Do 41% of all New York City pregnancies end in abortions?

posted at 11:36 am on January 7, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Drudge has this headlined, and Twitter is buzzing over the appalling statistic reported by ABC and CBS stations in New York City over the abortion rate in 2009, as determined by the Big Apple’s Health Department.  For the year, New York City reported 214,454 pregnancy outcomes, of which 126.774 were live births and just 407 were spontaneous terminations — miscarriages.  However, 87,273 pregnancy outcomes were abortions (induced terminations), which constituted 41% of all pregnancy outcomes:

New and eye-opening statistics about the rate of abortions in New York City have been released by the Health Department.

It raises questions about the effectiveness of current birth control education.

41% of all New York City pregnancies end in abortion.

The breakdown by ethnicity is, perhaps, even more startling.  Almost 60% of all pregnancy outcomes in NYC for African-American mothers were abortions; among Hispanics, 41.3%.  Asians and whites had relatively low percentages of abortion outcomes (22.7% and 20.4%, respectively).  ABC points out that the overall number is actually an improvement over 1998, when the citywide rate for abortion outcomes was 46%.

But some care should be taken with these numbers. It’s not a measure of pregnancies, but of pregnancy outcomes.  The data does not show the residential status of the mothers at the time of the outcomes, but only that the outcomes took place in New York City.  It is entirely possible that significant numbers of women seeking abortions come to New York City to get them from outside of the city; in fact, it’s probably more likely than not, considering the concentration of abortion services in major metropolitan areas.  Women seeking abortions may go outside their local area even if abortion services are readily available anyway in order to maximize their anonymity through the process.  That trend would seriously skew an “abortion rate” statistic.

Another possibility, although less likely, would be mothers seeking to have their births outside the city.  Those decisions might come earlier in pregnancy for mothers who prefer a less urban life for raising a family.  Even a small trend in that direction would tend to inflate the “abortion rate” in the city, although probably not much.

The headline that 41% of all New York City pregnancies end in abortions is at best iffy, if not inaccurate, as the statistic measures outcomes and do not control for residence.  One fact is certain: 87,000 abortions in New York City in one year is appalling, no matter how it appears in the statistics.

Addendum: As long as we’re talking about accuracy in terms, though, we should note that the Planned Parenthood spokesperson should try for some improvement, too.  She talks about comprehensive sex education as the key to reducing abortions, including abstinence education, but then asserts that “abstinence by itself is proven to be ineffective.”  Actually, abstinence by itself is the only completely effective way to avoid pregnancy.  She means abstinence education, but since we’ve been delivering comprehensive sex education for decades while abortion rates and unmarried pregnancies have skyrocketed, the same can be said for comprehensive sex education as well.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Tragic.

Bigbullets on January 7, 2011 at 11:38 AM

Liberals, so busy killing future tax payers, that soon they won’t be able to afford to kill future tax payers.

Iblis on January 7, 2011 at 11:40 AM

The Margret Sanger Institute of Fetal Death and Liquidation of Undesirables (MSIFDLU) released a statement saying these statistics are horrific. The numbers should be much, much higher … nearer 90%.

darwin on January 7, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Liberals, so busy killing future tax payers, that soon they won’t be able to afford to kill future tax payers.

Iblis on January 7, 2011 at 11:40 AM

They just replace murdered babies with illegals.

darwin on January 7, 2011 at 11:41 AM

It is entirely possible that significant numbers of women seeking abortions come to New York City to get them from outside of the city; in fact, it’s probably more likely than not, considering the concentration of abortion services in major metropolitan areas.

this may be the impetus behind the PP groups trying to get Catholic hospitals to start performing abortions (ie, so the gals don’t have to travel so far).

either way, this information is literally stomach turning. This is a lot of children.

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 11:42 AM

So sick. As a nation we have sown the seeds of our destruction. God will not be mocked forever.

flyfisher on January 7, 2011 at 11:43 AM

Killing babies by hook (abortions) or by crook (unions not plowing streets) in NYC.

truth..

