BMW E60 5-Series Forum | 5Post.com  
BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read  

Go Back   BMW E60 5-Series Forum | 5Post.com > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      12-19-2018, 11:32 AM   #133
F32Fleet
Major General
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
1122
Rep
7,438
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan_clt View Post
You guess wrong and there is AMPLE historical evidence to demonstrate that.
On the contrary prior to subsidized single motherhood it was much more of a rarity. It is more prevelant because its financially viable to be stupid now.
Not true. The abortion rate during the late 1800's is estimated to be between 1:6 and 1:3. That rate hasn't change much. Women could by drugs for an abortion prior to the Civil War.
__________________
"Drive more, worry less. "

435i, MPPK, MPE, M-Sport Line
Appreciate 2
      12-19-2018, 11:39 AM   #134
1MOREMOD
2018 track days - 0 ridge 1:52:24 pacific 1:33:30
1MOREMOD's Avatar
United_States
7551
Rep
20,913
Posts

Drives: Race car->
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: check your mirrors

iTrader: (5)

Your right my statistics were discussing single motherhood not abortion rate. Which is also subsidized. If I dont have to pay for others poor decisions by all means do drugs, have unwanted babies dont educate yourself the works. As soon as someone's poor decision affects everyone else financially it's not viable. The repercussions should be no subsidy to influence behavior.
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 11:40 AM   #135
Run Silent
Run Deep
Run Silent's Avatar
United_States
7552
Rep
2,280
Posts

Drives: Back and Forth To Work
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: The Mountains

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by DETRoadster View Post
Gotcha. I misinterpreted your cost argument. Totally agree. We have the money, we just need to agree to prioritize it to spend on this.

For starters, how about we ban adoptions of kids from other countries? You want a baby, we got plenty right here are home to adopt. How about investing heavily on drug addiction treatment and prevention. Fewer drug addicted babies born to unfit mothers would seem a worthy cause. And for those who simply can't make sound choices, let's offer the ultimate government handout: free medical sterilization and a one time cash payment.

Gotcha. I agree with most all of this, assuming some items can be corrected beforehand. The main reason overseas adoptions are so prevelant in this country is that it is extremely hard to adopt a child born in the USA. I have friends that have been trying for many years. The problem is that you have to 'foster to adopt' an American baby. If you do this, each time the foster period is about to run out, the mother shows up at court and the process starts over again. I believe the stats are around 2% of all FTA adoptions in America are successful. Because of that, adoption of an American child is essentially impossible. This is a topic for another thread though.

I like the pay to sterilize plan, although I worry that it would be ripe for government corruption. Something tells me that 'voluntary' would evolve a different meaning over time and that scares me. In addition, America actually has a baby shortage. We don't create enough children to sustain our population currently, so immigration would have to be expanded drastically if the sterilization plan would work. Otherwise, we would have a massive labor shortage in a short period of time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
Your right my statistics were discussing single motherhood not abortion rate. Which is also subsidized. If I dont have to pay for others poor decisions by all means do drugs, have unwanted babies dont educate yourself the works. As soon as someone's poor decision affects everyone else financially it's not viable. The repercussions should be no subsidy to influence behavior.
In a perfect world, your comments are spot on and I would agree 100%. Unfortunately, we don't live there and there are many other issues to be concerned with. If someone has an unwanted baby or doesn't educate themselves and there is no government intervention then they become a drain on society in other ways through the form of increased criminal activity, death of the child, overall reduced societal intelligence, and so forth.

I agree that many of our current government safety nets need a major overhaul to discourage abuse, but removing them all together doesn't work. A perfect example is my wife's home country in Africa. They have no social welfare program of any kind. The end result is that due to 50% unemployment (mostly unskilled, skilled labor actually has a shortage), a child will simply die of starvation if the dad doesn't do something. So he sits there an wrestles with the option of letting his child die or robbing someone so the kid will get fed. Guess which one he chooses? Guess how high the crime rate is in that country? If a government program was available to offer free food for the children paid by tax dollars in exchange for education to learn a trade, etc then crime wouldn't be so high.

It's a problem that is very complex and simply cannot be corrected by a complete libertarian mindset, although that is the ultimate goal.
__________________
Вести себя прилично? После дождичка в четверг!

