|
|
|
|
|
| | Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...Page 23 of 32 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32) | Touchdown Bundy wrote:
Are you trying to say that "most likely" every aborted fetus would have turned to a life of crime?
No, but probability seems to indicate that abortion reduces crime in general, or that fetuses that would be aborted but aren't are more likely to be a drain on society and/or more likely to become criminal in behavior than the average person.
At least, that's the theory, judging by the drop in crime a certain number of years after abortion was legalized.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_abortion_and_crime_effect | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/8/2009 1:40:31 AM |
No, but probability seems to indicate that abortion reduces crime in general, or that fetuses that would be aborted but aren't are more likely to be a drain on society and/or more likely to become criminal in behavior than the average person.
At least, that's the theory, judging by the drop in crime a certain number of years after abortion was legalized
This is complete rubbish. Modern technology has advanced greatly since 1973. The legalized abortion and crime effect is just an idea, a hypothesis.
Kind of like my opinions that you have a brain. Just an idea. | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/8/2009 3:11:55 AM | | Coat hanger technology remains the same...as do the consequences when old white male religious conservatives impose their will on female wombs. Prohibition of female rights is not an answer. | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/8/2009 10:31:50 AM |
This is complete rubbish. Modern technology has advanced greatly since 1973. The legalized abortion and crime effect is just an idea, a hypothesis.
What does modern technology have to do with the crime effect?
Coat hanger technology remains the same...as do the consequences when old white male religious conservatives impose their will on female wombs. Prohibition of female rights is not an answer.
Amen. As a woman, I appreciate you saying that.  | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/8/2009 4:14:25 PM | adventurelion wrote:
This is complete rubbish. Modern technology has advanced greatly since 1973. The legalized abortion and crime effect is just an idea, a hypothesis.
Complete rubbish? Why? Because you don't personally like or agree with the conclusions? Unless you can point to unbiased research that disproves the theory conclusively, then you're just a blowhard.
adventurelion wrote:
Kind of like my opinions that you have a brain. Just an idea.
Oh, now personal insults. Is that all you really have to fall back on. Charming fellow, you are. | |
|
Inicia
| | Joined: 12/21/2007
Msg: 556 | |
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/8/2009 6:52:33 PM | | IMO if we think about it if this statistic is true there could be correlation to legal abortions and drops in crime rate; not just that the fetuses are criminals... could be that the parents turn to a life of crime to support children they couldn't afford. Children dropping out of school to have babies and not having any tangible skills. or become involved with gangs and other support systems because they are not accepted by manistream as productive members of society and are accepted in criminal circles. which also adds to the fact that even if one is a pregnant teenager there are many negative ramifications. Parents of pregnant teens sometimes kick them out of their homes and tell them you wanted to make adult decisions and be an adult go be an adult.... | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/8/2009 7:36:16 PM | "Complete rubbish? Why? Because you don't personally like or agree with the conclusions? Unless you can point to unbiased research that disproves the theory conclusively, then you're just a blowhard."
Umm, you're asking him to disprove a theory conclusively, yet a theory is something which hasn't been proven conclusively. At least hold things to the same standard. I like the "unbiased research" part, especially since it's a wikipedia link.
Anyway, if you look near the bottom of that wiki page you'll see a link to "The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime, Criticism of."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Impact_of_Legalized_Abortion_on_Crime#Criticism
Interesting stuff. | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/8/2009 9:24:13 PM | Touchdown Bundy wrote:
Umm, you're asking him to disprove a theory conclusively, yet a theory is something which hasn't been proven conclusively. At least hold things to the same standard. I like the "unbiased research" part, especially since it's a wikipedia link.
I don't have to hold things to the same standard. I never said the theory was absolutely proved. Unbiased isn't a problem because a very specific study is cited, and unless someone is mentioning the name and date of the specific study, and in wikipedia attributing the opposite conclusions of that study to it, it's not a problem.
To wit, I'm not saying that Wikipedia is unbiased, I'm saying that the Donahue and Levitt paper is unbiased.