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 11:43 AM

The breakdown by ethnicity is, perhaps, even more startling. Almost 60% of all pregnancy outcomes in NYC for African-American mothers were abortions; among Hispanics, 41.3%. Asians and whites had relatively low percentages of abortion outcomes (22.7% and 20.4%, respectively).

Is birth control frowned upon amongst non-Asian minorities? How the hell can the rates be so much higher in the black and Hispanic communities?

Doughboy on January 7, 2011 at 11:43 AM

Ethnic Genocide

Daemonocracy on January 7, 2011 at 11:43 AM

Well, we’re almost at what the liberals promised.

They wanted to make abortion, safe, legal, and rare the outcome of a majority of all pregnancies in the country.

What? You want to quote them correctly; what are you racist?

gekkobear on January 7, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Only in this subject could a 5% drop over 12 years be considered positive.

Heinous.

“Health of the mother, rape, and incest” my arse. This is birth control, nothing less.

princetrumpet on January 7, 2011 at 11:45 AM

I would like to see the statistics myself, but wonder spontaneous abortions (that’s the term – not “terminations”) requiring surgery and those performed for fetal anomaly or ectopic pregnancy etc are included in the surgical/medical abortion category.

Would note that this figure is actually a decline from figures in previous years. I think it was nearer 48% ten years ago…but would need to see if categorization has changed.

SarahW on January 7, 2011 at 11:46 AM

If NYC were a ‘Southern’ City this would be national scandal where liberals pundits all the way up to President would be insinuating genocide.

It is disgusting that 60% of all African-American pregnancies are terminated.

Lance Murdock on January 7, 2011 at 11:46 AM

How the hell can the rates be so much higher in the black and Hispanic communities?

Doughboy on January 7, 2011 at 11:43 AM

No despot ever flung forth his legions to die in foreign conquest, no privilege-ruled nation ever erupted across its borders, to lock in death embrace with another, but behind them loomed the driving power of a population too large for its boundaries and its natural resources.

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood

apparently, those folks are convinced that our population is too large and they’re merely doing something about it…?

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 11:48 AM

The Democratic Party platform of 2008 finally dropped its old abortion language (“safe, legal and rare”), which had asked that women not have abortions unless they absolutely must. The 2008 platform, just announced, says instead, “The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.”

Socratease on January 7, 2011 at 11:50 AM


Almost 60% of all pregnancy outcomes in NYC for African-American mothers were abortions …

Well at least they won’t be “punished” with a baby, right Mr. Precedent?

Tony737 on January 7, 2011 at 11:50 AM

gives new meaning to the lyric

If you can make it there, you can make it anywhere. New York, New York. duh duh de duh…

james23 on January 7, 2011 at 11:50 AM

Clearly the only solution is more block voting for (D)s.

rogerb on January 7, 2011 at 11:51 AM

Ethnic Genocide SUICIDE – Daemonocracy

The craziest part of this whole thing is that not only have they wiped out millions of black Americans, they’ve gotten them to do it to THEMSELVES!

Tony737 on January 7, 2011 at 11:52 AM

Actually, abstinence by itself is the only completely effective way to avoid pregnancy. She means abstinence education, but since we’ve been delivering comprehensive sex education for decades while abortion rates and unmarried pregnancies have skyrocketed, the same can be said for comprehensive sex education as well.

I think all of us rational folks here on HA can agree that just bcs you have been educated, doesn’t mean you know anything.
And in fact, too much education can muddle things.
As an educator, I have seen this to be true.
You can really keep this issue simple.
If you have sex, there’s a chance you may get pregnant.
If you don’t, unless you’re using a turkey baster with some sperm in it for a douche, you are NOT going to get pregnant.
See?
Easy.

Badger40 on January 7, 2011 at 11:53 AM

The reason America is falling apart, concerns much more than just politics. Politics is the least of it. Politics is one symptom. America’s soul is ill, because it embraces so much evil–rampant abortion being exhibit one.

