- Joined
- Mar 27, 2009
- Messages
- 11,963
- Reaction score
- 3,543
- Location
- Naperville, IL
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
Okay, Mississippi, you're still a state.
Moderator's Warning: |
The next fool who calls another poster a fool in this thread will be removed from it. |
The anti-abortion percentage in the US is actually way smaller than we think it is. The religious right has just as many abortions as atheist liberals. It is only a small minority that is actually advocating for banning abortion or providing person hood to clusters of cells. It's a vocal minority though.
There are so many unsupported statements in that I don't know where to begin. How about start with presenting even a shred of evidence for this one: "The religious right has just as many abortions as atheist liberals."
Who's having abortions (religion)?
Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as "Born-again/Evangelical".
What I find particularly amusing is the general conservative position on life in general. But that is perhaps a discussion for a different thread altogether.
Bad day in conservativeville, eh? First the DC Circuit upholds Health Care Reform, then Ohio voters repeal anti-union legislation, then not one but two women come forward to accuse Herman Cain of sexual misconduct, and now voters in Mississippi (of all places) have handed a resounding defeat to anti-abortion legislation that was expected to pass!
Mississippi Voters Reject
This was yet another conservative effort to make an end run around Roe v. Wade. It may have failed in part due to speculation that it would actually outlaw the use of contraceptive pills.
Also, identifying your religion doesn't really mean you're religious.
But I suppose that was your point from the beginning, however indirect.
I will admit that there are some pockets in various Christian denominations that do believe abortion is OK. There is no Catholic, however, that can legitimately say that their religion supports it. The Church specifically forbids it, and any Catholic procuring or assisting in procuring an abortion, or God forbid performing or assisting in performing one, is guilty of mortal sin. I have also read that abortion carries automatic excommunication, which is a person being put out of the communion of the church for a serious moral offense. Excommunication does not mean "permanent ban" however, as most people mistakenly believe.
There are so many unsupported statements in that I don't know where to begin. How about start with presenting even a shred of evidence for this one: "The religious right has just as many abortions as atheist liberals."
You're right. The religious have far more abortions than atheists.
Chuck's statement is idiotic, and your counter of it is extremely slanted from someone just looking to make a hit rather than looking at it objectively.
To even approach attempting to honestly look at the ridiculous concept he suggested one would actually need to look at percentages.
76% of the populations considers itself Christian. A full 85% of people are religious. Only 1.6% of the population considers themselves Atheists.
A retarded spider monkey should be able to tell you there would be more abortions from religious people than atheists considering the fact that if EVERY atheist had an abortion it would only take 2.25% of the Christian, not even just religious, population to have MORE abortions than them.
Suggestion Atheists have more abortions than Christians is idiotic. Similarly, attempting to "disprove" it by acting like the religious have such a giant amount of abortions is also a bit of an over exaggeration and a rather useless bit of data. As stupid as the whole argument is, the only way to more honestly and effectively figure it out would be to look at the percentage within each. But actually coming at it with an honest attempt to find out a realistic and fair bit of information rather than just pushing one or the other individual hyper partisan mindset wouldn't be the point of either of your posts, so why would I expect it to be done in such a way.