechtel]

Just to throw some more reality into the picture:



The fetus was dead. She almost died from a lack of a D&C.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It is a reddit post, so the veracity of this event is in question. We do know this is happening and how unbelievably wrong it is.

Imagine if Rep. Scalise was in dire enough state after being shot to get medical care to save his life until he nearly bleeded out in his bed at home.

 

[Rhea]

47% That seems like a lot.

122 men. And even in an organization framed by men recruiting men, they couldn’t even get a majority.

Men do not constitute a significant percentage of the “abortion on demand lobby.”

47% is such a significant percentage I would go as far as saying almost half.

If that 260 volunteers represented

a significant percentage of the abortion on demand lobby.

Then you’d have a point. But instead, is it shifted goalposts? You’re saying men constitute a significant proportion of the people recruited by a small, isolated men-focused organization. But even then, not even half.

Look at the original goal posts:
You claimed that

Speaking of deflecting, can we talk about whether men constitute a significant percentage of the abortion on demand lobby.

And, people looking for what actual evidence - assuming you are going on evidence and not just your feelings - could possibly make you say something like that saw that it would be

It should therefore be TRIVIALLY EASY for you to link to to the LOBBY Organizations that are made up mostly of men.

But you won’t be able to, because your claim is not true.
Women want control over their own bodies. You do not have the right to turn them into vessels for men.

And you went to find one organization, that was only 260 people, and was nevertheless still mostly women, and wasn’t even a lobbying organization.


And this was your best response.

Women know what they want, and you are apparently not able to detect it.

 

[Rhea]

Funny how Lion is ignoring that in general, Pro-Birth is supported more by men than women.

I think I can ignore claims that aren't true.

This data (Gallup USA 2023) says men are 86% pro choice but women are only 55% pro choice.

86% seems like a "significant percentage".

Shifting goal posts again.

Your claim was about the “abortion on demand lobby”.
Now you are posting general polls of people’s opinions, but still not able to back up your claim about the “abortion on demand lobby”.


It should be trivially easy to back up your claim that “men constitute a significant percentage of the abortion on demand lobby”, if you came to this opinion by having read data, and if your claim had any truth to it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

If 86% of men thought abortion should be legal, it'd be 100% legal everywhere, with drive thru abortion clinics.

 

[Lion IRC]

It should be trivially easy to back up your claim that “men constitute a significant percentage of the abortion on demand lobby”,

Yep.
It was.
...trivially easy.

47% is significant if you ask me.
If you dont think so, that's fine.
The word significant is subjective.

 

[Rhea]

Funny how Lion is ignoring that in general, Pro-Birth is supported more by men than women.

I think I can ignore claims that aren't true.

This data (Gallup USA 2023) says men are 86% pro choice but women are only 55% pro choice.

86% seems like a "significant percentage".

Ok, I think this may be the most dishonest reporting of data I have seen all day.

First, it is 86% of men, not 86% of the abortion on demand lobby.

Second, and more importantly, you mined TWO DIFFERENT questions and claimed the half the numbers from each make a statement. Here’s what your link ACTUALLY says.

1. When asked if abortion should be legal, 85% of women and 86% of men felt it should be legal in all or some circumstances
2. When asked if they are pro-choice, 55% of women and 47% of men said yes.

And even more germane,

3. When asked if abortion should be legal in all circumstances, 47% of women said yes, and only 27% of men said yes, which directly contradicts your thesis, in data.​

So you looked at that and came up with:

This data (Gallup USA 2023) says men are 86% pro choice but women are only 55% pro choice.

Shame on you for making up stories.
Seriously, this is shameful misrepresentation.


So going back to your original goalposts:
No, Lion cannot come up with any data to support his wild claim that “men constitute a significant percentage of the “abortion on demand lobby.” It’s just fabricated out of thin air.

 

[ZiprHead]

Just to throw some more reality into the picture:



The fetus was dead. She almost died from a lack of a D&C.

I can't read that.

 

[TomC]

No, Lion cannot come up with any data to support his wild claim that “men constitute a significant percentage of the “abortion on demand lobby.” It’s just fabricated out of thin air.

Do you really think that men do not constitute a significant percentage of the pro-choice people?

That's a pretty wild claim.
One I find ridiculous, but that's just me.
Tom

 

[Rhea]

He did not say “pro-choice peopple”. He said “abortion on demand lobby.”

And I think the data we just all looked at shows that men are not as committed as women are to having legal abortions in all circumstances.

~shrug~. You arguing with them? Or with me? ‘Cause I didn’t say it. They did.
When asked if abortion should be legal in all circumstances, 47% of women said yes, and only 27% of men said yes,

My experience is that more men than women want to control women’s reproductive actions against their will, not give them choice.

 

[Lion IRC]

Which is more important to you? Fighting against sex or fighting against abortions?”

Fighting against abortion.

What an easy question that was.
If having sex killed people, I'd be against that equally.