RBMN on January 7, 2011 at 11:53 AM

Well wait. If part of the theory is people come into the city for abortions because there are more choices can that also be true for births? Are their more hospitals that specialize in childbirth in the city? Just asking. No matter what that’s a lot of dead children that will never have a chance to be someone special and that’s truly sad.

New Patriot on January 7, 2011 at 11:54 AM

This is birth control, nothing less.

princetrumpet on January 7, 2011 at 11:45 AM

I tend to agree here.
Real birth control, whatever form, takes forethought & planning.
Most people doing this are too stupid to do that.

Badger40 on January 7, 2011 at 11:54 AM

Tragic to some Republicans?

“Republicans for Election Win only” will say … don’t touch any social issue… FOCUS ON FISCAL CONSERVATISM … to always win election.

while all of them are drooling for pork and to raise debt ceiling!

Go figure the hypocrisy of many Republicans.

TheAlamos on January 7, 2011 at 11:55 AM

Child sacrifice is a sacrament in all pagan cities.

Inanemergencydial on January 7, 2011 at 11:55 AM

Well wait. If part of the theory is people come into the city for abortions because there are more choices can that also be true for births? Are their more hospitals that specialize in childbirth in the city? Just asking.
New Patriot on January 7, 2011 at 11:54 AM

Here in ND that would be very true.
A lot of people will travel 100 or more miles to give birth.

Badger40 on January 7, 2011 at 11:56 AM

This just in: crime rate in 2029 drops again.

/ducks

playblu on January 7, 2011 at 11:56 AM

Rather it is a decline from previous years or statistically inaccurate is beside the point… 87,000 lives tragically ended, and that doesn’t count the life of the mother, that despite what Planned Parenthood and NOW says… will be forever altered… A blight on this great nation and God will judge the shedding of innocent blood. Makes me so sad…

mcplumbercuda on January 7, 2011 at 11:58 AM

No matter what that’s a lot of dead children that will never have a chance to be someone special and that’s truly sad. – New Patriot

Yup, one could’ve been the Delta Force Operator who takes out bin Laden … oh wait, let’s try this with something libs care about … one of them could’ve been the gay doctor that discovered the cure for straightness!

Tony737 on January 7, 2011 at 11:58 AM

One fact is certain: 87,000 abortions in New York City in one year is appalling, no matter how it appears in the statistics.

7250 abortions per month

1673 abortions per week

238 abortions per day (365 day year, not excluding weekends/holidays)

30 abortions per 8hour workday

1 abortion every 2 minutes….

::::tick tock:::

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 11:59 AM

The one thing you can say about liberals is that they are willing to wait for their preferred outcomes but I don’t think this is going quite as Mrs. Sanger would have liked. I find 87,273 unfathomable in the world let alone one city in the U.S..

Cindy Munford on January 7, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Dead future Democrats. This is a problem?

SurferDoc on January 7, 2011 at 12:00 PM

And that is why the black community in America is in such a mess.
How tragic.

Badger40 on January 7, 2011 at 12:01 PM

the amount of abortions performed per month in NYC is essentially HALF of a US Army division and 1.5 times that of the crew of a US aircraft carrier.

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 12:01 PM

Odd, 41%…near the same as Obama’s approval rating.

Electrongod on January 7, 2011 at 12:01 PM

This just in: crime rate in 2029 drops again. – Playblu

Or … This just in: NYPD and FDNY once again can not fill their ranks in 2029, crime increases, fire-related fatalities way up.

Tony737 on January 7, 2011 at 12:02 PM

playblu, I hope you are not insinuating that the bright side of killing 60% of African American’s before brith and 20% of Hispanics before birth will be that the crime rate will will go down? That so racist. And I’m not one to cry racist. But I happen to be Hispanic and I have not committed a crime in my life and I have two children that I’ve raised to be law abiding, God fearing , awesome contributors to society. Post like that give Hot air a bad name!

mcplumbercuda on January 7, 2011 at 12:02 PM

Democrats: Party of Moloch.

