• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

In New York City, 41% of pregnancies aborted

I felt that it was long ago as well. Perhaps she lived there in the 80s. Those times were dangerous especially in a city like NYC. Nowadays everything is safe....too safe. There is no more spice to NYC. It has becomed to plastic like most of Europe. Its why I prefer cities like Chicago. Actually yeah, Chicago is the only good city in the states.

The fact that it's gotten safer does not mean that there's no spice or that it's plastic. I guarantee that no matter what you're into, you could find something that would blow your face 7 nights a week.

I spent a couple weekends in Chicago and that was enough for me. The entire thing felt like one large suburb that closes at 12.

there's 3 types of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics.

True as that may be, it's not much of a response. If you think that NYC is somehow lying about the number of murders, explain how.
 
True as that may be, it's not much of a response. If you think that NYC is somehow lying about the number of murders, explain how.

Not that anyone actually provided statistics on this, but just the fact that you have to qualify the statement by saying 'big city' means something. It's the same as saying it's the least dangerous of all the most dangerous places.

As to the actual topic though, if 41% is anywhere close to accurate it's a public health nightmare. Even if you don't feel it's murder (which I do, but that's not the point of this post), you have a tremendous number of people participating in an unneeded behavior that results in risky procedures. But I suppose if you start with the smokers and people eating saturated fats eventually you'll get around to looking at this one.
 
Not that anyone actually provided statistics on this, but just the fact that you have to qualify the statement by saying 'big city' means something. It's the same as saying it's the least dangerous of all the most dangerous places.

Never been there personally, but I've been told it's safer if you can avoid encounters with police.

As to the actual topic though, if 41% is anywhere close to accurate it's a public health nightmare. Even if you don't feel it's murder (which I do, but that's not the point of this post), you have a tremendous number of people participating in an unneeded behavior that results in risky procedures. But I suppose if you start with the smokers and people eating saturated fats eventually you'll get around to looking at this one.

That's 41% of how many pregnancies???

Are Babies Bad for the Environment? : Scientific American Podcast

Some people are probably viewing these numbers as a 'good thing'...
 
Women want to go to college instead of be mothers.
 
Several reactions:

1. That statistic is astounding and disheartening. 41% is a sickening rate of abortion, and shows just how messed up our society has become.

2. What makes you think those babies would grow up to be Democrats? Doesn't NY have a Republican mayor?

3. What makes you think that most of those abortions weren't paid for by the government in one way or another?

4. Just from a purely economic standpoint, an abortion is cheaper than a delivery, isn't it?

Are YOU ****ing serious???
 
Are YOU ****ing serious???

Cost wise is specifically what he was referring to - and yes.
An abortion is a short, outpatient procedure.
A delivery is not.

logically - you simply cannot unmake that fact. It is true regardless of emotional reaction.

It also costs more to raise a child than it costs to not raise a child - gee, imagine that.

Like it or not - life costs money. It in fact costs a lot of money. when you don't have a lot of money you're just living next to homeless.

I feel bad for people who go through this entire situation in their personal lives. On one hand they have the pro-life crowd pressuring them to have another child. Then they have the pro-choice supporting, maybe. Then they have those who don't want them dependent on the government for support - and who negatively chide them for having more children . . . and then family - maybe their family doesn't want them to have the child. Maybe their partner promised to be there and then bailed (it's happened to me - happens to a lot).

What a ****ty situation to be in - where people will hold it against you and loath you no matter what you do.
 
Last edited:
The fact that it's gotten safer does not mean that there's no spice or that it's plastic. I guarantee that no matter what you're into, you could find something that would blow your face 7 nights a week.

I spent a couple weekends in Chicago and that was enough for me. The entire thing felt like one large suburb that closes at 12.

Chicago is a quiet city. But you have to know where to go. It is much a better city than NYC. NYC did loose its spice and it is way too plastic and that is not something I find enthralling. Even if I can find a little group of cyber-hackers or playboy's or beautiful women. They are all fake. Its pathetic. Everything in NYC is too European but with American values. Its why it sucks.
 
Cost wise is specifically what he was referring to - and yes.
An abortion is a short, outpatient procedure.
A delivery is not.

logically - you simply cannot unmake that fact. It is true regardless of emotional reaction.

It also costs more to raise a child than it costs to not raise a child - gee, imagine that.

Like it or not - life costs money. It in fact costs a lot of money. when you don't have a lot of money you're just living next to homeless.

I feel bad for people who go through this entire situation in their personal lives. On one hand they have the pro-life crowd pressuring them to have another child. Then they have the pro-choice supporting, maybe. Then they have those who don't want them dependent on the government for support - and who negatively chide them for having more children . . . and then family - maybe their family doesn't want them to have the child. Maybe their partner promised to be there and then bailed (it's happened to me - happens to a lot).

What a ****ty situation to be in - where people will hold it against you and loath you no matter what you do.
Of course, there are ways to not get pregnant in the first place that are cheaper than both abortion and child birth.
 
Of course, there are ways to not get pregnant in the first place that are cheaper than both abortion and child birth.

Many people, it seems, don't even support that being provided. . . not only do the pro-life people not want abortions. They also oppose providing free birthcontrol if the nature of the BC violates their pro-life views.
Their pressures have led to some BC's being made largely unavailable- and have even permitted Pharmacies to choose not to fill various prescriptions.