Last edited by Run Silent; 12-19-2018 at 11:47 AM.
Appreciate 4
Jockey1579.00
xQx722.50
Mingwan1012.50

      12-19-2018, 12:48 PM   #136
1MOREMOD
2018 track days - 0 ridge 1:52:24 pacific 1:33:30
1MOREMOD's Avatar
United_States
7551
Rep
20,913
Posts

Drives: Race car->
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: check your mirrors

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MKSixer View Post
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act treats a fetus (their word, not mine...I use the term unborn child or unborn human) as a legal victim in a crime if the mother is killed or injured to the point that it causes the unborn child/human harm.

If I'm not mistaken, there is no threshold age: The law defines "child in utero" as "a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.

Law can you help us out here?

What are your thoughts?
Your inbox is full.
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 12:50 PM   #137
1MOREMOD
2018 track days - 0 ridge 1:52:24 pacific 1:33:30
1MOREMOD's Avatar
United_States
7551
Rep
20,913
Posts

Drives: Race car->
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: check your mirrors

iTrader: (5)

725 phase them out benefit to those people as well as financial savings to country would be huge.
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 01:12 PM   #138
MKSixer
Major General
MKSixer's Avatar
10915
Rep
5,869
Posts

Drives: 2015 BMW i8, E63 M6, 328d
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Southeast United States

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2016 M4 GTS (Allotted)  [0.00]
2013 BMW 328d  [0.00]
2007 BMW M6  [5.00]
2015 BMW i8  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
Your inbox is full.
Clear. Fire away.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtodd_fl View Post
Hell, I get random sausage attacks when I go anywhere.

@[Nyet. Not Russian Hacker](contact:368080)
Ask me hacker question. Hacker question I get answer.
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 01:22 PM   #139
Joekerr
Is Joe King
Joekerr's Avatar
3448
Rep
1,359
Posts

Drives: 2012 300C SRT8
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Toronto, ON

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
#1 Scientists in China just announced last week that twins were born using gene editing. So much for extremes. Genie is out of the bottle.
No. A scientist CLAIMED this was done, and investigations are starting to verify and there is a large outcry by everyone else. Big difference.


Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
#2 Voting is disguised mob rule. So 50+1 is just fine as long as you're one of the 50+1? Besides politicians don't always do what's in the interests of the people.
It is called democracy. So yes, 50 +1 is just fine by me. If you have a better solution - let's hear it, till then, I like democracy just fine, even when I don't personally agree with the majority.

And when politicians don't do what is in the interests of the people they get removed. So it would be fixed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
#3 No, you can't just arbitrarily pick up stakes and move to another country.
Yes. You can. People emigrate all the time. If the country you want to go to offers that much more benefits to where you currently are, you will do your best to go there, or somewhere similar. I never said it wouldn't be a hard decision, I just said it would solve the issue arising where you disagree so vehemently with the majority that you need to do something.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lups View Post
he's Canadian. By international law we all must worship him and all other products of the country.
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 01:29 PM   #140
Run Silent
Run Deep
Run Silent's Avatar
United_States
7552
Rep
2,280
Posts

Drives: Back and Forth To Work
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: The Mountains

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
725 phase them out benefit to those people as well as financial savings to country would be huge.
I think you missed my point, or I am misunderstanding yours - the sentence is a bit disjointed that I quoted.

What I am saying is that there is more to the real world than theoretical libertarian policies. If you eliminate most social welfare benefits in the USA, the crime rate absolutely skyrockets. This isn't a proper solution. As an example, my post pointed to my wife's home country, where this exact scenario has played out.

I am pretty conservative and anti-government, but you have to understand that theory only works in a vacuum. In reality, there needs to be a bit of government welfare to make a modern society function correctly. I agree our current programs are structured poorly and are too grand in scope, but eliminating it all isn't the solution.
__________________
Вести себя прилично? После дождичка в четверг!
Appreciate 3
Jockey1579.00
Mingwan1012.50

      12-19-2018, 01:37 PM   #141
Run Silent
Run Deep
Run Silent's Avatar
United_States
7552
Rep
2,280
Posts

Drives: Back and Forth To Work
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: The Mountains

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
#1 Scientists in China just announced last week that twins were born using gene editing. So much for extremes. Genie is out of the bottle.

