Ripple effect of Abortion on society

[LeroyCRHP]

Certainly Capt;

TamM also offered 3 excellent options.

1. Have a before marriage abstinence campaign like we do against drugs and cigarettes. Not about contraceptives, but abstinence. Look at the dramatic reduction in smoking in the past 50 years. This is a long term program. I think everyone is for this and if we reduced these high risk pregnancies by 50% in 10 years that would be an incredible savings in human suffering.
2. Outlaw abortions. This will have immediate results and leads to #3.
3. With 1M more babies when #2 is enacted we need a comprehensive plan to address this. Offer support for pregnant couples when it does happen. Include churches and local organizations that help the Mom and baby with health care and delivery if they cannot afford it.
4. There are so many people wanting to adopt babies we need to establish national adoption program that covers the whole process. There are about 150,000 adoptions per year so we would have to staff up to cover some larger number. Not sure of the first year 1M new babies how many would come up for adoption vs how many would be kept… Assuming we would need 1 staff person for annual of 100 adoptions and 300,000 adoptions we would need 30,000 staff people for this program plus management.
5. Create a Family Czar cabinet postion. This would adminster the campaign in #1, provide a comprehensive plan for #3 and #4.

I could easily do the math and this program would financially pay back in 30-40 years. WIth any luck these first 1 million babies will be graduating college and entering the work force as I retire. This will start the payback process and pay into my social security!

It really would be easy to start a pro-life policy.

Can you provide three tangible solutions to the abortion dilemma in the United States?
capt

 

[fix]

Go back before the conception of the “unwanted” or “undesired” or “unplanned” offspring. Go back to the actual genesis of desensitization to the “sacredness of life”. Go back to the families who cannot discuss sexuality, the fathers who refuse to show love and affection to their daughters, the peers who humiliate their virgin schoolmates. What are the instigating circumstances that beget such ignorance, such emptiness, such a need to belong to something or somebody that invite boys and girls, men and women, to regard sexual activity as the solution to the problem?

**Abortion is symptomatic of a greater failure in our society: the failure to love. All the whining in the world is not going to change abortion laws today. There is too much fixation on legislating morality and precious little on repairing familial relationships, educating children on the responsibilities of their sexuality, openness in communication. Even so, children will do what they must to feel a belonging and to create what they consider to be meaning in their lives. Unfortunately, this sometimes includes becoming sexually active. The same can be said for adults - most of us are searching for a way to not have to endure the walk of life alone. **

What is the solution? If you cut off the weed of abortion at ground level you still have the root beneath the surface leaching nutrients and water out of the soil to eventually spring back up. Rarely do I read on CAF what the solution might be - I mostly try and fail to digest the rhetorical references to “murderers” and a fight for the innocents. If a genuine fight to eradicate the need for abortion is to ensue, get it at root level. Don’t simply hack at it when it appears above ground. Where is the constructive thought on the subject? Whining and bluster amount to nothing.

capt

The Catholic Church has done, and will always, do much to help people. That includes material and spiritual support.

There is no shortage of talk regarding material support both from the government and from private sources. Of course, like everything else in this world more can always be done.

There is no shortage of talk regarding minimizing the law in regard to this issue. That it is codified into law is wrong on several laws. There is no protection for the most innocent in this society.

There is no one soloution, but a big part of the solution involves changing the law.

 

[captbackfire]

" How do they present “more opportunity” to the mother? What tangible thing to they give her?"

Capt, are you engaging me in argument for education, or is this simply rehtorical? I’d suggest you attend, if you want to know. **No argument, sir. Nor was the question rhetorical. I have no idea what you mean by your suggestion that I “attend if I ] want to know.” Care to explain? **

" Most women in crisis pregnancy resent the interference."

I tend to think that most children in the womb of the women in crisis pregnancy would *welcome *the interference. Are you referring to the fetus that has no capacity for critical thinking?

