A Majority of Those Under 35 Years Approve of Abortion
In the Des Moines Register is a poll about public attitudes toward abortion. A majority of older voters does not approve of abortion in some cases. A solid majority, 57%, of those under 35 years old generally approves of abortion. This trajectory follows the same demographic path as approval of gay relationships. Time is not on the side of social conservatism.
At the heart of politics which have the goal of depriving gay people and women the same rights as straight people and men is prejudice. It is a prejudice we did not create but one that existed and we were born into it.
Prejudice against some non white races was huge in my lifetime is has slipped into acceptance over time. People as old as I am know of the incarceration of people of Japanese decent as well as 400 years of slavery and segregation. How could something that went on for so long and was so well ingrained in our culture be upended? It was, or, at least we are quite far along in upending it.
And so it is with abortion. I've mentioned hear many times the unresolved dilemma of anti abortion laws. When a fetus becomes a "human being," the same laws that apply to human beings already born would apply to fetuses. This means that when a fetus died or disappeared, an investigation would be required by law enforcement. Women would be under the watchful eye of authorities all the while they are pregnant. This is already happening in local locations in the U.S.
Men and women under 35 recognize the rights of women are just as important as the rights of men. When time comes to vote for candidates and on issues I have no doubt they will see to it their views prevail.
It has been said, that 'I can't hear what you're saying, your actions are speaking so loudly.'
ReplyDeleteAnd so it is with abortion politics.
I'm happy to point out that the abortion rate is the lowest it's ever been since 1973. Not just 2% or 5% but down 50%; half of what it used to be. Jon will say it is because of the widespread use of artificial contraception.
The fact is, despite the rise in US population, the number of abortions is half of what it was in 1973.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/number-abortions-us-falls-lowest-1973-65685105
The evidence is coming from the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute as reported by ABC News. The same report can be found from any number of media outlets.
Matt "I'm happy to point out ..is the lowest it's be since 1973."
DeleteI'm happy fewer abortions are needed as well. I'm happy heart attack numbers are down. Whenever the public takes measures to prevent medical problems that is good. What is not good is having medical decisions made at the local Bishop's residence instead at a doctor's office with the patient.
Jon,
ReplyDeleteAs you may have read, the article in Matt’s post points to fewer women becoming pregnant and increased accessibility to contraception due to the Affordable Care Act as the primary drivers for the decrease. In the period between 2011 - 2017, 400 restrictive state laws were not the main force behind the decline. A significant increase in the use of abortifacients was also noted.
As restrictive laws by states become more draconian they will likely have more effect until a measure of sanity is restored. My guess is disregarding the quality of life of an adult women in favor of a fetus seems so titillating to some anti-abortion zealots it may have an erotic dimension sublimated by a more socially acceptable mild religious euphoria.
Ardy B "..by more socially acceptable mild religious euphoria."
ReplyDeleteBeautifully stated. A certain kind of euphoria must happened when folks like Matt learn another woman has been punished for having sex. The more she suffers from losing a job, or her other children suffer because the home life was difficult before the birth or even the health of the mother is harmed by the birth the more such folks celebrate. "This will teach her not to have sex."
how can any idiot really believe this nonsense about punishing women for having sex? that is so, shall we say, so shop worn. do you people still live in trees?
DeleteUnknown "...nonsense about punishing women for having sex?"
DeleteApparently you do not read, or have forgotten, posts here at the blog. Countless times there have been posts, including from posters still active here, that if women just crossed their legs they would not need abortions. The meaning is clearly if they have sex they need to suffer a pregnancy. Many times over the decades men have told me the problem of unwanted pregnancies would solve itself if women suffered through all their pregnancies--no abortions would be needed. Abortion is the whip that teaches women not to have sex.
I cannot end this without quoting you, how can any idiot not see that forcing pregnancies to term is punishment for having sex?
Unknown: Believe me when I say that Jon acts no differently than Satan. His goal is to get people so worked up that they have animosity towards one another. Really, nothing what he says makes sense. What I find amusing, if there such a thing here, is the number of spelling errors Jon makes. His latest is "happened", when I think he meant happen.
DeleteBishop Folda would surely be amazed to learn that the medical decisions of his Fargo diocese flock will no longer be going through his office. Just the sheer number of antibiotic prescriptions he had to approve last year was enough to have to hire another full-time staff member.
I think that his spelling errors relect the fact that he isn't much concerned about quality of writing. just throw it out there, get people pissed and go on to the next one. that said, I, too, tend to post in haste. the result, a few "beauts" on my part.
DeleteJon, it is certain that if people adhered to a responsible set of sexual ethics (something that seems to beyond your ken) there would be no reason for abortion. but people often do not behave in responsible ways (original sin?) we are left with abortion as a way out. i.e. make the child "pay" for the parents misdeeds. I recognize, of course, that you will (and have) twisted this view to make us believe that we are punishing women for having sex(rather than punishing the conceptus, which in your world, is written off as a nullity). it also seems that you think that sex is some kind of universal "right," the consequences thereof be damned. as I recall having said before, there are times when I think of pro-abortion fanaticism as little more than a subset of the so-called sexual revolution.
ReplyDeleteUnknown "It also seems you think sex is some kind of universal 'right'..."
ReplyDeleteExcept for rape and such, having sex is legal. Even same sex is now legal. As far as "a responsible set of sexual ethics", I think you are talking about your Catholic religious rules on sex.
The fetus is part of a woman's body. Until someone comes up with a reason law enforcement must keep tabs on the behavior of pregnant women, women should have rights equal to men.
If you have an argument as to why women should not have rights equal to men, you can post them here.
since when is thinking that humans should act responsibly, prudently is, as you claim, nothing but Catholic rules regarding sex. as to the fetus being part of the women's body: that is demonstrably untrue. it is a separate, distinct body. and it really amuses me when male feminists like you try to keep up with the rabid female feminists.
Deleteunknown "fetus being part of the women's body: that is demonstrably untrue."
ReplyDeleteThat's a new one. If the woman dies, the fetus dies. It is demonstrably true they are one and the same.
nonsense. if the mother dies and the born child die, does that prove that they are one and the same? your views on such matters don't even make for good sophistry.
DeleteUnknown "mother and born child.."
ReplyDeleteIt's not a requirement to check your brains at the door before posting, but it seems to happen. If the mother of a born child dies the child can live on. It happens often. If the mother of a fetus dies, the fetus dies.