OhioCoastie on January 7, 2011 at 12:04 PM

Paging Hillary “Safe,legal,rare” Clinton-

Unemployment rate of NYC continues to run between 9-11%. People have been inundated with terrible economic predictions for nearly a decade, used as an attack against Repubs and conservs. Words have meanings…Not a lot of people want to bring children into the world when they cannot support themselves and the children they may already have. More young adults are self centering,concentrating their income on themselves. Socio-economically it was bound to happen and I think we will continue to see these sorts of stats until 2020, when the economy makes a “recovery”. Im not saying its right that its happening, Im pro-life. Only making the point that politically,some of this is due to the rhetoric and propaganda being banded about to attack each party. Some of it is due to hard economic times, and some of it is because young people are waiting longer to have children, enjoying the “fruits of their labors”, no pun intended. When PP sells abortions as birth control this is what you get. Abortion are handed out like condoms and BCP.

canditaylor68 on January 7, 2011 at 12:05 PM

one of them could’ve been the gay doctor that discovered the cure for straightness!

Tony737 on January 7, 2011 at 11:58 AM

++

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 12:06 PM

This 41% abortion rate is caused by Climate Change

J_Crater on January 7, 2011 at 12:08 PM

SurferDoc on January 7, 2011 at 12:00 PM

Yes, it is a problem.

Cindy Munford on January 7, 2011 at 12:09 PM

Hate to be harsh, but I’ve got to be pragmatic. I don’t find this that disturbing. We don’t need any more wards of the state. Do I wish there were way less pregnancies to be sadly terminated? Yes, of course.

toliver on January 7, 2011 at 12:10 PM

This is reminiscent of the statistic that half of all marriages end in divorce. Sure, but a significant minority of people marry and divorce 4, 5, or 6 times, while many folks marry once and stay married. Avoid statistics that don’t necessarily measure the same group for both the numerator and denominator.

Vashta.Nerada on January 7, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Maybe these women should get out of the city.

Maybe the negativity of city life makes them feel like it is wrong to bring a child into it.

Get out where it is clear life is still good.

Life is still worth living.

I feel sad for those women, mothers, they are missing so much joy. Motherhood is hard, I have six children, I know all about hard. But what else gives such a reward for your sacrifices? Motherhood is joyful.

petunia on January 7, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Almost 60% of all pregnancy outcomes in NYC for African-American mothers were abortions

Based on that quote alone, I was going to pose the question of whether or not this rose to the level of genocide. Then I saw a magazine which arrived in the mail. For more on the subject, go to:

http://fota.cdnetworks.net/pdfs/citizenmag/2011-01-cover.pdf

and read the article about a woman who a woman who worked for Planned Parenthood for eight years, until she actually witnessed an abortion. The woman’s name is Abby Johnson, her book is titled, “unPLANNED“. Also read, “Gianna“, by J. S. Renshaw.

oldleprechaun on January 7, 2011 at 12:11 PM

If there is any racism, it is truly on the heads of those who marketed this holocaust of the unborn to the minorities as an acceptable form of birth control.

SurferDoc on January 7, 2011 at 12:13 PM

How the hell can the rates be so much higher in the black and Hispanic communities?

Doughboy on January 7, 2011 at 11:43 AM

I also hate to be harsh, but can we state the obvious? These particular blocks have more of a problem with keeping it in their pants and keeping their legs together.

Am I being purposefully offensive?

Yep.

catmman on January 7, 2011 at 12:13 PM

This just in: crime rate in 2029 drops again. – Playblu

That was the thinking behind the ‘Final Solution’,you should feel proud.

darwin-t on January 7, 2011 at 12:14 PM

the amount of abortions performed per month in NYC is essentially HALF of a US Army division and 1.5 times that of the crew of a US aircraft carrier.

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 12:01 PM

And the answer to the Social Security problem.

I think if you have ever had an abortion you should not get Social Security. I’m just saying…

petunia on January 7, 2011 at 12:14 PM

“We don’t want the word to get out that we hope to exterminate the “black” population”

Margaret Sanger.

Vera on January 7, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Maybe these women should get out of the city. – Petunia

Or maybe they should keep their legs closed until they get an education, a job, get married and a place to live (preferably outside the city, like you said) and then actually have kids.

That goes for the men too! If they MUST have sex … try oral!

Tony737 on January 7, 2011 at 12:18 PM

toliver on January 7, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Most of us wish that and that the word “choice” was not so narrowly defined.

Cindy Munford on January 7, 2011 at 12:19 PM

31x 9/11.

I’m not in favor of putting pregnant women and doctors in jail over this. It’s a social issue that we should handle as a society rather than with guns and police.

But that is an appalling toll. Shame on NYC, and shame on the women who think this is acceptable.

phelps on January 7, 2011 at 12:22 PM

“We don’t want the word to get out that we hope to exterminate the “black” population” – Vera

Close, here it is … The Quote of the Century …

“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” – Margeret Sanger, socialist

Tony737 on January 7, 2011 at 12:22 PM

“We don’t want the word to get out that we hope to exterminate the “black” population” – Vera

Close, here it is, The Quote of the Century …

“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the N_gro population, if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.” – Margaret Sanger, socialist

Tony737 on January 7, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Not too surprising. Given the preponderance of Blacks having abortions, I would say that Planned Parenthood’s targeting of those ethnics is having an effect.

unclesmrgol on January 7, 2011 at 12:26 PM

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Do us a favor and run the numbers on how many US soldiers W killed per day.

My guess will be W’s numbers would be lost in the rounding number of NYC abortions.

Serial Killers. The old movie, Escape from New York, certainly sounds like a good idea now.

BobMbx on January 7, 2011 at 12:26 PM

The breakdown by ethnicity is, perhaps, even more startling. Almost 60% of all pregnancy outcomes in NYC for African-American mothers were abortions…

History’s masterminds of genocide never came near a umber like that. Absolutely unreal.

JetBoy on January 7, 2011 at 12:27 PM

Thanks, Tony. I couldn’t get the un-n word through the filters.

Yeah, definitely the quote of the century.

Vera on January 7, 2011 at 12:27 PM

I’m not in favor of putting pregnant women and doctors in jail over this. It’s a social issue that we should handle as a society rather than with guns and police.

But that is an appalling toll. Shame on NYC, and shame on the women who think this is acceptable.

phelps on January 7, 2011 at 12:22 PM

In response to your first statement, the carnage is created with vacuums, blenders, and pickling fluids by doctors.

The police have guns.

Both sides have lethal weapons. Seems fair to me.

BobMbx on January 7, 2011 at 12:29 PM

No surprise. Lots of cultural and religous pressure from family and friends not to have a child out of wedlock, and that’s even IF they find out.

rickyricardo on January 7, 2011 at 12:31 PM

BobMbx on January 7, 2011 at 12:26 PM

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/fallen/

Cindy Munford on January 7, 2011 at 12:32 PM

I think if you have ever had an abortion you should not get Social Security. I’m just saying…

petunia on January 7, 2011 at 12:14 PM

New law: We get the uterus with the fetus.

0% recidivism. Gauranteed.

BobMbx on January 7, 2011 at 12:32 PM

NYC is the communications capital of the coounty. Is there any doubt why the media thinks like it does?

bw222 on January 7, 2011 at 12:33 PM

rickyricardo on January 7, 2011 at 12:31 PM

More now than in the past?

Cindy Munford on January 7, 2011 at 12:34 PM

No surprise. Lots of cultural and religous pressure from family and friends not to have a child out of wedlock, and that’s even IF they find out.

Did we just go back in time 30 years?