" My suggestions have been utterly and completely ignored in favor of spewing sanctimony. It will never end."

Two points for alliteration.** Is there a true need for ugliness in this discussion? (Or a denial of ugliness?) ** You’re not the first to suggest there’s greater depth to the scourge of abortion in the United States. My remarks dealt exactly with your reported concern and you gave me grief about it. What grief? Be specific. Golly, I was hoping for that.

Personally, I’m not ignoring your suggestions either utterly or completely, even if you did spend the largest part of your comments prior to this point trying to equate choice with murder. You misunderstood. My point is that choice does NOT equal murder. Choice equals the opportunity to walk** away from abortion as much as it does to undergo an abortion.

Catholics *believe *procured abortion is wrong. *Correction: SOME Catholics believe procured abortion is wrong.
**
Listening to you go on about choice * is tiring. The arguments are old; they are not convincing. ** I don’t hope to convince anyone that choice is appropriate for everyone. A died-in-the-wool Catholic would never accept that. I only wish to present another view. And take note: You are not listening. You are reading. If this tires you, hit your ignore button and then take a nap.

Very simply, very clearly, the best way to avoid abortion is to do just what most of us are doing right now, at this very minute – not having sex. ** This is your solution? No wonder the problem of unwanted pregnancies persists.**

[SIGN]Vivat Jesus![/SIGN]

capt

 

[captbackfire]

Certainly Capt;

TamM also offered 3 excellent options.

1. Have a before marriage abstinence campaign like we do against drugs and cigarettes. Not about contraceptives, but abstinence. Look at the dramatic reduction in smoking in the past 50 years. This is a long term program. I think everyone is for this and if we reduced these high risk pregnancies by 50% in 10 years that would be an incredible savings in human suffering.
2. Outlaw abortions. This will have immediate results and leads to #3.
3. With 1M more babies when #2 is enacted we need a comprehensive plan to address this. Offer support for pregnant couples when it does happen. Include churches and local organizations that help the Mom and baby with health care and delivery if they cannot afford it.
4. There are so many people wanting to adopt babies we need to establish national adoption program that covers the whole process. There are about 150,000 adoptions per year so we would have to staff up to cover some larger number. Not sure of the first year 1M new babies how many would come up for adoption vs how many would be kept… Assuming we would need 1 staff person for annual of 100 adoptions and 300,000 adoptions we would need 30,000 staff people for this program plus management.
5. Create a Family Czar cabinet postion. This would adminster the campaign in #1, provide a comprehensive plan for #3 and #4.

I could easily do the math and this program would financially pay back in 30-40 years. WIth any luck these first 1 million babies will be graduating college and entering the work force as I retire. This will start the payback process and pay into my social security!

It really would be easy to start a pro-life policy.

---

Thank you for THINKING! I agree with much of what you have suggested. I especially like #5, the Family Czar. How inventive!

capt***

 

[LeroyCRHP]

Thanks for the chance! How could it be better before I start emailing this to my senators, representatives and even President Obama? I do think President Obama is the guy that can get things done and we need to feed him options.

Leroy

Thank you for THINKING! I agree with much of what you have suggested. I especially like #5, the Family Czar. How inventive!
capt

 

[Dameedna]

To the OP, I suspect the data is fabricated. It’s just an example. You could look at Population of those born, with population of occupations, but that would vary greatly from nation to nation.

The same argument could go, that the population of those born, determines the population of criminals that exist.

No real data to be found. Just an emotional argument.

 

[Dameedna]

urrgh…this debate is endless.

The issue that pro-lifers never want to face, is that it is actually a unique issue. One life, is completely dependant on another. It is not the same as any other “life/death” situation. There are stages of fetal development that mean the baby, doesn’t even have a brain yet. Wether you like it or not. There is also the very real issue that is caused by new human life, in a society that is struggling. One more mouth to feed, and the family starves. Too many humans, and we begin to destroy each other over resources.

