Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
Can you cite this 100% figure?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
Can you cite this 100% figure?
Can you prove its wrong?
what is it you would like to prove wrong? the concept? or the statistic?
Yes,Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
The burden of proof lies with the person making the statistically unfalsifiable claim.
Leaving that aside for the moment. All I need to do is find one Democrat, or state the possibility that one Democrat, doesn't support your contention.
This being the case then 100% of Democrates must be false.
THe fact that they want even more blacks to get abortions so thre are fewer of them around... being they already murder well over half of the babies they conceive now. SO they want to make it free and even easier to bump up those numbers as high as they possibly can... 100% is as high as they can go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
OK. That's a different argument to the one you put forward.
No it isn't. It's a well known fact here... of course being on the other side of the planet... you wouldn't be aware of it. Can't say if you have any minority groups with already extraordinarily high abortion rates that have people pushing for making it easier and free which would only increase those numbers in Australia... that sort of information doesn't make its way here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
Ok. How about we change the subject matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
You did mention Australia. I will tell you what I know.
In Australia we only have one state that has abortion on demand. Abortion in Australia is controlled by individual states.
In Australia abortion is rarely a hot issue.
I am not sure about indigenous Australians. They may have a higher termination rate. I believe that overall abortion is slowly decreasing.
Having said that one would need to look at the facts and figures, especially in relation to particular age groups.
As I said, this is off the top of my head. Everyone is free to do the research and inform me. Saves me doing it.
Here the black abortion rate are more than double those of the next highest ethnic group. Which if memory serves me right are the hispanics. Both of these groups are statisticly proven to have low usage of condoms or other forms of birth control.
Just looking at the posts on this site... you can see the extraordinarily high rate of complete ignorance of the human reproductive system. Making Abortions free and as easier to get than cigarettes would only encourage more of that same behavior. You have to present an ID to buy cigarettes here... they want to give abortions to 14 year olds without the parents knowledge or consent. I read in the newspaper today that 42% of black women in the USA either have or have had an STD, it was in a left wing newspaper that had the article. THat actually surprised me it was that high.
Those numbers would go even higher.
Have to say smoothy I don't think the availability of abortion has anything to do with promiscurity, that is a cultural thing and seems to be a much higher rate in your country than in others, such as Australia, which may account for different abortion rates even though there are similarities in our societies. The one similarity we don't share is the population of coloured races so that may account for a greater rate in your country, but it is a long bow to suggest that abortion is made easy to get rid of coloured races. I think you just tend to do things to excess, whether it be guns, promiscurity or political corruption
I'm afraid the bow isn't as long as you might think. The founder of Planned Parenthood was an ardent Eugenicist.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Margaret Sanger’s Negro Project - National Historic Americans | Examiner.com
Later in life she broke with the German eugenicists, but that was long after the organization was up and running.
Read Cdad's link to Sanger and learn more about the eugenics movement that was a big part of end of the 19th century thinking in American scientific and academia thinking. We like to believe that it was confined to Germany's barbaric policies ;but all over Europe and the US you can find laws regarding forced sterilizations.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Margaret Sanger ,founder of Planned Parenthood was a devoted disciple of eugenics and Malthusian solutions. Her motives for opening her clinics was clearly rooted in a racist application of these movements.
what you have written has nothing to do with teh statements I made and very little to do with the abortion debate. fact is this is the "me" society in action, you know the un-holy trinity, me, myself and I, I'm sure you know that very well
Unfortunately the abortion debate as well as the discussion on race has sunk to an excuse to keep people underserved, underpaid, and under represented, and hidden by innuendo, obstacles and political tricks. None of which is based in fact which is a testament to the distraction of division and entrenchment of the idea of who is worthy, and who is not. The legacy of power and money has become the goal and the destination.
That's your me, myself, and I, generation Clete, its us. Not the old or young but us railing against THEM to keep what we have and get more while the young and old languish as the victims of our thinking and actions, as we tell them what's best for them, and make rules that apply only to them, and affect only them. The very definition of institutional racism.