#2 Voting is disguised mob rule. So 50+1 is just fine as long as you're one of the 50+1? Besides politicians don't always do what's in the interests of the people.

#3 No, you can't just arbitrarily pick up stakes and move to another country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joekerr View Post
No. A scientist CLAIMED this was done, and investigations are starting to verify and there is a large outcry by everyone else. Big difference.

It is called democracy. So yes, 50 +1 is just fine by me. If you have a better solution - let's hear it, till then, I like democracy just fine, even when I don't personally agree with the majority.

And when politicians don't do what is in the interests of the people they get removed. So it would be fixed.

Yes. You can. People emigrate all the time. If the country you want to go to offers that much more benefits to where you currently are, you will do your best to go there, or somewhere similar. I never said it wouldn't be a hard decision, I just said it would solve the issue arising where you disagree so vehemently with the majority that you need to do something.

I'm going to jump in here on a couple of these, because neither of you is completely right. With respect to #2, a democracy is a terrible form of government, because it is mob rule and is destined to fail and evolve into a dictatorship. The USA is a republic, and it this is an important distinction, because it helps prevent the 51 from terrorizing the 49. Fleet is also correct in that politicians don't always do what the public wants and due to gerrymandering, are more difficult to remove from office than one might imagine.

With respect to emigration, F32 is correct - it is extremely difficult to move from one country to another. As an American, I cannot just decide that I want to move to Japan, England, Germany, or South Africa. It doesn't work that way. There are requirements that I have to show, such as my ability to generate income, my ability to not be drain on social services, skill sets that are in need, and so forth. On top of all this, most all countries require some sort of sponsorship in the form of an individual, relative, or company. Even for someone like me, with multiple post-grad degrees and fluency in several languages, it is very difficult. For an average US Citizen with minimal savings and no skilled labor talents, it would be nearly impossible to move to another country.

Just trying to show this isn't all black and white.
__________________
Вести себя прилично? После дождичка в четверг!
Appreciate 1
2000cs582.50

      12-19-2018, 02:08 PM   #142
Real Dodger
Field Marshal of the Cosmos
Real Dodger's Avatar
United_States
5663
Rep
6,840
Posts

Drives: 135i DCT
Join Date: May 2017
Location: McKinney TX

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2012 135  [5.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by usshelena725 View Post
I think you missed my point, or I am misunderstanding yours - the sentence is a bit disjointed that I quoted.

What I am saying is that there is more to the real world than theoretical libertarian policies. If you eliminate most social welfare benefits in the USA, the crime rate absolutely skyrockets. This isn't a proper solution. As an example, my post pointed to my wife's home country, where this exact scenario has played out.

I am pretty conservative and anti-government, but you have to understand that theory only works in a vacuum. In reality, there needs to be a bit of government welfare to make a modern society function correctly. I agree our current programs are structured poorly and are too grand in scope, but eliminating it all isn't the solution.
Thread hijack!
__________________
Renegade of Funk
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 02:10 PM   #143
1MOREMOD
2018 track days - 0 ridge 1:52:24 pacific 1:33:30
1MOREMOD's Avatar
United_States
7551
Rep
20,913
Posts

Drives: Race car->
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: check your mirrors

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by usshelena725 View Post
I think you missed my point, or I am misunderstanding yours - the sentence is a bit disjointed that I quoted.

What I am saying is that there is more to the real world than theoretical libertarian policies. If you eliminate most social welfare benefits in the USA, the crime rate absolutely skyrockets. This isn't a proper solution. As an example, my post pointed to my wife's home country, where this exact scenario has played out.

I am pretty conservative and anti-government, but you have to understand that theory only works in a vacuum. In reality, there needs to be a bit of government welfare to make a modern society function correctly. I agree our current programs are structured poorly and are too grand in scope, but eliminating it all isn't the solution.
I agree with that, some does need to exist but very minimal. The solutions should come from private sectors and charity first not the govt. Govt is not capable of doing anything efficiently. And yes I dont use punctuation like I should so am hard to understand.
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 02:23 PM   #144
Run Silent
Run Deep
Run Silent's Avatar
United_States
7552
Rep
2,280
Posts

Drives: Back and Forth To Work
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: The Mountains

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Real Dodger View Post
Thread hijack!
Hey now - my thread, so I can do what I want!




Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
I agree with that, some does need to exist but very minimal. The solutions should come from private sectors and charity first not the govt. Govt is not capable of doing anything efficiently. And yes I dont use punctuation like I should so am hard to understand.
Yeah, but again, that is a common talking point by folks like Stossel - and it is correct. Government is terribly inefficient and charity should do as much as possible. The reality is, however, that sometimes it just isn't enough. If charity and private enterprise was capable of solving the social welfare problems in every country, then there wouldn't be issues like those that exist in my wife's country. The fact that, despite enormous amounts of charities pouring funds and man hours into the country, her country still has extremely high unemployment rates, poverty, and crime. Most of this is due to the leaders of government stealing so much from the treasury that there isn't enough left to provide basic services, let alone provide for any welfare.

Regardless of the cause (due to graft or due to purposely removing the programs as in your scenario), the end result is the same.


----------


Now - back to discussions regarding the US Courts deciding that unborn babies are not really people, so it's fine for doctors to murder them....

__________________
Вести себя прилично? После дождичка в четверг!
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 04:14 PM   #145
1MOREMOD
2018 track days - 0 ridge 1:52:24 pacific 1:33:30
1MOREMOD's Avatar
United_States
7551
Rep
20,913
Posts

Drives: Race car->
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: check your mirrors

iTrader: (5)

Agreed but I cant see flushing more and more money into the administration instead of the application of good works. No govt program ever said they were failing for any other reason than needing more money.

Instead they should have built in bail outs. Heres x amount of dollars prove your worth or everyone in the program gets shit canned.
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 04:21 PM   #146
Run Silent
Run Deep
Run Silent's Avatar
United_States
7552
Rep
2,280
Posts

Drives: Back and Forth To Work
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: The Mountains

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
Agreed but I cant see flushing more and more money into the administration instead of the application of good works. No govt program ever said they were failing for any other reason than needing more money.

Instead they should have built in bail outs. Heres x amount of dollars prove your worth or everyone in the program gets shit canned.
Unsure of how your statement relates to the topic at hand, but I have no problem with the government offering welfare assistance to bridge a gap between private donations and charities and the actual need of society. I do not think that government assistance should be in lieu of assistance from private endeavors.
__________________
Вести себя прилично? После дождичка в четверг!
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 06:08 PM   #147
hooligan_COLD
Space Shuttle Door Gunner
hooligan_COLD's Avatar
2611
Rep
2,447
Posts

Drives: '15 X1 35i M Sport
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Back in the Mitten

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
On the contrary prior to subsidized single motherhood it was much more of a rarity. It is more prevelant because its financially viable to be stupid now. Single motherhood rates have skyrocketed across racial lines.
Who's talking about single-motherhood?

I thought the "bad decision" in question in this thread was abortion?

Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 06:48 PM   #148
1MOREMOD
2018 track days - 0 ridge 1:52:24 pacific 1:33:30
1MOREMOD's Avatar
United_States
7551
Rep
20,913
Posts

Drives: Race car->
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: check your mirrors

iTrader: (5)

Abortion and single motherhood are linked a bit dont you think? I see them together at least a poor decision leads to pregnancy now another poor decision ensures or at least a morally bankrupt one abortion or keep the kid be single mother and a burden to society in a different manner. We have programs to help single mothers primarily called welfare. These programs shouldn't exist for the most part and so on.
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 06:54 PM   #149
hooligan_COLD
Space Shuttle Door Gunner
hooligan_COLD's Avatar
2611
Rep
2,447
Posts

Drives: '15 X1 35i M Sport
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Back in the Mitten

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
Abortion and single motherhood are linked a bit dont you think? I see them together at least a poor decision leads to pregnancy now another poor decision ensures or at least a morally bankrupt one abortion or keep the kid be single mother and a burden to society in a different manner. We have programs to help single mothers primarily called welfare. These programs shouldn't exist for the most part and so on.
Sure, they're often linked. So what?

