The Choice No Woman Wants To Make


Posted: January 6, 2013 at 1:35 a.m.

While I never suggest Bill Clinton as a moral role model and I frequently question his motives, I find myself more and more often in support of his fiscal and even social policies.

This story is only available from our archives.

Opinion, Pages 11 on 01/06/2013

I agree that it would be a good compromise to work towards reducing the numbers of abortions, while keeping them legal.
But Mr, Canfield's strategies aren't really strategies. To devise a strategy, one needs to consider some of the CAUSES.
There is a clue in the fact that so many more black women are having abortions.
The clue is that one of the main reasons that women have abortions is ECONOMIC.

Posted by: Coralie

January 6, 2013 at 3:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

The Netherlands has the world's lowest abortion rate and also the lowest teenage pregnancy rate.
"Researchers credit strategies like sex education in schools, discussion of sexuality in the mass media, and easy access to contraception. [Also] inclusion of family planning services as part of the Dutch medical system."

Posted by: Coralie

January 6, 2013 at 3:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Of course the Netherlands already has a lot of that "socialism" stuff, so that there is more of a safety net under a women with an unwanted pregnancy.

Posted by: Coralie

January 6, 2013 at 3:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Three strategies to reduce abortions, but not one of them has to do with contraception?
In fact contraceptives aren't even mentioned.

Posted by: Coralie

January 6, 2013 at 3:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Cor: "...contraceptives aren't even mentioned.">>

Besides that, Mr. Canfield's article is brimming with basic errors and constant question begging assumptions, that is, assuming beforehand his conclusion that an embryo is the equivalent of a person and just making it up from there. Can't do that. And his reasons for doing it are full of holes. Big ones. It would be nice someday to see an antiabortion person be able to argue for their position with something beyond nonstop question begging.

When I get back to freethinker headquarters, shortly, I'll be able to get into the details.

Posted by: fayfreethinker

January 6, 2013 at 6:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

If one life is precious, why do we care so litle about those lost as "collateral damage"?

Posted by: Coralie

January 7, 2013 at 1:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

I left out this source, which says as many as 168 children have been killed in U.S. drone attacks in Pakistan.

Posted by: Coralie

January 7, 2013 at 1:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Fifteen million children die of hunger every year.
According to WHO, "Every minute, at least one woman dies from complications related to pregnancy or childbirth – that means 529 000 women a year. In addition, for every woman who dies in childbirth, around 20 more suffer injury, infection or disease – approximately 10 million women each year."
One can assume that many of the fetuses or infants are also lost.
A great many of these women live in subSaharan Africa, where contraception is difficult to get and sometimes socially disapproved.
If one life is precious--and it is--why don't 'pro-life' people ever consider these facts?

Posted by: Coralie

January 10, 2013 at 1:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal )