Sharks in the Septic Tank Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (6361)	2/23/2001 11:52:24 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) of 82486

There are a lot of ideas in that post. Some of which are repeated at least once with the same exact words. It seems to me that its main theme is - Almost all abortions are caused by unwanted conceptions. Methods of preventing these conceptions are numerous, and although few contraceptive methods are 100% effective, their availability and use would reduce the number of abortions performed to less than one tenth of today's figures. I don't have a problem with the idea of contraception. I do see some of the beneifts that "Repect for Life" promotes. But at least in the US contraception is pretty available. Any increase in its availability will be a change at the margin not one that would reduce the number of abortions to less then 1/10th of today's figures. Also even if the 1/10th figure was accurate there would still be a large number of abortions. I don't have a disagreement with their idea but I do disagree with their figures and the notion that their idea is a solution. Now that I have addressed the main idea, I will quote and respond to a few other statements in the post. As human population becomes more dense, the value of human life is diminished. Not in the moral sense and not always even in other ways. Economically this can be true or false. Often the economic production increases as people congregate together in more densely populated areas. There is a function of supply and demand where a greater supply of workers will reduce the economic value of the workers, but workers are also consumers and a greater supply increases total demand as well so this works both ways. Psychologically greater population density can decrease peoples regard for the other people around them but this isn't universal. If they are talking about someone's value in other terms besides the ones I mentioned then I'm not sure what they mean so I can not at this time respond. Encouraging positive alternatives to procreation will lower birth rates. Adoption, foster and step parenting, and co-operative child caring all respect existing children who need adult interaction. I can see the argument for reducing unwanted pregnancies and when unwanted pregnancies do happen adoption is IMO a better solution then abortion. I don't however see a need to reduce the birth rate in the US, or in many other countries. (certain specific countries like Bangladesh might be another story). In any case I think the birth rate will go down world wide without any extraordinary efforts to cause it to happen. Is this group looking to reduce just unwanted pregnancies or to greatly reduce even wanted pregnancies and births? There are situations where terminating a pregnancy expresses more respect for life than would continuing it to birth. Maybe when both the woman and child will die if the pregnancy is not ended but that's about the only situation where I would agree with the above statement. Tim

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next