Sure sure Tal, and then we have stories like this coming from the generation your saying we are stealing from.
Rachel Canning Loses Effort to Make Parents Pay High School Tuition - ABC News
Many children of today have no respect for elders and have taken it upon their generation to be entitled. It is a generation that is spinning out of control very fast due to progressive education.
I won't judge a generation by the actions of a brat or her lawyer.
This is a perfect synopsis of the Left Wing fallacy: judging groups instead of individuals. This fallacy lumps people such as Bill Cosby, Allen West, and Al Sharpton together because of the melanin content in their skin or Billy Graham, John Paul II, and Jim Jones because of their belief system. I'm not accusing you, Tal. This wasn't your point at all. You just happened to put the words together in the perfect order to let me make my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I think it's a much more complicated issue Cats, for individuals and groups, and you have to listen to both for their attitudes and concerns to be properly understood. Its too easy to dismiss what we may not agree with, or don't like the messengers. Or are just afraid of.
It is important to keep in mind that it wasn't only scientific and academic thinking. Eugenics existed across all political divides at the time. It was generally seen by business, government and a large cross section of the population as sensible and necessary.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Another important point is the idea for that time period was Eugenics by force. If you were labeled of a particular type then you had no choice in the matter. What is also required is to judge these matters in terms of historical perspective.
Slavery was once accepted also along with Jim Crow in the south after slavery. Much of the thinking then is alive and well now despite the progress we have supposedly made.
and today it's an individual choice to kill a baby . With the knowledge we have now ;one can destroy that life if it is not the gender you want ,or if it doesn't have the DNA make up you prefer. I'd say eugenics is alive and well and entrenched in the progressive philosophy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
Not just the progressives but most females as Catholics have availed themselves of this choice also. What do you think gynecologist for the rich and well to do have been doing forever? Money and power have always given better choices and options and opportunities to those that can afford them.
Poor women, not so much. But then the GOP'ers know that already.
Did you just say that Catholic females avail themselves of abortion?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
not only that ,he said most Catholic women .Quote:
Originally Posted by Catsmine
must have his wires crossed somewhere eh, perhaps he confuses abortion with contraception
You mean Catholic woman never get D and C's? Of course how would you know since they never tell.
You made the claim. Back it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Abortions: Comparing Catholic and Protestant Women
Changes in Abortion Rates Between 2000 and 2008 and Lifetime... : Obstetrics & GynecologyQuote:
The abortion rate for Catholic women was 22 per 1,000 women; the rate for Protestants was 18 per 1,000 women, according to study author Rachel K. Jones.
Quote:
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate abortion rates among subpopulations of women in 2008, assess changes in subpopulation abortion rates since 2000, and estimate the lifetime incidence of abortion.
METHODS: We combined secondary data from several sources, including the 2008 Abortion Patient Survey, the Current Population Surveys for 2008 and 2009, and the 2006–2008 National Survey of Family Growth, to estimate abortion rates by subgroup and lifetime incidence of abortion for U.S. women of reproductive age.
RESULTS: The abortion rate declined 8.0% between 2000 and 2008, from 21.3 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15–44 to 19.6 per 1,000. Decreases in abortion were experienced by most subgroups of women. One notable exception was poor women; this group accounted for 42.4% of abortions in 2008, and their abortion rate increased 17.5% between 2000 and 2008 from 44.4 to 52.2 abortions per 1,000. In addition to poor women, abortion rates were highest for women who were cohabiting (52.0 per 1,000), aged 20–24 (39.9 per 1,000), or non-Hispanic African American (40.2 per 1,000). If the 2008 abortion rate prevails, 30.0% of women will have an abortion by age 45.