This thread isn't about welfare or single parents. Cutting welfare is going to do ZERO to reduce abortions.

So, what is your point.
Appreciate 1
Jockey1579.00

      12-19-2018, 07:29 PM   #150
xQx
General
Australia
723
Rep
893
Posts

Drives: 2008 BMW 135i (E88 N54 6AT)
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Sunshine Coast QLD Australia

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
Abortion and single motherhood are linked a bit dont you think? I see them together at least a poor decision leads to pregnancy now another poor decision ensures or at least a morally bankrupt one abortion or keep the kid be single mother and a burden to society in a different manner. We have programs to help single mothers primarily called welfare. These programs shouldn't exist for the most part and so on.
Honestly, I think they're linked - probably not in the same way that you do - but I think it's a discussion for another thread

I think they're linked because if society or the state removes a mother's ability to have an abortion and thus force them to carry an unwanted child to term, then they have a corresponding greater responsibility to both mother and child to support them for the rest of their lives.

But ultimately I think the question of welfare is quite independent from that of abortion.

I also think it's a bit unfair to characterize all abortions as the result of poor decision making. Taking rape off the table; No contraception is 100% effective, and it's entirely possible for normal people taking normal precautions to fall pregnant, and only find out that they are in that situation well after the window of the morning after pill's effectiveness.

For some reason, in Australia, our government finds the prospect of people being able to take RU486 quickly and easily during the first four weeks morally reprehensible - and forces them down the path of surgical options (and sometimes interstate travel due to differing laws).

Curiously, we don't have any children available for adoption, even in states where abortion is technically illegal.
__________________
2008 BMW 135i Convertible 6AT (E88 N54) M Sport (BMS DCI, VRSF 7" Intercooler, VRSF CP, VRSF v2 DP, Turbosmart BOV, SmartTop Module, xHP Stage 3, BMS Cowl Filters, 2" Inlets & Outlets, MPP TD04/16T Turbos, MFactory 1.5way LSD, Fuel-it Stage 2+ Bucketless)
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 07:40 PM   #151
bayarea328xit
Private First Class
United_States
18
Rep
126
Posts

Drives: 2007 328xit
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA

iTrader: (0)

Let’s assume that science develops a process that allows normal, full-term gestation to occur any time after conception outside the uterus and the process for extracting the fertilized egg/fetus from the mother is no more painful than an abortion. Under this scenario, I see no problem making abortion illegal. This process still gives the woman the right to eliminate her pregnancy, and society can still protect the unborn child.

With the above in mind, the question about abortion becomes really a question about what burden can society place on the woman who is pregnant to protect the interest of the unborn child.

Society cannot ask the woman to bear this burden on absolute terms. Unwanted pregnancy is a matter of statistics – not of life style choice, poor decision making, etc., see post # 38, 150, etc. We have to provide a window during which an abortion is an absolute right of the woman – we need to set aside the rights of the unborn child.

Having said that, I am disturbed by the following observation:

Imagine a plot that has time since conception on the bottom axis and probability of “live birth” (excluding abortions) on the upper axis – focus on US pregnancies. At time near 9 months, the plot would be very close to 100%. Now, near time equal to zero (just after time of conception), the plot is probably around 40-60%. This is based on the observation that spontaneous miscarriages in the first trimester are frequent (say around 50%). Between zero and 9 months, this plot grows from 40-60% up to 100%. This plot describes the probability of having a “person” as a function of gestation time.

Setting aside the burden on the woman, an abortion immediately after conception, based on the above plot, is tantamount to killing a person that has about a 50% survival rate. That is pretty rough. This also, I suspect, is the reason that women really struggle with the decision to abort. I also suspect, the vast majority of women don’t take this decision lightly.

The focus then becomes: “what is the appropriate time window during which we permit an abortion – no questions asked?” A woman may not realize that she is pregnant for some time – due to irregular menses, life stress, etc. We must account for such variabilities in creating a window that still allows a woman to make this decision after thinking through her particular facts.

In my earlier post, I said: “Anything more than 10 weeks, I start to get concerned …”. I now think that the window may have to be longer than 10 weeks – especially given that many women may not realize that they are pregnant or may need time to work through the decision regarding an abortion.