 

[bilby]

Which is more important to you? Fighting against sex or fighting against abortions?”

Fighting against abortion.

What an easy question that was.
If having sex killed people, I'd be against that equally.

Having sex kills vast numbers of fetuses.

The number of miscarriages far outweighs the number of abortions, even in the places with the highest abortion rates.

Mostly, nobody is even aware that there was a pregnancy.

Whether you consider fetuses to be "people" is a whole other argument. But if you don't, then abortion doesn't kill people, and if you do, then having sex does kill people.

It was only an easy question for you because you don't understand enough about the topic to grasp why it's a difficult question, nor to form a useful, informed, educated, consistent, or logical opinion.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

No, Lion cannot come up with any data to support his wild claim that “men constitute a significant percentage of the “abortion on demand lobby.” It’s just fabricated out of thin air.

Do you really think that men do not constitute a significant percentage of the pro-choice people?

That's a pretty wild claim.
One I find ridiculous, but that's just me.
Tom

There are a number of issues. First is the illiterate 86% being used by Lion. 86% of men don't think abortion should be legal in all or some cases. Lion decided to add numbers because, well, I think I'll let others decide. The percent of men labeled as 'pro-Choice" is 48%. Percent of men thinking abortion should be generally accessible floats above 50%, not at 86%.

Secondly, Lion intentionally misrepresented the values for women, using a completely different question and not summating the all or some values, to falsely imply that the percent of men supporting abortion was near twice that of women. Okay, I didn't let others decide.

Third, *see Rhea's post* above. Lion is trying to create big baddies (on demand abortion lobby, pedophiles, rapists) to foil against because they can't morally justify forcing women to have babies. The reality regarding abortion support in the US is that the conservative state of Kansas which has nearly 2 to 1 Republican v Democrat registered, voted 3 to 2 in support of abortion access for women.

To Lion's claim, men and women support access to abortion, but more women support it than men. Men and women support eliminating access to abortion, but more men support that then women. Lion's claim was false and the evidence Lion presented to support it was misunderstood by Lion (at best).

 

[Rhea]

Which is more important to you? Fighting against sex or fighting against abortions?”

Fighting against abortion.

What an easy question that was.
If having sex killed people, I'd be against that equally.

Great. Thanks for the clear reply.

Given that reducing abortions is your prime directive,

Do you publicly support, and push your governments to attain, and argue whenever the topic of reducing abortions come up, that the best way to reduce abortions right now is to provide free-to-user, easily accessible, long acting reversible birth control? And that this is more important and more effective and more immediate than any argument over whether abortion is wrong?

Because by reducing conception, you can eliminate 88% of abortions by August Fifteenth.
(August 15th is 12 weeks away from today, when current pregnancies would accrue to 88% of abortions chosen because they are unplanned and not wanted.)

Would you like to reduce abortions by 88% by August Fifteenth? Are you doing everything you can to increase support for it? Or are you spending your time letting abortions happen because you are busy arguing about abortions instead of pregnancies?

Moreover,

Do you also publicly support and push your government to enact laws that remove the danger, difficulty and stigma of unplanned parenthood by providing for free prenatal care, free post partum care, subsidized daycare, and publicly delivered food assistance?

Because by reducing the reasons people choose to terminate pregnancies such as mothers with existing children who cannot afford another or who are scared by medical bills of childbirth, you would reduce abortions, again, by August Fifteenth.

Would you like to have more pregnancies result in full term and still be continuing after August Fifteenth? Because if women were less terrified of the outcome, they would be less likely to choose abortion.


So…. Do you walk the walk? You could advocate to reduce abortions by 88% in 12 weeks by promoting protected sex and support for mothers.
Be honest. Do you do that? Do you support the measures that would do that?

1. Free-to-user, easily accessible long acting reversible birth control
2. Comprehensive sexuality education
3. Free and easily accessible pregnancy, birth and parenting care

Your behavior on this forum does not indicate that you act in favor of reducing abortions. You do not argue to gain support for free birth control. Or if you do, please link it. But I don’t recall ever seeing you do something that actually reduces abortions, today.

 

[Shadowy Man]

To back up Rhea’s fantastic post:

from https://cdphe.colorado.gov/fpp/about-us/colorados-success-long-acting-reversible-contraception-larc:

The Colorado Family Planning Initiative (CFPI) drove a 50 percent reduction in teen births and abortions, avoided nearly $70 million in public assistance costs and empowered thousands of young women to make their own choices on when or whether to start a family.


A private donor’s investment in the state health department’s family planning program allowed us to train health care providers, support family planning clinics and remove the financial barriers to women choosing the safest, most effective form of contraception.

Highlights​

This initiative empowered thousands of Colorado women to choose when and whether to start a family.

