When it comes to getting "worked up", abortion could become the defining political issue in our country for some time if Roe v. Wade is overturned. This is because overturning it has been the (political) life's goal of a significant number of people.
I just want to say something about average age here. The average age being 26 is misleading. The peak number of offenders are aged much younger from 20-24. The ramp up from 13 to 24 is very high, peaks at 24 and then drastically falls off. The fact we live much longer than 26 is why the average is pulled higher. So in 1988 these "ghost criminals" would have been 15 and homicide should have drastically started it's reduction, in fact the opposite happened and crime increased. Also, if your theory was correct we would have seen a nice wave of continuing drop off as we not only lost the peak 13-26 year old criminals but also as the crime was reduced for all age levels. The "ghost criminals" would have been unable to account for crime at 45 just as much at 25. That didn't happen, crime remained pretty flat and is recently increasing. The only thing that happened was a steep drop off from 1994 to 2000 then a level out.
Im not disagreeing with you at all. Its a hollow pointless victory that only serves to distract from meaningful discussions that actually matter. Does overturning Roe Vs Wade really matter if all 50 states hypothetically legalize abortion? For the vast majority of Americans, we will understand its a pointless debate either way. However there are the fringe on both sides who will feel its about the principle of the argument. Nothing frustrates me more when people get distracted from more meaningful discussions. Roe vs Wade is just one of those that corral people back into their political party voting blocks.
If you look at women who have had an abortion, you would see that there isn't much of difference between classes. However, poorer women are much more likely to have multiple abortions. I forgot where I read that, but it was interesting and stuck.
Well, obviously the courts decided that abortion is upheld in the constitution which is why we are here now. A woman getting an abortion dictates nothing upon your life, so this isn't some federal overreach here, or the rich trying to dictate anything upon your life. This is about many women who feel that they should have the right to opt out of pregnancy should it happen. The majority of women believe this and feel pretty strongly about it? So I also don't get the argument that there are more important issues to discuss, that's your opinion. Different issues matter to different people. For some people, this is THEIR issue. Here is the thing regarding abortion. Making it illegal in some states is not a good thing. Poor women won't have the funds to fly out to California to get an abortion. I don't think they have to and the biggest thing is that if they are determined to do it, they will.
There is nothing obvious about this statement. SCOTUS has overturned previous decisions in the past. SCOTUS is not infallible as you are currently insinuating. If this was the case, then we would not be debating the Kennedy replacement. Both sides, which IMO have merit, accuse the SCOTUS as being impartial to political beliefs over constitutional law. If I knock up a chick and I want her to get an abortion but she declines, thus forcing me to have to pay child support for 18 years, you're telling me that it dictates nothing on my life? Are you just being naive or just stupid? Again, the vast majority of abortions are due to women not wanting the responsibility, not because of the womans/fetus health, rape or incest. Why do women get a decision but I don't (Even if you think it doesnt dictate my life). In this hypothetical solution in which you think most states will ban abortion, I would find a $400 airfare a fine investment over having a baby i dont want. You think California is your liberal paradise obvious, however before Roe Vs Wade, California only allowed abortions based on the health of Woman/fetus, rape and incest. Only Washington, New York and Hawaii offered abortions w/out restrictions. Alaska restricted late term abortions. Discard the late term abortions debate, how many states are going to outlaw abortion as a means of birth control? Very few. Its not going to require a a flight to California. Again, stupid discussion that merits little response. Abortions are here to stay, regardless of SCOTUS verdicts.
You need better proof than that. The poverty rate climbed after Roe and has been flat since the early 1980's despite increasing abortions.
They are not infallible but seeing as how we got to Roe V Wade it seems they have consistently come to this decision. The only point here is that the SCOTUS time and time again decided that this was a right that women have and should be protected. They did not come to this decision lightly. Sure, the Trump Scotus can decide to overturn it, I dare them to. Seems like the blowback wouldn't be worth it but whatever. Well then, don't get a chick knocked up? Pretty much this is what the religious right has been telling women, the same applies to men. There, now it has no effect on your life. Personal responsibility and all, you don't get any women pregnant if you practice abstinence or are more responsible about where you stick your genitals and with who. Women have the decision because it is their body and this falls under bodily integrity. A discussion about child support is another thing entirely. I think if you want to change that it would benefit you to just stay on that subject. I said some states. You really have to understand that some people don't have $400, it's not even an option for them. In states that it is illegal you're going to find a black market, you just will. Nah, I was just creating a scenario. Just replace it with New York then, same point. As for how many states will allow it or not, I have no idea... That's again, according to you. You don't get to decide which issues are important to which people. I also don't understand why anyone on the right would want it overturned if they believed that it would be legal in most if not all states anyway. Seems like a good way to collect a few Ls in elections.
Homicide rates from late eightjes to 2000 are distorted by crack violence among black youths among others. The homicide rate peamed in 1980. The seventies really saw a mix of drugs and poverty leading to violence. Poverty is obviously helped by less kids. There also may have actually been some birth control education that helps reduce unwanted pregnancies
If she wants to give it up for adoption - The Father should be the First to be able to get the child I think Fathers have the right to know if they are potential fathers. I think falsely accusing someone of being the father, should carry some punishment which is why I beleive in mandatory paternity tests (Which is dicey for the alternative uses but . . . which is why once paternity is determined they should be destroyed) By the same token I believe in equal pay I believe in equal level of safety and pursuit of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness Rocket River
Overturning Roe v Wade and making abortion illegal is being driven by right wing and you know the conservative states would make abortion illegal. So why would the most personal of human rights...what a woman chooses to do with her body, be made illegal in one state where its legal in others?
Government sponsors influx of drugs into black and brown communities ignited that That said. Pro-Life is a misnomer. They are more Pro-Birth Those bastards don't give a d*mn once you are born They are generally anti WIC, Welfare or anything that helps a child grow into a functional adult . . .well at least not on the government dime While they seem pretty kewl with throwing money away on the Death Penalty (Stabbing is free!! - Chris Rock) Corporate Welfare and useless wars The direction of this country should be making it so Not only is Abortion undesirable but unnecessary Rocket River
I don't think falsely accusing someone of being a father should carry punishment when it is easily resolved through a paternity test. Our system doesn't reward or punish people this way. But yes, if a woman wants to give a child up for adoption, the father should have the inside trek of adopting the child - and guess what - that is how it works today. In fact, the mother would have to pay child support on top of that.
Not if he is not informed. Is she does not want to pay child support she simply never tells him Rocket River
If you have paid 10 yrs in child support . . .. . . to find out it is not your child . . .. . . you deserve some of that back I don't think just because you married to a lady . .. they child should automatically become your responsibility (in cases of her cheating etc) Rocket River
plenty of kids born into extreme extreme extreme poverty in the 30's. Incredibly low crime in the 1950's as adults. Why did we have crack violence when we were able to exterminate the evil, poor black babies? Many factors at play but I simply argue against the idea that the drop in crime is from abortion when the time of the drop and the shape of the drop don't match what you would expect from that correlation. They exactly match what you would expect with a correlation to the 1994 crime bill. secondary effects aside. paternity tests are banned in france. progressive future.
the pro-abortion side relies on the invisibility of the unborn science diminishes that advantage every day