The pro-choice advocates insist on calling the fetus a fetus, or a collection of cells or human tissue. Sorry my friend, it is not about to turn into a frog. My arm is also human tissue and I’m rather glad I have 2 of them. Obviously, when you are terminating a pregnancy you are killing a human being. And when you choose to support abortion, in a certain circumstance, you are agreeing to a human death. Face that reality, then make a choice. Don’t call it human tissue. It’s an affront to your own humanity.

The problem I have with both camps, is that neither will admit to what they are really saying nor will they admit to the problems that both choices create for society. Until they do, the debate will rage forever.

 

[Aaron409]

Really, you think one more mouth to feed is more of a problem then abortion? Do you not think God made that life? He created that life for a reason and I can assure you it wasn’t for it to be destroyed. Maybe abstenence should be taught not contraception and sex is ok when your not married. That in my mind is the real problem.

 

[Jude_Smith]

Um, it appears to me that this is straying from the original topic. Where did the numbers come from? I wondered about that too, when I saw a sign at the March for Life saying we have lost 8,000 priests. Someone suggested they just look at the overall population and then apply those percentages to abortion statistics. I would hope the number of priests would be lower if only because Catholic women wouldn’t be having abortions! Of course, I have no figures on what percentage of priests enter the Church as converts rather than as cradle Catholics.

 

[RobbyS]

---

Thank you for THINKING! I agree with much of what you have suggested. I especially like #5, the Family Czar. How inventive!

capt***

Above you said, among other things, that a “fetus” is incapable of critical thinking. It has long been a proposition in canon law that no child under seven was capable of this, and this is consisent with the views of Piaget, the psychologist. So does that mean than no young child should have the right to live except by decision of his (Female) parent? What philosophical position are you coming from?

 

[captbackfire]

Above you said, among other things, that a “fetus” is incapable of critical thinking. It has long been a proposition in canon law that no child under seven was capable of this, and this is consisent with the views of Piaget, the psychologist. So does that mean than no young child should have the right to live except by decision of his (Female) parent? What philosophical position are you coming from?

I am not coming from a philosophical position; I am coming from a scientific position. Feti are incapable of critical thinking. Canon law has no impact on me - I am not a practicing Catholic.

capt

 

[JimG]

The concept of “critical thinking” is really more of a philosophical concept than a scientific one.

But it is true than many people, including the very young and the very old, are not capable of “critical thinking.” (They remain, however, members of the species homo sapiens: they are human beings.)

So if that is the criterion, abortion should be allowed for anyone under the age of 7 and perhaps over the age of 80. In between those years, one could be reasonably safe, as long as you didn’t come down with a mental defect.

 

[captbackfire]

The concept of “critical thinking” is really more of a philosophical concept than a scientific one.

But it is true than many people, including the very young and the very old, are not capable of “critical thinking.” (They remain, however, members of the species homo sapiens: they are human beings.)

So if that is the criterion, abortion should be allowed for anyone under the age of 7 and perhaps over the age of 80. In between those years, one could be reasonably safe, as long as you didn’t come down with a mental defect.

**All righty, then - a fetus is incapable of forming thoughts or words or reciting the Gettysburg Address. This is a scientific fact. And there are occasions where the very young and the very old are warehoused, neglected, abused. Some take their own lives.

I don’t like it. I think it’s pathetic that there is such a need for abortion. Some folks argue that there is, in fact, no “need” for it. This points to people who have never been in that position. Pro-lifers are going to shout “murderer!” until the cows come home. Women will continue to have abortions even if Roe is rescinded. There will be no end to this debate, ever. Unless men and women suddenly become completely responsible for their own actions and willing to accept the consequences of same, the rate of unwanted pregnancies will remain the same or even increase. I believe Madison Avenue has a good deal of blood on its hands here, presenting love and lust on the same magazine page, equating sexuality with spiritual union. This is not to say that these things are mutually exclusive, but advertising can be persuasive, manipulative, coercive. And a lot of people, particularly young people, see that and believe that this is what love is, this is what a relationship should be, this is truth and beauty and belonging. It’s bull.