Maybe the plot I described above would give some insight on the right cut-off. I’m not sure …
Appreciate 1
xQx722.50

      12-19-2018, 07:41 PM   #152
1MOREMOD
2018 track days - 0 ridge 1:52:24 pacific 1:33:30
1MOREMOD's Avatar
United_States
7551
Rep
20,913
Posts

Drives: Race car->
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: check your mirrors

iTrader: (5)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hooligan_clt View Post
Sure, they're often linked. So what?

This thread isn't about welfare or single parents. Cutting welfare is going to do ZERO to reduce abortions.

So, what is your point.
Sure it will if you cant be supporter by the govt on welfare your gonna make smarter choices about getting knocked up. The fall back for both is the same i dont need to be responsible for myself someone else will bear my burden for me.
Appreciate 0
      12-19-2018, 07:46 PM   #153
sspade
Brigadier General
sspade's Avatar
United_States
994
Rep
3,217
Posts

Drives: F30 328i
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Placerville, CA

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
2014 BMW 328i  [5.00]
I think there should be a limit placed on the amount of abortions a woman can have.

That limit should be one.

The second time, you get your shit torn out so the third time is impossible.
__________________
BMW 328i visit my garage for pictures and build details.
Appreciate 1
Run Silent7552.00

      12-19-2018, 08:20 PM   #154
xQx
General
Australia
723
Rep
893
Posts

Drives: 2008 BMW 135i (E88 N54 6AT)
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Sunshine Coast QLD Australia

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD View Post
Sure it will if you cant be supporter by the govt on welfare your gonna make smarter choices about getting knocked up. The fall back for both is the same i dont need to be responsible for myself someone else will bear my burden for me.
Okay, assuming that the crucial decision for a mother about whether or not she's going to raise a child is if she's going to get paid by the government or not...
[I'm sure it'd be factor for some people, but I doubt it'd make a material difference to the numbers - but lets move on.]

This means more people would get pregnant if there's high welfare.
This also means more people would carry their unexpected pregnancies to term if there's high welfare.

So, if there's no welfare:
People should be less inclined to have unprotected sex, and thus result in less unwanted pregnancies.
People should be seeking more abortions because they've had unprotected sex, which has resulted in an unwanted pregnancy.

But there's a few things to consider (I have't said "facts" because half of these are 'classist' assertions):
  • People who are on welfare or are in need of welfare have already made terrible decisions to land there. Why would you expect them to be rational about sex?
  • If the threat of STD's, the pain of childbirth, and the horror of raising children to adulthood isn't enough to convince someone to wear protection, why would the prospect of being poor in 12 months tip the scales... ... especially with people who are so horrible at managing money that they're on welfare or needing welfare WITHOUT kids.
  • Have you ever heard anyone say "it's okay, we can have unprotected sex. I'll just have an abortion if it comes to it?"

Basically, I think making abortion legal might reduce the need for welfare; but reducing welfare while abortion is illegal isn't going to stop people from putting themselves in the situation of unwanted pregnancies (ie. having sex).

Also, and very importantly: "getting knocked up" isn't just the result of "stupid choices". It's a result of HAVING SEX, and the only 100% effective form of birth control is ABSTINENCE.

... or being gay. I guess we could just blame the need for abortion on the population who obstinately refuse to embrace their gayness.

tl'dr:
I think welfare might influence the decision to seek an abortion once pregnant; but it's unlikely to influence the decision to have sex or not or use protection or not.
I also think the availability of abortion probably has an impact on the number of people who end up on welfare - so making abortion illegal increases the need for, the burden on, and the moral imperative of a state to have welfare.
__________________
2008 BMW 135i Convertible 6AT (E88 N54) M Sport (BMS DCI, VRSF 7" Intercooler, VRSF CP, VRSF v2 DP, Turbosmart BOV, SmartTop Module, xHP Stage 3, BMS Cowl Filters, 2" Inlets & Outlets, MPP TD04/16T Turbos, MFactory 1.5way LSD, Fuel-it Stage 2+ Bucketless)

Last edited by xQx; 12-19-2018 at 08:27 PM.
Appreciate 1
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:08 AM.




5post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST