So does this mean anything? Is that 20 number significant? I would say so; according to the US Bureau of Justice Statistics between 1976 and 2002, 18-34 year olds accounted for 64.8% of all murders; the average age of the offender was about 26 years old. In 2002, 62% of all prison inmates were under the age of 35 and 76% of all homicides were committed by people under the age of 35. How different would this country have been if we had all these unwanted 20 year olds running around, especially as they got older and got into their peak crime years? Since 1993, that 20 year mark, violent crime has fallen over 50%, property crime has dropped 63% and the female suicide rate is down over 30% since 1973, the year abortion became legal.
Of course there are a thousand other factors that we must take into account today that we didn't face in the 70's and 80's and those could all be contributors to the decrease in crime. Education levels are higher, the baby-boomers are older, it is harder to obtain a gun, we have more nudity and bad language on TV, we have violent video games, we have a higher divorce rate, we have more violent and satanic music lyrics available to children, we aren't allowed to have prayer's in school, we have internet porn, people are no longer afraid to be openly gay, we have gay cartoon characters, condoms are available to teenagers, etc. So, just the fact that women aren't forced to have unwanted children doesn't necessarily mean that abortion is the only reason that we don't have maladjusted, unwanted, neglected kids turning into criminals when they reach their mid 20's.
Hmm, maybe those "family values" people have it all wrong; maybe their way of life was causing all the crime.
Sources: USA Today, Bureau of Justice Statistics (DOJ), Factcheck.org
32 comments:
you are rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrright?
i believe that the people born from unwanted pregnancies are the ones who really struggle to do something different and make something out of their lives in spite of their situation. there must be some other factor here to explain the statistics. i really believe this because jesus just wouldn't let such progress come from the horrible sin of abortion.
Well that was the point; sort of.
The original point was to just throw the theory of unwanted children causing crime and it link to Roe v Wade. And then I guess at the end I turned the whole "family values" stance around and wanted to point out that back in the days of "family values" we had a lot more problems than we have now in a freer open society. Although I realize there are plenty of people who want to put black people back at receiving end of a fire house, put the women back in the kitchen, restrict our first amendment freedoms, make it ok to beat up gay people again and let criminals buy guns.
Yes some people who were going to be aborted end up being great people but typically most people weren’t aborted, should have been. What if Hitler or Dahmers mom had an abortion?
You don't know what the fetus will become; it may not even come to term at all; it may be born with no eyes and 12 thumbs. What you do know is that you don't want a child and if you don’t want something you won't take care of it properly. Are you trying to say that every kid living in the projects with no father and a crack head mom is better off than never being born in the first place? Are you saying that society is better off as a result of that welfare mom having another kid that we have to raise and put through our education and corrections system?
As far as where I draw the line; I don't. It's none of my business; if you want an abortion go ahead, if you want to have a baby go ahead. I am a man therefore the choice is not mine and it shouldn't be in the hands of any other men either. You as a woman have a choice whether or not to have a child. Although I think we already have plenty of people on the planet already, feel free to have as many kids as you can care for.
As far as your last statement goes you will get no argument from me.
One last thought Goddess; would you want a bunch of men to make a law telling you what kind of tampons you are able to use? No? Why not? Is it because it's none of their business?
I wouldn't want a woman in the state senate telling me what kind of condoms I am allowed to wear or telling me that I can't get a prostate exam or any other medical procedure.
You also mentioned that it was ok to kill someone once they are alive but it doesn't make sense that you would say it is ok to kill a living person but not ok to terminate a clump of cells that is not a human life.
Good stuff, Toad. The reasonableness of this is what needs to be questioned. I had one guy I was arguing with tell me that I was a sinner for even disagreeing with him. That seemed unreasonable to me, how 'bout you?
Being a sinner is fine as long as you don't believe in God. It's the same difference between being an alcoholic and a drunk; drunks don't have to go to all those meetings.
I'm still just freaked out that Goddess's husband was aborted. How did he survive outside the womb? Did he have to turn tricks to get by?
Well yeah, there's that (hic).
Nice work again Toad.
I know that you are not suggesting that in every case abortion should be performed rather than having the baby. You are also not proposing that people on the lower end of the economic ladder or other high risk groups should have abortions to keep the crime rate down. In no way do you say that all children in this state should be killed in utero because they will definately become criminals.
You admitted that your analysis is not the sure answer for the crime rate and that other factors could be involved. All you did say is just the opposite of what the right has been saying since Roe first was upheld.
They said that immorality would reign with women able to make this decision about their bodies. It would be a slippery slope down the road to a total disregard of human life.
All you did was point out that it is just the opposite that is true, maybe due to legal abortions and maybe not. The facts are the facts and here it is definately something that warrants further analysis.
What Goddess and some of the other commenters fail to understand is that there are many cases where a certain family life is shown to have causation to create people who commit crimes. This can be an impoverished young mother who gets pregnant as well as many other things.
Then on the other hand you see cases where the same poor mother wants a child so bad and although the family may live a hard life she loves the child enough to teach them well and instill the right values.
Maybe this was a person like goddess' almost aborted husband. Choice is key because it doesn't force people into lives that they will resent, and resentment of ones live produces a lack of respect of other human life, i.e. crime, murder, etc.
I am the one who wants to keep the option open, I know it's a tough decision but we should keep it so someone can choose to make that decision if they decide that is what is best for them and society. It's the Goddess crowd who wants to force their opinions on other people. I am just saying that there are upsides to abortion for society that go further than just it helping a single girl take control of her life and her own destiny. As everyone knows I am the eternal optimist seeing the positive side of everything.
However, there is an extremist side to me that says until you can get off public assistance you shouldn't be able to have more kids. Not exactly saying abortion is the only option here, sterilization would work just as well, as would forced contraception. I have made this analogy before but I think it works: It's not fair for me to go out and buy a Porsche and then when I realize I can't afford it I make you take over the payments on it while I go out and buy a second one which you will also have to pay for.
As with driving, procreation should be a privilege not a right and should require a license.
Is it safe to assume that you would criminalize abortion if you had the chance?
I don't see how there is a paradox in those 2 statements; all of them will make the grocery lines shorter.
I’m with you; it should be a crime to be a stupid ass. Unfortunately that has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
So fine, I am sorry I thought you were a planned parenthood bombing prolifer.
All I have to say is...this statement: "satanic music lyrics" cracks me up.
Instead of thanking God (as so many musicians annoyingly do) during those award ceremonies...I can hear them now, "I'd like to thank my mom, the fans and most importantly, I'd like to thank Lucifer for inspiring me to write such thought-provoking, profound award-winning satanic lyrics."
Hilar.
Off the topic (sort of) but not really because it was embedded within all the other brouhaha in this post.
As far as abortion, I have my own opinion on the whole topic but alas...I am just too busy paying taxes, working for the Benjamins, complaining about slow left-lane drivers and making grilled pepperjack cheese sandwiches at the moment to share them. GOOD DAY.
mmmm... Pepper Jack cheese
Hey, go read this shit.
www.madison.com/toolbox/index.php?action=printme2&ref=tct&storyURL=%2Ftct%2Fhome%2Ftopstories%2Findex.php%3Fntid%3D55749%26ntpid%3D1
PS sorry i dont know how to link it.
Wait, even better. This republican Bennet (former secretary of education) speaking on just this statement. I cant believe he actually said it. listen:
/mediamatters.org/static/audio/bennett-200509280006.mp3
Wow, he actually said to stop crime you could abort every black baby. That sure puts conservatives in a pickle doesn't it.
The_Goddess. While your husband maybe a good person (and I hope he is if you married him) he is the exception rather than the rule. Unwanted babbies make up a huge percentage of those than end up in criminal facilities.
Now Levitt certainly does not encourage killing off unwanted babies (in fact he says that abortion is probably the most ineffecient form of crime control), but the point he is making is the corrilation between unwanted babbies and the crime rate.
Obviously it would be better if these babbies were prevented at an earlier stage, and I'm sure even toAd thinks of abortion as a last resort, but that doesn't mean it isn't a method of crime control.
Levitt makes a big point that you can't predict ahead of time whether a baby will turn out good or bad, but you can predict the odds, and with the odds that bad... why wouldn't you?
btw, Levitt is the guy who wrote Freakonomics for those of you who don't know.
It makes perfect sense to me: most criminals were unwanted children. Fewer unwanted children = reduced crime.
Yah, to hell with the sorry fuckers who wouldn't turn out to be criminals...
So if unwanted and unloved usually turns out to be a criminal, wouldn't all those who are wanted and loved usually turn out ok? .....But they don't.
actually the_true_messiah, they do.
Children who are wanted and loved usually turn out ok. Now remember, usually doesn't mean always.
Uhh, and thats why I also used the word 'usually'. 'Usually' doesn't necessarily implie 'always', or at least the English language I use doesn't. I don't know about you.
In the past 20 years crime rate has gone down, ok maybe it has?