Adventurelion, on the other hand, says it's, and I quote "Complete rubbish" - which I presume to mean absolutely false, and without any scientific merit whatsoever. Since he's saying COMPLETELY false, he'd better be able to disprove it completely, wouldn't you agree? He's the one who's raising the threshold on himself by using such a phrase. I never spoke in absolutes, a point that I'll address below.
I also have no idea what he's referring to with the advancement of technology bit that he mentions.
Touchdown Bundy wrote:
Anyway, if you look near the bottom of that wiki page you'll see a link to "The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime, Criticism of."
Indeed, there are criticisms, some of which are subsequently addressed by Donahue and Levitt; I never denied that such criticism existed. However, I also never claimed that the study is 100% confirmed. Thus, in my post #558, I say "...seems to indicate" . . and "At least, that's the theory...."
| |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/9/2009 12:45:10 AM |
However, I also never claimed that the study is 100% confirmed. Thus, in my post #558, I say "...seems to indicate" . . and "At least, that's the theory
Your claim was a weak attempt to sway opinions on abortion, by suggesting there could be a correlation between Abortion being legal and crimes going down. No study could ever produce results to such a situation, because crime rates go up and down in different cities on a regular basis, depending on the circumstances. Essentially you are giving merit to something that has no scientfic credibility.
When I mentioned that modern technology has gone up, it was just one of many specific reasons why any crime rates would go down. In particular with murder, DNA evidence and testing, among several other major technological advances in law enforcement gives a great number of reasons why criminal activity would be going down.
It's not 1972 anymore. Everyone has multiple forms of communication today, such as cell phones, the internet, and criminals find on a regular basis that the better technology advances, the harder it is to get away with a crime. Many places have surveillance cameras running at all times, while in 72' they were hard to come by.
Now if you'd like to compare crime rates in over taxed liberal cities, compared to lower taxed conservative cities, we'd have a good discussion going. But we both know you would push like crazy to avoid a topic like that. | |
|
Inicia
| | Joined: 12/21/2007
Msg: 560 | |
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/9/2009 5:20:06 AM | many of the technological advances mentioned would not prevent crime only make it possible to apprehend theose who committed the crime and prosecute the crime successfully therefore>>>is it your contention that criminals will not commit crimes if they are surveiled??? becuase often times that is how they are prosecuted and DNA actually convicts criminals does not prevent the original crime it may prevent future crimes once they are able to apprehend the suspect but if DNA is not available in DATA base then their is no way to apprehend suspect until they are caught???
See the person who murdered the Doctor in church had several witnesses, (surveilance) and they had plenty of evidence to prosecute him but he was still able to commit the crime. He was not prevented from murdering??? HMMMM>>>>>where was the technology to stop that?????? | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/9/2009 12:42:58 PM |
many of the technological advances mentioned would not prevent crime only make it possible to apprehend theose who committed the crime and prosecute the crime successfully therefore>>>is it your contention that criminals will not commit crimes if they are surveiled??? becuase often times that is how they are prosecuted and DNA actually convicts criminals does not prevent the original crime it may prevent future crimes once they are able to apprehend the suspect but if DNA is not available in DATA base then their is no way to apprehend suspect until they are caught???
See the person who murdered the Doctor in church had several witnesses, (surveilance) and they had plenty of evidence to prosecute him but he was still able to commit the crime. He was not prevented from murdering??? HMMMM>>>>>where was the technology to stop that?
You are trying to change what I said to "Modern Technology stops all crime" I didn't say that.
I said it plays a role in deterring crime. | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/9/2009 12:51:23 PM | | Gosh people the fetuses that are involved with late term are not going to be children necessarily that would live if born let alone have brains or intelligence. My neighbor has a son that is what they call a pin head. He is 11 and is just like a baby. Because her husband is military, military hospital where they do things on the cheap often and don't refer you to specialists too often (from my experience of knowing other military families) they didn't catch the situation the fetus was in. She had a heck of a delivery and survived. Not all mothers survive or the babies. This is why they have the late term abortion so at least the mothers have the opportunity to live. I can not see if children from late term abortions were not aborted many would be capable of anything. | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/9/2009 7:35:39 PM | "Since he's saying COMPLETELY false, he'd better be able to disprove it completely, wouldn't you agree? "
No. It's his opinion vs. your opinion. Can't prove either. All studies and hypotheses are biased, because humans created them. It may be small, but to say that the donahue/levitt paper is unbiased is definitely an "absolute", and erroneous. | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/9/2009 10:58:35 PM | adventurelion wrote:
Your claim was a weak attempt to sway opinions on abortion, by suggesting there could be a correlation between Abortion being legal and crimes going down. No study could ever produce results to such a situation, because crime rates go up and down in different cities on a regular basis, depending on the circumstances. Essentially you are giving merit to something that has no scientfic credibility.