Believe what you will, and I will do the same. There is no way to reconcile this thing, and neither side will give a millimeter or even recognize a legitimate point made by the other.

It’s exhausting.

capt**

 

[fix]

**
Believe what you will, and I will do the same. There is no way to reconcile this thing, and neither side will give a millimeter or even recognize a legitimate point made by the other.

It’s exhausting.

capt**

There is no way to reconcile what cannot be reconciled, that is right. There is no legitimacy in condoning intentional killing of innocents no matter what reasons one may think are legitimate.

 

[JimG]

I believe Madison Avenue has a good deal of blood on its hands here, presenting love and lust on the same magazine page, equating sexuality with spiritual union. This is not to say that these things are mutually exclusive, but advertising can be persuasive, manipulative, coercive. And a lot of people, particularly young people, see that and believe that this is what love is, this is what a relationship should be, this is truth and beauty and belonging. It’s bull.

This is a good point about Madison Avenue and the advertising industry in general. They probably don’t think of themselves as responsible for out of wedlock pregnancies, promiscuity and abortion, but they are indeed guilty of promoting it.

 

[TamM]

This is a good point about Madison Avenue and the advertising industry in general. They probably don’t think of themselves as responsible for out of wedlock pregnancies, promiscuity and abortion, but they are indeed guilty of promoting it.

Media in gereral promotes promiscuity and adultery, not to mention other things. I shudder every time I watch t.v, to think teenagers and children are getting ideas and building morales on what they see in TV, hear on the radio, and read in print. As a parent I try to discuss it with my child, but I know there is only so much I can say and do to counter the effects of society. It’s disheartening. All the while, the under current thought is that pregnancy is a side effect of this behaviour that can be dealt with with an abortion. The Media is definitely guilty.

 

[flatlanderjenn]

About 8 months ago I caught the tail end of a monologue on EWTN Radio. I do not know the name of the female host of the program but she was speaking on a report which outlined what society has lost do to abortion. For example, (I’m making up the numbers here because I do not remember what they were…

Since abortion has become legal and with the abortion rate being 1.3 million abortions annually since that time, we have:
9000 less doctors to treat us when we become ill
3000 less priests within the Church
etc…
etc…
etc…

The host of the show was reading this information from a source that is unknown to me (because I didn’t catch the first part of the monologue). I was HOPING that perhaps someone here might know where I can find these numbers. I have scoured the internet and the only things I have found are the effects of Abortion on the mother, father, economy, etc. etc. Nothing however, that depicts the human resources lost due to abortion specifically. When over a million babies are killed a year, there has got to be a breakdown somewhere of what those millions upon millions of actual people would have contributed to society had they been allowed to be born based on the same number of babies who were in fact born. Anybody?

LOOK WHAT I FOUND!

nrlc.org/Factsheets/FS04_MissingPersons.pdf

This discusses the ecomonic impact of abortion and the future of Social Security and Medicare due to abortion. It doesn’t list the specific percentage of jobs not filled because of those lost to abortion, but it is still very interesting and helpful with the pro-life cause.

 

[captbackfire]

**Are the 40 million children’s parents who are not shopping for diapers and baby bottles the same ones who are teens mowing lawns as summer jobs? Or are they all simultaneously clamoring for teaching jobs? Maybe the 40 million individuals would have all been buying houses and cars as they grew old enough to do so. This would have been 18 years after Roe, so you’re really looking at births potentially having occurred after 1991.

These projections are not statistics. They are provided for dramatic effect. They do not offer any analytical data with regard to the impact of abortion on the U.S. economy. As they fan the flames of sadness, they also preach to the choir. They offer no solution to the dilemma of abortion.

