Yes. I pointed out that the term "responsible" was being inappropriately used in this case, as it really had to do with accountability. No, we're talking about rape, incest, lack of education, lack of available advice, accessibility of prophylaxis, etc., etc. We're talking about the failure rate that occurs even with perfect use. There isn't some clause in the law that says the law doesn't apply when these factors are present. No proposed law has EVER said that if you claim you behaved responsibly then you get to have an abortion. I'm quite well aware of contraception stats. And, your assumption of the possibility of perfect use is ridiculous. However, I do agree that certain steps would help. For example, better, more thorough education and training before mensis would help. It would probably cut down on sexually transmitted disease, too. I disagree that this problem boils down to laws against irresponsibility or laws oriented to accountability in the hope that it will result in more responsibility. Harsher laws designed to hold women more accountable is simply not an acceptable or effective approach. I'm sure irresponsibility exists. Duh. But, writing laws against all women on the grounds that there exist those who aren't successful in preventing pregnancy? Sorry. That's not OK.
NO one is obligated to use birth control. No one should be forced to implant devices in their bodies or take potentially dangerous drugs. For some that is being irresponsible.. Now, explain how all the irresponsible people in the world should be punished, not just women who don't bow to your "rules"... .....and do please show how your life has been the model of responsibility.... NO one is obligated to use birth control. It is an option in a free country.... ALL birth control methods have a failure rate but women don't need to make excuses, they can just have an abortion.
How about So agree with the numbers, but not the conclusion? Lets walk through this 2nd grade math- 1 - its not at all unreasonable for a responsible woman to use 2 simple methods of contraception. IUD and homrmone impant separately have a real world <1% failure rate. Used together the failure rate is less than 0.01*0.01=0.0001 or 0.01%. That's <1 woman in 10,000 in the course of 1 year. 2 - For the other person involved, have the man use a condom, by itself it has a failure rate of 18% in the real world. Combined with the 2 methods a responsible woman would use and the result is 0.0001*0.18=0.000018, or 0.0018% failure rate. That's 1.8 pregnancies for 100,000 women over 1 year. 3 - In my first post, I made a guess on the number of women of child bearing age, but this time from the CDC there are about 76 million women of child bearing age. If they were all being responsible and using 2 methods of contraception, and requiring the man to use a condom, then that's 0.000018*76,000,000 = 1,368 accidental pregnancies a year. How many "accidental" pregnancies are there in the USA per year? https://www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/unintended-pregnancy-united-states In 2011, nearly half (45% or 2.8 million) of the 6.1 million pregnancies in the United States each year were unintended 1,368 versus 2,800,000. There is no way you can claim that women as a group in the USA are being responsible. If they truly did not want to get pregnant, then they could easily meet that objective. If they were acting responsibly, then there would not be 900,000 abortions a year and abortion would not be an issue. What's easier for a woman - to get an abortion with all the emotional and social turmoil involved, or to get an IUD and a hormone implant? The root of the problem is irresponsible behavior.
WRONG. You did not read any of my posts, including the one explaining that I do not claim "perfect use" at all. Learn to read. Live up to your name.
No use continuing. I know your argument. It is NOT a matter of math. - you've skipped the fact that we don't have education to ensure teens know these techniques to a level of proficiency. - you're once again ignoring rape and incest - you're assuming that all those past mensis have access, but they don't - you're assuming that the more reliable methods are medically acceptable for all women. - you're ignoring that even those who are extremely responsible experience a failure rate. - you're assuming that the possibility of lowering the rate of abortion is justification for laws that affect all women - you're assuming that holding women more strongly accountable will result in them not having unwanted pregnancies I don't agree with ANY of those assumptions. Laws against women apply to ALL women - not "irresponsible" women, not "well informed" women, all women. I agree that there are tactics we can work together on in order to lower the abortion rate. Education of young Americans, for example. Making advice far easier to obtain, especially anonymously, Ensuring prophylaxis is available. Etc. There is quite a bit we could do. We could also make it more possible to carry a pregnancy to term - parenthood raises very large questions for many, especially for teens. The challenges can seem overwhelming. But, that list does NOT include laws against women.