CONCLUSION: Abortion is becoming increasingly concentrated among poor women, and restrictions on abortion disproportionately affect this population.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III
Yes, I agree with this. It is a very sad state of affairs.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Taken as a whole your statement is just an affirmation of the consequence. It is invalid reasoning.Quote:
Originally Posted by tombder55
Margaret Sanger's dream triumphant . She was a racists who despised the poor and was searching for a way to prevent them from reproducing.Quote:
CONCLUSION: Abortion is becoming increasingly concentrated among poor women, and restrictions on abortion
A lot of people were and did. I'm not disagreeing with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
So why do you challenge my comments and not this one from Clete ?
Quote:
but it is a long bow to suggest that abortion is made easy to get rid of coloured races.
Because it is a long bow to draw. It gives the impression that eugenics is a policy of PP. If this is the case then within the organization there should be a policy stating this aim. Such documentation should be recoverable. It is the case that such documentation was recoverable from the early part of last century.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
It is more likely the case that PP policies may well be contributing to eugenics. But this is completely different to saying that PP HAS a policy of eugenics.
If you can show me a policy of eugenics then I will agree with you, but otherwise dad's link and your previous statement is an affirmation of the consequence.
it was the stated goal of the founder and the entire reason she created the organization .
Yes, but that doesn't mean it is the stated goal of the organization today.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Many organizations and industries actively supported eugenics in the early part of last century. Does this mean that those organizations that still survive today still support eugenics? Of course not.
I think women's reproductive needs and rights have come a lot further in 50-70 years. The personal economic and racial aspects cannot be ignored, or dismissed as irrelevant.
the only thing that has changed is now it's called a right and a choice.
Are you suggesting we go back to when it wasn't a right, or a choice?
http://www.clutchmagonline.com/2011/...be-sterilized/
Quote:
North Carolina's eugenics program lasted from 1929 to 1974 (it was disbanded in 1977), and was initially adopted as a way to control welfare spending on poor Whites. However, as the program progressed, Black women became targets. During North Carolina's eugenics program, 7,600 people were forcibly sterilized, 85 percent of them female and 40 percent of them non-white.
Many, like Riddick, didn't know they were sterilized until they wanted to have more children later in life.
NBC's Rock Center reports:
It wouldn't be until Riddick was 19, married and wanting more children, that she'd learn she was incapable of having any more babies. A doctor in New York where she was living at the time told her that she'd been sterilized.For the past eight years, North Carolina has been trying to right its horrible wrongs. Lawmakers have been working to compensate victims of the state's eugenics program, but so far, only 48 victims have been matched to their records.
“Butchered. The doctor used that word… I didn't understand what she meant when she said I had been butchered,” Riddick said.
This summer, the state held hearings trying to encourage more victims to come forward. Bolstered by the efforts of state politicians like State Representative Larry Womble, the victims of North Carolina's horrible sterilization are finally speaking out.
Despite the daunting task of finding and compensating all 7,600 victims, as Representative Womble pointed out, if the government is “powerful enough to perpetrate this on this society, they ought to be responsible, step up to the plate and compensate.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuttyd
I dont think it is such a long bow at all when you examine the history and connections from past to present. The words may have changed and been upgraded to fit a point of veiw but it doesnt mean they have disappeared into history. Planned parenthood was started with blacks and hispanics in mind.
The organization promoted the founding of birth control clinics, primarily for the Black and Latino population, and encouraged women to control their own fertility.
American Birth Control League - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Other links that can be followed to bring us from past to present.
Eugenics in North Carolina
The Secret History of American Eugenics part 2 | Thee Monkee Armada Word
Planned Parenthood - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You already know my answer to that. I guess you think that a baby has no right to life ;that it's all at the will of the mother. It's not even a matter of father's choice . They have no rights in the decision either . 5th amendment due process ? Don't exist for the baby . A doctor can legally puncture it's head and suck it's brains out .Quote:
Are you suggesting we go back to when it wasn't a right, or a choice?
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:02 PM. |