And the beat goes on . . .

capt

**

 

[Tietjen]

**These projections are not statistics. They are provided for dramatic effect. They do not offer any analytical data with regard to the impact of abortion on the U.S. economy. As they fan the flames of sadness, they also preach to the choir. They offer no solution to the dilemma of abortion. **

And the beat goes on . . .

capt

I’ll concede that some of these numbers are projections but certainly not all. The stats discussed on the page refer to ALL abortions since it’s legalization, not simply those occurring on or after 1991. Now you can sit behind your keyboard and ignore the facts of how abortion is not only immoral but has an absolute negative impact on a society’s economic status if you choose. It’s far easier to close your eyes, pretend that abortion is a good thing and recite tired maxims like “And the beat goes on…” The solution to the abortion problem is to make society realize what it actually does to the baby, to the parents, and to society itself. You sit here and complain that all pro-lifers do is use scare tactics and artificial numbers in an attempt to effect change. The reality of the matter is in fact that pro-lifers hope and pray that the facts become apparent to a society, who at this time, chooses to side with convenience rather than life. Burry your head in the sand if you wish, but I promise you this Capt., one day society will wake up and realize what they allowed to happen and they will morn their stupidity. They’ll realize the millions upon millions of lives they murdered and it will all come to an end. Pro-lifers are simply attempting to effect that outcome sooner rather than waiting for millions more to be murdered.

 

[captbackfire]

**Tietjen,

The article you gave the link to, if I’m not mistaken, was making an attempt to draw attention to the impact abortion has had on the U.S. economy since Roe v Wade. Roe was passed in 1973. Consider, then, that if these individuals were born and raised instead of aborted, they would have had little impact on the economy until they had reached the age of emancipation; i.e., they could hold jobs, buy cars, have children of their own, etc. This is the reason I found the claims deceitful and inflammatory, as the number of jobs that could** have been filled, the number of cars that could have been bought, the number of children that could have been brought into the world by these people were statistically insignificant until such time as they were actually working, buying and procreating.

It is an ugly argument that the number of abortions performed on women in this country have allowed women to enter or remain in the workforce, thereby creating a positive impact on the economy through purchasing power alone; or that it may have eased stress in overcrowded classrooms, affording more individualized attention between teachers and students. For every negative impact argument there will be an equal, positive rejoinder. This does not interest me. You and I disagree as to the im/morality of abortion, so no use discussing that. However, be aware that I am no fan of abortion, having personally experienced a vacuum aspiration many, many years ago. I certainly do not espouse abortion to be “a good thing”. I have not closed my eyes to the facts of abortion. I am abundantly aware of the procedure and its implications. So step back from judgment there, if you will.

"You sit here and complain that all pro-lifers do is use scare tactics and artificial numbers in an attempt to effect change," you charge. “The reality of the matter is in fact that pro-lifers hope and pray that the facts become apparent to a society, who at this time, chooses to side with convenience rather than life.” **** I’m sorry, but hoping and praying is not going to get your job done. In this society you must be immeasurably more involved than that. You can hope and pray while sitting at your keyboard, too. The burden of action and change is upon you, not me.

I do not “burry” my head in the sand. My eyes are wide open to the complexities and sorrowfulness of abortion and have been for almost four decades. It is a grievous experience, and yet I will never, ever put myself in a position to deny any woman the right to decide her own fate in the matter of an unexpected pregnancy. That is a personal decision for her to make without interference or influence unless she seeks it.

You say, ***“Pro-lifers are simply attempting to effect that outcome sooner rather than waiting for millions more to be murdered.” *** I am interested to know what, exactly, you are doing in addition to hoping and praying?

capt

---

Oh, yeah - “It’s far easier to close your eyes, pretend that abortion is a good thing and recite tired maxims like ‘And the beat goes on…’” “Tired maxims”? Is this kind of sidebar analysis really necessary?