No, you just have a different name for it. The problem is that there is still a failure rate. You can call it anything you want. Laws against women would still hit those women.
You: ""What's easier for a woman - to get an abortion with all the emotional and social turmoil involved, or to get an IUD and a hormone implant? "" Here's where you are confused...it is ONLY up to the woman to decide that, NO one else, not the government and certainly not YOU. Most women feel relief after an abortion and many women have emotional turmoil after giving birth. Again, a woman does not need to justify her reason for an abortion. NO one is under any obligation to use birth control and unless you advocate penning up all women like cattle ( since I see you think all women are exactly alike that may be your preference) there's nothing you can do about it
You: ""My posts only highlight glaring contradictions when it comes to the pro-abortion side""" No, none of your posts did that.....
You obfuscate because you don't like the truth. For example, rape accounts for much less than <1% of unplanned pregnancy. And you once again fail to even read the posts. Obviously contraception is not perfect, people don't use it properly every time. That's why the rates I used are not for perfect use, but are the result of studying real world use - surveying pregnant women. And you FAIL for the third time. You are OUT.
There was no obfuscation, you just didn't like all those facts....he stated everything clearly... But you finally got something right :""Obviously contraception is not perfect, people don't use it properly every time""' (or it fails on it's own). "" That's why the rates I used are not for perfect use, but are the result of studying real world use - surveying pregnant women.""" You'll be perfect when you admit no one is obligated to use birth control.....and women need NO excuse to have an abortion
I am quite aware of the stats. I read your full posts. ALL of it. However, as you will note from my post, the stats aren't at the root of several objections I have. Yet, you focus on the stats alone. That is not good enough. As for the stats, the fact that laws against women would "only" hurt some rape and incest victims, some cases where every attempt to prevent pregnancy didn't work, etc., is once again NOT good enough. I'm in favor of working to lower the abortion rate in the US. Others on this board agree. However, you have shown no interest in any method but one. Demanding that we restrict the method is NOT a way to make progress. Canada is having more success than we are, without your legal assault. Why are you ignoring that proven success?
I think you have me confused with someone else. I have not addressed any legal aspects or restricting methods.
I responded to somone else. But, good. If you aren't focused onlaws against women we can probably work together to reduce the number of abortions.
Sure. Nobody I've ever heard of opposes that idea - on paper. The catch comes in that it is a total failure as a solution.
TRUE! BUT the Anti-Choicers think that all women have to do to avoid having an abortion is to stop having sex....""a total failure as a solution""
Yeah, sex should only be for men, the catch is they have to pay for child support if a woman decides to keep the pregnancy
I taught sex ed for years and I encouraged abstinence but I wasn’t going to keep them ignorant if they were having sex.
It has to go beyond that. They aren't going to come and talk to their teacher before they have sex. Plus, kids at a very young age need to know they have a right to be secure in their person, etc. Like in a lot of subjects in school, there is a continuum of information leading from that personal security to being well informed.
Exactly. And as a teacher I am well aware that they are not going to tell me they are having sex and that is why after encouraging abstinence I would teach about birth control and not getting pregnant or STDs One thing I did in my sex ed class was have the kids write journals to me and they would pour their hearts out and tell me their most intimate secrets because they didn’t have to look at me face to face...and I would respond to them I did tell them that if they were abused in anyway I would have to report it but otherwise it was just between us
No, its not a failure as a deterrent. When the person - boy and girl - has to face real consequences, then they will modify their behavior. That's social engineering, basic human psychology, it can be seen in everything from the tax code to legal system to teens in high school. Its not a complete solution, but it will certainly help.
Despite having the history of the world to back up the FACT that preaching abstinence doesn't work some still persist....amusing...
This story should put to rest any notions that all these children are unwanted: https://nypost.com/2017/06/17/this-woman-stole-children-from-the-poor-to-give-to-the-rich/
LOL! From 1950 ! Boy you really have to stretch........How pertinent is that to 2017 ? 67 years ago....LOL!