Thanks in large part to the Colorado Family Planning Initiative:

• Teen birth rate was nearly cut in half.
• Teen abortion rate was nearly cut in half.
• Births to women without a high school education fell 38 percent.
• Second and higher order births to teens were cut by 57 percent.
• Birth rate among young women ages 20-24 was cut by 20 percent.
• Average age of first birth increased by 1.2 years among all women.
• Rapid repeat births declined by 12 percent among all women.
• Costs avoided: $66.1-$69.6 million.

It is demonstrably true that these kinds of efforts reduce abortions. Yet the “pro-life lobbies” never seem to invest or back them.

 

[Rhea]

Supporting Research:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1400506

RESULTS​

Of the 1404 teenage girls and women enrolled in CHOICE, 72% chose an intrauterine device or implant (LARC methods); the remaining 28% chose another method. During the 2008–2013 period, the mean annual rates of pregnancy, birth, and abortion among CHOICE participants were 34.0, 19.4, and 9.7 per 1000 teens, respectively. In comparison, rates of pregnancy, birth, and abortion among sexually experienced U.S. teens in 2008 were 158.5, 94.0, and 41.5 per 1000, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS​

Teenage girls and women who were provided contraception at no cost and educated about reversible contraception and the benefits of LARC methods had rates of pregnancy, birth, and abortion that were much lower than the national rates for sexually experienced teens. (Funded by the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation and others.)

This study was repeated in two other major US cities with similar results, making the data crystal clear: If you want to reduce abortions TOMORROW, you should join with the people who want to deliver contraception, and indeed the most reliable kinds of contraception, as quickly as possible to all women. (You should also do everything possible to further research on male contraceptives)

If you want to reduce abortions - walk the walk.

 

[Jarhyn]

Supporting Research:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1400506

RESULTS​

Of the 1404 teenage girls and women enrolled in CHOICE, 72% chose an intrauterine device or implant (LARC methods); the remaining 28% chose another method. During the 2008–2013 period, the mean annual rates of pregnancy, birth, and abortion among CHOICE participants were 34.0, 19.4, and 9.7 per 1000 teens, respectively. In comparison, rates of pregnancy, birth, and abortion among sexually experienced U.S. teens in 2008 were 158.5, 94.0, and 41.5 per 1000, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS​

Teenage girls and women who were provided contraception at no cost and educated about reversible contraception and the benefits of LARC methods had rates of pregnancy, birth, and abortion that were much lower than the national rates for sexually experienced teens. (Funded by the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation and others.)

This study was repeated in two other major US cities with similar results, making the data crystal clear: If you want to reduce abortions TOMORROW, you should join with the people who want to deliver contraception, and indeed the most reliable kinds of contraception, as quickly as possible to all women. (You should also do everything possible to further research on male contraceptives)

If you want to reduce abortions - walk the walk.

The problem here is that this doesn't yield the hidden primary goal of preventing poor people from using family planning to escape poverty.

The best way to guarantee success of a child is to have the child "late", and to only have one.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Supporting Research:

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1400506

RESULTS​

Of the 1404 teenage girls and women enrolled in CHOICE, 72% chose an intrauterine device or implant (LARC methods); the remaining 28% chose another method. During the 2008–2013 period, the mean annual rates of pregnancy, birth, and abortion among CHOICE participants were 34.0, 19.4, and 9.7 per 1000 teens, respectively. In comparison, rates of pregnancy, birth, and abortion among sexually experienced U.S. teens in 2008 were 158.5, 94.0, and 41.5 per 1000, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS​

Teenage girls and women who were provided contraception at no cost and educated about reversible contraception and the benefits of LARC methods had rates of pregnancy, birth, and abortion that were much lower than the national rates for sexually experienced teens. (Funded by the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation and others.)

This study was repeated in two other major US cities with similar results, making the data crystal clear: If you want to reduce abortions TOMORROW, you should join with the people who want to deliver contraception, and indeed the most reliable kinds of contraception, as quickly as possible to all women. (You should also do everything possible to further research on male contraceptives)

If you want to reduce abortions - walk the walk.

Yeah, they want to eliminate abortion and the consequence of that is a major bonus. Go read Butker's speech for details about how god is in charge of the reproductive system, not enzymes, hormones, nerves, tissues, and other assorted junk that has proper medical names.

 

[Lion IRC]

Which is more important to you? Fighting against sex or fighting against abortions?”

Fighting against abortion.

What an easy question that was.
If having sex killed people, I'd be against that equally.

Great. Thanks for the clear reply.

NP

Given that reducing abortions is your prime directive,

That's right. I'm anti- abortion.

Your behavior on this forum does not indicate that you act in favor of reducing abortions.

Show me something I've written in this forum that 'indicates' I dont want to reduce abortions.

 

[TomC]

Show me something I've written in this forum that 'indicates' I dont want to reduce abortions.

Have you supported the various ways folks like Rhea have described to reduce abortion without resorting to government overreach?
If so, I don't remember that.
Tom