Unless we unhinder the availability of BC - which includes tibal ligation and visectomies BEFORE anyone parents a child - then our own government is literally making the vary class that everyone loathes.

Our system is full of holes - and unless we're all one way or the other I feel it's just ridiculous to call people out on their final choice.
 
Many people, it seems, don't even support that being provided. . . not only do the pro-life people not want abortions. They also oppose providing free birthcontrol if the nature of the BC violates their pro-life views.
Their pressures have led to some BC's being made largely unavailable- and have even permitted Pharmacies to choose not to fill various prescriptions.
You're talking about one very specific birth control option. RU 486, the abortion pill. I was referring to BC that prevents pregnancy in the first place. Other than Catholics, I know very few pro lifers that oppose contraception.
Unless we unhinder the availability of BC - which includes tibal ligation and visectomies BEFORE anyone parents a child - then our own government is literally making the vary class that everyone loathes.

Our system is full of holes - and unless we're all one way or the other I feel it's just ridiculous to call people out on their final choice.
Other than RU 486, I don't think the availability BC has been hindered at all.
 
That umber is so astouding that I have a hard time believing it is true.

We've had 49.5 MILLION abortions since roe v. wade in 1973.
That is both disgusting and astounding.

And it's not like birth control is some type of rationed item, is new to the market and is available in one form only.

Sad... truly sad.

.
 
Last edited:
So you would have preferred 49.5 million illegal abortions?

I think we would have preffered 49.5 living people who weren't murdered by their mother's and "doctor."
 
So you would have preferred 49.5 million illegal abortions?
It's a complete break down in logic to think that everyone of those 49.5 mil would actually get an illegal abortion, but carry on.
 
We've had 49.5 MILLION abortions since roe v. wade in 1973.
That is both disgusting and astounding.

And it's not like birth control is some type of rationed item, is new to the market and is available in one form only.

Sad... truly sad.

.

So if all those babies were born then what?

Born to 49.5 million mothers who didn't want them - fathers who were likely not even around except for the fun part . . . who's going to raise them? How would their lives be?

Like I always say - unless we fix *all those other problems* abortion is an accepted although unpleasant fact of life.

Just like war, suicide and divorce.
 
So if all those babies were born then what?

Born to 49.5 million mothers who didn't want them - fathers who were likely not even around except for the fun part . . . who's going to raise them? How would their lives be?

Like I always say - unless we fix *all those other problems* abortion is an accepted although unpleasant fact of life.

Just like war, suicide and divorce.

Society would most likely be more responsible, and certainly less callous.

When life is disposable, has been reduced to a Bic lighter... it's sad commentary on society, and is destructive.

.
 
Last edited:
We've had 49.5 MILLION abortions since roe v. wade in 1973. .

Staggering.

And it's actually 100 times that. Think of the children and grandchildren of those babies. One of them might have cured cancer.

Think of your brothers and sisters. Think of your kids. Imagine how different your life had they all been aborted.
 
Society would most likely be more responsible, and certainly less callous.

When life is disposable, has been reduced to a Bic lighter... it's sad commentary on society, and is destructive.

.

So 200 years ago people were more responsible and less callous?

Haha! If you know anything about history you'd know that's a steaming pile.
 
1 - So if all those babies were born then what?

Born to 49.5 million mothers who didn't want them - fathers who were likely not even around except for the fun part . . . 2 - who's going to raise them? 3 - How would their lives be?

1 - when they get to working age that would reduce the ratio of retirees leaving the workforce to those IN the workforce having to pay into the retirement of their elders... for starters.

2 - First, like it or not, there are a portion of abortions that are performed on women that simply do not want to take the responsibility of being a mother... to these women adoption is a better option. Otherwise, well, once humans become a disposable commodity society is in trouble, so it's not so much important WHO raises these children, but that these unborn children are at least given a chance.

Or we could always go with the Chinese option of forced abortions, forced sterilizations, etc...

3 - Can only speculate. The bigger issue though is the health of the women that get abortions... because if there is a flaw with the unborn baby, a woman's body can recognize the problem and then will have a miscarriage, when that happens the hormones adjust and cope. Different story if the baby is ripped out of the womb... the body doesn't know how to cope with there not being a baby to grow in the belly any longer... and well, if you get an abortion you might as well start drinking and smoking because your chance of getting cancer has increased drastically.

Like I always say - unless we fix *all those other problems* abortion is an accepted although unpleasant fact of life.

Just like war, suicide and divorce.

Ya.. let's have a war on pregnancies... why limit it to first term abortions?? You should be able to abort the child up to 5 years old. It's an 'unpleasant fact of life' that we kill our babies... so why stop while they are in the womb???
 
So 200 years ago people were more responsible and less callous?

Haha! If you know anything about history you'd know that's a steaming pile.

What percentage of people in the United States, if you asked them if they wished they were aborted, would say "yes"?

Nowhere in your argument do I hear consideration of what these babies would want given the choice. "Pro-choice" doesn't include their choice.
 
What percentage of people in the United States, if you asked them if they wished they were aborted, would say "yes"?

Nowhere in your argument do I hear consideration of what these babies would want given the choice. "Pro-choice" doesn't include their choice.

No, it doesn't include their choice. Why should it?
They aren't on their own and making their own choices until much later in life - up until then they're the charge of someone else.

Until my kids grow up and move out - their lives are 100% my decision.
 
Back
Top Bottom