I wasn't trying to sway opinion, I was trying to answer the question Bundy posited in post 556.
How do you know that this study has no scientific credibility? What sort of credentials do you have to be able to determine that? Aside from the fact that you personally don't like the conclusions, how do you determine that the Donahue and Levitt paper is invalid and without any credibility?
adventurelion wrote:
Now if you'd like to compare crime rates in over taxed liberal cities, compared to lower taxed conservative cities, we'd have a good discussion going. But we both know you would push like crazy to avoid a topic like that.
In this thread, you're right. Start another thread dealing with that specifically, and it's a different story. However, I doubt I'd get any credible sort of information on this from you. Your track record in this thread so far appears to favor misinterpreting what people say, intentionally or otherwise, and just stating things that you wish were true without backing them in any way.
Touchdown Bundy wrote:
No. It's his opinion vs. your opinion. Can't prove either. All studies and hypotheses are biased, because humans created them. It may be small, but to say that the donahue/levitt paper is unbiased is definitely an "absolute", and erroneous.
Not so. My post was initially in answer to your question asked in post 556. I said, effectively, that the study appears to have merit. Adventurelion however has been stating opinion without attempting to back it up in any way, shape, or form except by constantly beating the "conservatives are great, liberals are idiots" drum over and over again.
I will stand corrected, though, you're right. There MAY in fact be SOME amount of bias, possibly minute, in the paper, though LIKELY it's unintentional. You've just walked into your own trap, though, by saying EVERYTHING written on any subject ALWAYS has bias.
Studies and hypotheses are not biased if the authors/researchers have no agenda or have no stake or concern as to what the conclusion is.
Statements made on websites with a clear, and sometimes blatantly stated, political agenda most certainly are biased, particularly when they engage in cut-and-paste of information out of context.
In any case, to imply that adventurelion's statements and the Donahue/Levitt paper are equally biased is absurd in the extreme.
In the base 10 numbering system, 2 added to 2 yields 4. There is no bias there. | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/10/2009 3:45:06 AM | I know this really isn't keeping with the spirit of the thread's original intent, but I'm thinking it needs to be said. Ok, so I was thinking, in third grade (or there abouts) we were told that there are three possible states of living: Alive, Dead, or Non-Living.
Assuming this is true, how would you categorize an unborn fetus?
Personally, I wouldn't define it as "dead". That just seems absurd. Leaving only Alive or Non-Living left to choose from, I'd say it were alive.
Here's why. In the same class, we discussed that in order to be alive, something had to require food, oxygen, water, consist of cells, grow and be able to age and reproduce. That last one is a bit of a caveat though, because of sterile animals like mules. Mules are born of reproduction between a horse and a donkey, so we say it's alive anyhow.
Now, "what of a car?" you might ask. Cars require oxygen and fuel as food. If the parts rust, they can gain mass via water absorption even, so they "grow" and age. But they aren't born from reproduction, nor can they make baby cars. They don't have cells, either... Maybe self replicating nano-robots, but that's a different discussion.
So, that's it. An embryo meets all of those requirements for being alive. I believe, that given enough time, we'll be able to grow a person from egg to baby without a womb. If that's possible, then a fertilized egg would be even be considered "viable" because the woman wouldn't be a necessary vessel any more.
With all this pointing towards "alive", can you justify taking a young human life for cosmetic or convenience purposes? If complications threaten the mother's health, then you do what you must. I'm not arguing against that! It simply makes me sick when people have abortions because they don't want to be bothered to raise a child that they willingly conceived in the first place. Protection or not, you're aware of the risks you run.