Perhaps they should take into account the 50 MILLION Unborn Babies that were murdered in their mothers womb since 1973?
Have you happened to notice that in the past 20 years Breast Cancer is on the rise in younger and younger women?
Well, what the nice abortion providers neglect to tell these women is that if you terminate your pregnancy, your chances for breast cancer increase by 150%. And if you have more than one abortion, pretty much guaranteed that you will get breast cancer.
Go here to read more on AbortionFacts.com
That is news to me. I know it is not the safest procedure in the world but neither is eating at McDonalds and I don't see you on the street corner protesting that.
Oh and by the way it's hard to "murder" somthing if it doesn't have a heart beat, or brain activity. So everytime someone cuts down a tree is that murder as well?
I'm sorry if I don't take an organization called Abortion” Facts" seriously. Gee, I wonder if they have an agenda. How are the two even related? More women are getting breast cancer because they live in polluted cities and eat shitty foods with bad chemicals in them.
Obviously there is a HUGE difference between eating a super-sized meal at McDonalds and murdering an unborn child. If the baby wasn't really alive, then there would be no need to terminate the pregnancy. If it's not really a baby, then the woman is not really pregnant. Surely you are not comparing a tree to a human life? No it is not murder to cut down a tree!
Let me ask you these simple questions:
When a woman is pregnant, is she pregnant with a...
A) Human Species? B) Plant Species? C) Animal Species? or D) I don't know?
Is this species within her womb...
A) Alive B) Dead or C) I don't know?
Go here for pictures of ABORTED BABIES, then tell me what you think after looking at them.
=======================
How are abortion and breast cancer related?
Just think about this for a minute...
When a woman becomes pregnant her body produces a surge of the hormone estrogen. This causes the cells in the breast to multiply rapidly in the first half of the pregnancy. In the second half, other hormones are produced to stop this rapid growth and to direct these cells to perform new functions such as producing milk. These last changes protect the cells against cancer-causing substances. When a woman has an abortion, all of those millions of cells are left immature and growing too fast. Without the second surge of hormones to turn off the growth and direct the cell, they are left open and vulnerable to cancer.
The only "agenda" is to save the lives of children and to make women aware of the consequences for killing their offspring. Is there something wrong with that?
Abortion is not a natural procdure, and when women murder their own offspring, they WILL REAP WHAT THEY SOW. It's called 'Cause and Effect' my friend!
Toad - You also said, "As with driving, procreation should be a privilege not a right and should require a license."
Absolutely Correct - It's called a Marriage License. Sex outside of marriage poses all sorts of risks, like STD's and unwanted pregnancies, which lead to abortions and fatherless children.
Perhaps the adults should get their sh*t together and quit acting like a bunch of whores?
Either can damage an unborn child. And of course it's safe to say that o woman isn't pregnant with a dog but that's not to say that the pregnancy would have ever resulted in life. 36% of embryos that implant themselves in the uterus never come to term. So for one, in cases of abortion you don't know if that baby would have been naturally miscarried or be stillborn to begin with. You are not God, you have no proof that a pregnancy will result in a human life.
You also seem to be missing my point that within the first 6 weeks you don't even know what sex the embryo is going to be and within the first 8 weeks it is no more life than a cup of sperm is; neither has a heart beat, a brain, or a nervous system.
So as far as breast cancer is concerned pregnancy causes breast cancer. If she would have never become pregnant she wouldn't have produced those hormones and thus wouldn't have increased her risk of breast cancer. By the way, everything causes breast cancer. Eat McDonalds, drink Coke, live next to power lines, go to the dentist; these all increase your risks of breast cancer.
As far as the second comment I agree with most of it but you’re missing something; Sex out of marriage can result in the same unwanted kids and fatherless children as sex within marriage. 50% of all marriages end in divorce. There should be a procreation license for single and married people. Just because you are married doesn't mean that you aren't a white trash, wife beating, alcoholic meth head who is going to beat and neglect your unwanted kids.
Toad - you to me, “You are not God, you have no proof that a pregnancy will result in a human life.”
Right, I am not God and neither are you! What gives you the right to dictate who should live or not?
Like I said, if it’s not really a baby, then the woman is not really pregnant. If natural causes lead to a miscarriage, that is one thing, but NO person has the right to end the life of a child, wanted or not!
Take a another GOOD look at these pictures of 7-9 week old ABORTED BABIES.
Then tell me if these aborted babies look like insignificant, undeveloped tissue? Go ahead - take a look, I dare you!
Post a Comment