The majority of black children are born to single mothers, along with something like 30% of hispanic children.

There’s no social stigma. There’s also no social stigma against abortion in the black community thanks to Sanger’s direct campaigning with black preachers on the subject.

Vera on January 7, 2011 at 12:35 PM

No surprise. Lots of cultural and religous pressure from family and friends not to have a child out of wedlock, and that’s even IF they find out.

rickyricardo on January 7, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Hey, its 2011, not 1953.

Being a single mother is a fashion statement today.

BobMbx on January 7, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Do us a favor and run the numbers on how many US soldiers W killed per day.

BobMbx on January 7, 2011 at 12:26 PM

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_casualties.htm

I took the total wounded and killed (30,182) and figured out the same rates. Between 23Mar2003 (beginning of OIF) until 31 Dec2009.

total wounded and killed=30,182
4451 casualties per year

370 per month

86 per week

12 per day

1 every two hours…..

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 12:36 PM

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 12:36 PM

Hmmmm…ok. Unfortunately, our Dear Leader doesn’t allow babies to survive an abortion.

So to compare apples to apples, lets just use deaths.

BobMbx on January 7, 2011 at 12:39 PM

phelps on January 7, 2011 at 12:22 PM

Why not? The fetus is still an unborn victim of violence, even if an artfully crafted exemption is in place.

It’s amusing how pro-abortion people try to have it both ways; most pro-abortion states have fetal homicide statutes on the books, and even the Feds do, all in the name of presumptive Choice.

So the mother can Choose to have her fetal child be human, or not, as she sees fit, with the state presuming the child is human if the mother dies violently, even if said violent death was on the way to the abortionist, while the state assumes the child is non-human if it dies at the mother’s hand.

unclesmrgol on January 7, 2011 at 12:41 PM

1 abortion every 2 minutes in NYC versus 1 soldier killed or wounded every 2 hours….

Thusly, in the same time 2hour period– 1 soldier is either wounded or killed in Iraq –but there are 60 babies aborted in NYC.**

**caveat. soldiers figures calculated based on a 24hr cycle vs an 8hr PP workday.

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 12:42 PM

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 12:36 PM

I didn’t realize that W was such a good shot.

unclesmrgol on January 7, 2011 at 12:42 PM

Liberals hate babies, and they only respect women who kill their babies and glorify a culture of death. Insanity.

I’m sickened when I read stories of women who are having abortions because they had goals they wanted to attain before being mothers (I wanted to move up the corporate ladder!) Yeah, well, get working on those goals and put your panties back on. What a shocking concept to be responsible for your actions. But we have this attitude in this country that we’re rarely ever responsible for our actions.

I’m sure this is great news for racists though. 60% of black births. Yet blacks tend still to cling to democrats who have sold them this idea that the best thing for them is to adhere to this “progressive” agenda of death, creating a black holocaust.

Mind boggling.

TheBlueSite on January 7, 2011 at 12:42 PM

She means abstinence education, but since we’ve been delivering comprehensive sex education for decades while abortion rates and unmarried pregnancies have skyrocketed, the same can be said for comprehensive sex education as well.

Let me explain.

When someone gets pregnant in spite of abstinence education, it proves that abstinence education doesn’t work. When someone gets pregnant in spite of “comprehensive” sex education, it proves we need to increase the funding of it.

Liberal Logic 101.

tom on January 7, 2011 at 12:43 PM

We are a culture literally drowning in our own success!
As a conservative, I have to confess that abortion has never been a huge issue with me until the last few years. I’ve always believed it was wrong, but I never had any children of my own so it just never grabbed me with any real urgency.
And then a few years ago, something happened that really opened my eyes in a very unexpected way; my stepdaughter delivered to the world the most dazzlingly beautiful baby girl — and from that second on, nothing has been the same.
Margaret Sanger and all of the “Progressives” and intellectuals that followed, look upon a baby as a problem. Conservatives and traditionalists, look upon a baby as an opportunity. Once I held my brand new granddaughter for the first time, and looked in those smiling blue eyes, an entire galaxy of dazzling possibilities suddenly opened up that I never imagined before, and suddenly I understood what all of those “social cons” were so desperately earnest about.
We are butchering an entire universe of shining possibilities, and the price to be paid will be in terms of miracles not achieved and potential not realized. It is the very essence of cultural suicide!