As for the whole unwanted kids raising crime rates, well, I consider that to speak volumes about the kinds of people that are having abortions. If it's a good correlation, anyway. | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/10/2009 5:13:13 AM |
Assuming this is true, how would you categorize an unborn fetus?
Personally, I wouldn't define it as "dead". That just seems absurd. Leaving only Alive or Non-Living left to choose from, I'd say it were alive.
An embryo meets all of those requirements for being alive.
I'm not going to argue this point, mainly because science has shown that cells are the smallest living organism in the world. Or at least it was at one time. That may have changed, I don't know for sure.
With all this pointing towards "alive", can you justify taking a young human life for cosmetic or convenience purposes? If complications threaten the mother's health, then you do what you must. I'm not arguing against that! It simply makes me sick when people have abortions because they don't want to be bothered to raise a child that they willingly conceived in the first place. Protection or not, you're aware of the risks you run.
Yes, I can. An embryo is not a human. Neither is a fetus or a zygote. They are all a mass of cells that grows inside of the womb of a female homo sapien that has the potential to become another homo sapien. So we are not discussing the taking of a young human life, unless you know people who are taking three year old children and stuffing them back in the womb of their parents. We are talking about a mass of cells and the vigilante justice that some people feel they are entitled to in regards to that mass of cells. | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/10/2009 5:50:28 AM |
With all this pointing towards "alive", can you justify taking a young human life for cosmetic or convenience purposes? If complications threaten the mother's health, then you do what you must. I'm not arguing against that! It simply makes me sick when people have abortions because they don't want to be bothered to raise a child that they willingly conceived in the first place. Protection or not, you're aware of the risks you run.
If being "alive" (in the strictest definition of the word) is all that a mass of cells needs in order to be granted a "right to life" then I could also make the argument that anyone going through chemo is also a "murderer".... | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/10/2009 6:09:38 AM |
Assuming this is true, how would you categorize an unborn fetus?
what they should have tought you in 3rd grade is the difference between life and Human life...its not that difficult of a concept to master.
as well as...a Fetus is not a baby, and legal abortion is not murder.
and for ALL you anti-abortion folk that want to use science or pseudoscience as your basis to dis-credit abortion, please learn what the Scientific method is... | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/10/2009 11:14:45 AM | "Another rightwing terrorist shows his disdain for the rule of law
Conservatives fail to see a problem."
I identify more with the conservative party than liberal, but I also support the law which legalizes abortion. I also see plenty wrong with what happened. I know it must make your head spin to realize that not everyone falls into your narrow world view of how a "conservative" must think, but that says more about you than me. People who tend to use labels to split everyone into different groups never seem to realize that 99% of us have more in common with each other than difference. | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/10/2009 11:20:46 AM |
Assuming this is true, how would you categorize an unborn fetus? what they should have tought you in 3rd grade is the difference between life and Human life...its not that difficult of a concept to master. as well as...a Fetus is not a baby, and legal abortion is not murder. and for ALL you anti-abortion folk that want to use science or pseudoscience as your basis to dis-credit abortion, please learn what the Scientific method is...
There is a difference between being alive and a life. My arm is alive, but it is not a life. An embryo is alive, but it is not a life. Here is the definition:
Let me again try to begin by defining life and I think there exists a reasonable consensus amongst biologists on this definition, namely that life consists of all of the self-contained units of nature considered primarily of organic matter, autonomously and I stress the autonomously capable of undergoing development, reproduction and evolution. Note that this definition excludes the viruses because they're not autonomously capable of undergoing development and reproduction.
http://www.bioethics.gov/transcripts/jan03/session1.html | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/10/2009 11:23:09 AM | If a man murders a pregnant woman, he is usually charged with infanticide on top of the murder charge.
Food for thought. | |
|
| Late Term Abortion Doctor Killed...
Posted: 7/10/2009 11:59:28 AM | | Man, these threads really bring out the worst in people. It's no wonder we don't get along any better with one another as a society. We're all a bunch of closedminded, dogmatic idiots. No matter what our beliefs. | |
|
|
|
|
Page
23
of
32 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32)
|
|
Home
login 