Lew on January 7, 2011 at 12:45 PM

based on US MIL deaths alone from 03 to 09 (4282 cax).

632 killed per year

52 killed per month

12 per week

1.7 per day

comparing the NYC abortion rate (238/day) to the US casualty rate in Iraq over a 6 yr period (1.7/day), the NYC abortion rate in NYC during 2010 was 140 times higher than the average death rate in Iraq during the most dangerous period of the war (invasion/pre-surge/surge and post-surge).

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 12:47 PM

unclesmrgol on January 7, 2011 at 12:41 PM

The logic is perfect:

Blow up an abortion clinic, killing 10 pregnant women and you get charged with 20 counts of murder.

Ask the clinic how many babies they would killed if not for the bomb? 0.

On planet bizarro, abortion is not murder and Pi is exactly 2.

BobMbx on January 7, 2011 at 12:48 PM

…the NYC abortion rate in NYC during 2010 was 140 times higher than the average death rate in Iraq during the most dangerous period of the war…

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 12:47 PM

Which one is the war of choice?

Thanks ted.

BobMbx on January 7, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Rush just mentioned this, and said these abortions are future liberals.

toliver on January 7, 2011 at 12:54 PM

And the answer to the Social Security problem.

I think if you have ever had an abortion you should not get Social Security. I’m just saying…

petunia on January 7, 2011 at 12:14 PM

What you are saying is that money speaks. Here’s a way for “Choice” to really be a choice. Let the mother declare her child’s humanity after a doctor says she’s pregnant. If she does so, then the child is given citizenship and a social security number, and the parents get the associated tax exemption from the time of declaration forward, as well as all entitlements associated with a child — such as aid to families with dependent children. If the child later dies due to an induced abortion, those benefits must be repaid — future benefits are garnisheed to assure compliance.

In addition, if a mother has been determined to be pregnant, and has resolved that her child is non-human, then a violent offender cannot be prosecuted for killing said child.

This allows mothers who chose to call their babies non-human to truly have that “Choice” without any burden on the state, but allows mothers who “Choose” the other path to have the benefits associated with a child.

unclesmrgol on January 7, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Which one is the war of choice?

Thanks ted.

BobMbx on January 7, 2011 at 12:50 PM

now, that’s the question of the day…

you’re welcome

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Hate to be harsh, but I’ve got to be pragmatic. I don’t find this that disturbing. We don’t need any more wards of the state. Do I wish there were way less pregnancies to be sadly terminated? Yes, of course.

toliver on January 7, 2011 at 12:10 PM

Because of course none of those babies would have been adopted.

There are couples across the country that want to adopt, and have to go to foreign countries to find babies to be adopted.

Sorry, but that’s not just pragmatic. It’s short-sighted and callous. It assumes that aborted babies would become wards of the state rather than be adopted, and assumes that wards of the state are less deserving of life.

tom on January 7, 2011 at 12:55 PM

Alveda King addressed this issue in extraordinary fashion on 828, where there were 500,000+ people there.

2:00+

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Check out http://www.blackgenocide.org/ , you’ll get background on those numbers.

theCork on January 7, 2011 at 1:05 PM

the blood of our children is shed in the womb of our mothers …in a war…..

Alveda King
828

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Rush is addressing this right now.

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 1:08 PM

Absolutely horrific, but Margaret Sanger would be proud. She was afterall racist towards blacks.

tommer74 on January 7, 2011 at 1:13 PM

abortion kills more black Americans than the 7 leading causes of death combined.

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Being a single mother is a fashion statement today.

BobMbx on January 7, 2011 at 12:35 PM

…and a way to kick up your welfare and food stamp payments.

slickwillie2001 on January 7, 2011 at 1:16 PM

She talks about comprehensive sex education as the key to reducing abortions,

How about we merely reduce abortions and skip the comprehensive sex ed middleman?

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 1:17 PM

BTW, Focus on the Family is giving out grants of money to offer ultrasounds to women who are thinking of an abortion.

Regardless of what you think of FOTF politically, this is a smart move that will undoubtedly save lives. There’s nothing quite like seeing the baby you’re thinking of killing to help you realize what you’re about to do.

tom on January 7, 2011 at 1:22 PM

Absolutely horrific, but Margaret Sanger would be proud. She was afterall racist towards blacks.

tommer74 on January 7, 2011 at 1:13 PM

It wasn’t anything personal on her part. She believed in eugenics, and in her version, Blacks didn’t make the cut.

unclesmrgol on January 7, 2011 at 1:29 PM

Sanger gets a lot of ink because of her stand on eugenics, but here’s a lady who gets virtually none for the ideology:

I give you Ruth Bader Ginsburg:


Here’s what Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in Sunday’s New York Times Magazine: “Frankly I had thought that at the time [Roe v. Wade] was decided,” Ginsburg told her interviewer, Emily Bazelon, “there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

From the same article:

Oliver Wendell Holmes was a passionate believer in such things. In 1915, Holmes wrote in the Illinois Law Review that the “starting point for an ideal for the law” should be the “coordinated human effort . . . to build a race.”

In 1927, he wrote a letter to his friend, Harold Laski, telling him, “I . . . delivered an opinion upholding the constitutionality of a state law for sterilizing imbeciles the other day — and felt that I was getting near the first principle of real reform.”

And much more recently we have this offering:

Ron Weddington, co-counsel in the Roe v. Wade case, wrote a letter to President-elect Clinton, imploring him to rush RU-486 — a.k.a. “the abortion pill” — to market as quickly as possible.

“(Y)ou can start immediately to eliminate the barely educated, unhealthy and poor segment of our country,” Weddington insisted. All the president had to do was make abortion cheap and easy for the populations we don’t want. “It’s what we all know is true, but we only whisper it. . . . Think of all the poverty, crime and misery . . . and then add 30 million unwanted babies to the scenario. We lost a lot of ground during the Reagan-Bush religious orgy. We don’t have a lot of time left.”

My guess is the bolded statements don’t get a lot of microphone time in the target populations’ neighborhood.

What Mr. Weddington actually said is this: The conservatives are getting in our way of genocide. But we can make up for it.

I wonder if Mr. Weddington has been suggesting using ovens and gas chambers after W left office.

BobMbx on January 7, 2011 at 1:37 PM

Not so different from the old days when people sacrificed their children to idol gods.

I don’t think we are quite that culpable, but it’s close.

scotash on January 7, 2011 at 1:39 PM

What is the position of Soros’s “Open Society” on abortions?

Have we reached maximum saturation yet?

Dr Evil on January 7, 2011 at 1:48 PM

A wide number of interpretations of the Aztec practice of human sacrifice have been proposed by modern scholars, with regards to both its religious and social significance. For example, one theory that has been widely discredited is that the Mesoamerican diet was lacking protein and that cannibalism of sacrificial victims was a necessary part of the Aztec diet.[4] Other theories link the practice to special socio-psychological factors or see it as a political tool. Most Mesoamerican scholars, however, see it as a part of the millennia-long cultural tradition of human sacrifice in Mesoamerica.

Human sacrifice among pre-Columbian indigenous populations is a controversial topic. The discussion of human sacrifice is also tied with the classic conflict between viewing indigenous peoples as either “noble savages” or “primitive barbarians” also within modern scholarship, where some scholars tend to romanticize the description of human sacrifice while others tend to exaggerate it.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture

ted c on January 7, 2011 at 1:59 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3