bawomolo:

i don't see this as an important issue though. roe vs wade would still stand

It is not an important issue. . . . the Republicans make it such, even though they know they will not/cannot change it. . .

hehehe. . .at all anti-abortionists

I would have u knw that no less than S. Schwarz(I bet that's not his name. who cares, he sounds Jewish ) who wrote Freakonomics

has causally linked Roe v. Wade to the decline in the crime rate in New York.

Emphasis on Freakonomics I guess

Woo Hoo. . . . .

Clap ur hands for Roe v Wade y'all

bawomolo:

i believe the argument would be poorer biblebelt southern states like arkansas, mississippi who have little to fund welfare would be burdened by an increase in welfare babies or foster kids.  i don't see this as an important issue though. roe vs wade would still stand

Abortion is illegal in Arkansas and Mississippi?

@Ibime

If you base your arguments on lies,it falls apart. Take your assertion that 48% of black men in New York are unemployed,that is a bold faced lie.

The burden of proof lies on whoever makes an assertion. You have made an assertion and you are claiming that certain correlations,many of them lies, constitute proof of it.

The absurdity of your argument is that you are effectively casting huge swathes of society,the poorest of the poor,as net burdens. Using that argument,one can say that America will be better off getting rid of this poor demographic.

lmao, Doyin, You need to quit  

Abortion is illegal in Arkansas and Mississippi?

it was just an hypothesis if roe vs wade was overturned

If we are to assume that the consequence of having children raised by single mothers is that they are net economic burden to society,we have to conclude that African-Americans and Caribeans are a net burden to the US & UK respectively

The whole statement is misleading because it isn't relevant. We're not talking about black people, we're talking about single mothers. And although there may be black single parents, they have to be included in the same bracket as the white single parents. Not compared to other Africans or Caribbeans.

I seriously do not see how you can make that leap or what relevance it has. Please explain.

I'd also disagree that children are a burden to society. If the parents can afford to have them, they pay. But statistics do show that the children of unmarried mothers are more likely to face poverty and require state handouts. And this is the section of society you will be hitting the hardest if you ban abortion.

http://www.welfareacademy.org/pubs/welfare/testimony-0395.shtml

I find these statistics frightening:

   * Violent criminals are overwhelmingly males who grew up without fathers. i
   * Seventy-five percent of children/adolescents in chemical dependency hospitals are from single parent families. ii
   * More than half of all youths incarcerated for criminal acts lived in one-parent families when they were children. iii
   * Sixty-three percent of suicides are individuals from single parent families. iv
   * Seventy-five percent of teenage pregnancies are from single parent homes. v
   * Children living at home with both parents grow up with more financial and educational advantages than youngsters raised by one parent, as US Census statistics have long shown. vi
   * Seventy-two percent of the US Populations believes that fatherlessness is the most significant social problem America is facing. vii
   * Children in single parent families are two to three times as likely as children in two parent families to have emotional and behavioral problems. viii
   * Children who lived with only one parent had lower grade point averages, lower career aspirations, poorer attendance records, and higher drop out rates than students who lived with both parents. ix

As for the answer to your Irish question. It would be churlish of me to state that every Irish woman who wants an abortion comes to the UK. But again, the fact remains that many do. I also restate my claim that Ireland is not of relevence.
If it were, I could state that until relatively recently it was a 3rd world country and that this was down to the fact that abortion is illegal but that because Ireland is in the EU it's whole reason for having a high standard of living is due to the subsidies and handouts that it receives.

Regarding this quote:

If you are unaware that there are many people,lots of them teens,who get pregnant precisely to get benefits,you are being naive.

That was my whole point. Teens know they're going to get a handout. With banning abortion and still offering the handout, what incentive is there to not have a child out of wedlock?

doyin13:

I would have u knw that no less than S. Schwarz(I bet that's not his name. who cares, he sounds Jewish ) who wrote Freakonomics

has causally linked Roe v. Wade to the decline in the crime rate in New York.

Emphasis on Freakonomics I guess

Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner wrote Freakonomics. . . .

They also argued that swimming pools are more dangerous than guns statistically. . . . I do not see anyone arguing that they were pursuing a Republican agenda.

4 Play:

If you base your arguments on lies,it falls apart. Take your assertion that 48% of black men in New York are unemployed,that is a bold faced lie.

When the CSC measured the employment population ratio in New York City in 2003, they found that only 51.8 percent of African American men between 16 and 65 held jobs. That means that nearly half of all African American men did not have jobs. By comparison, 75.7 percent of White men in New York held jobs that year, meaning that fewer than one in four of them did not hold jobs.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0DXK/is_13_21/ai_n6169071


You still do not answer my assertion that those who could afford to travel to New York for abortions before Roe vs Wade did. Therefore Roe vs Wade only catered for the disadvantaged.

The whole statement is misleading because it isn't relevant. We're not talking about black people, we're talking about single mothers. And although there may be black single parents, they have to be included in the same bracket as the white single parents. Not compared to other Africans or Caribbeans.
I seriously do not see how you can make that leap or what relevance it has. Please explain.

70% of African-Americans and Afro-Caribeans are born out of wedlock,so if the culture of single motherhood is in itself a net burden, it could be rightly said Caribeans and Blacks are generally burdens to the UK and the US.

I'D also disagree that children are a burden to society. If the parents can afford to have them, they pay. But statistics do show that the children of unmarried mothers are more likely to face poverty and require state handouts. And this is the section of society you will be hitting the hardest if you ban abortion

The mere fact that a parent has to pay for a child makes a child an economic burden until he can fend for himself. To the extent that a child doesn't contribute to the economic output of a nation,a child remains an economic burden until adulthood.

As for the answer to your Irish question. It would be churlish of me to state that every Irish woman who wants an abortion comes to the UK. But again, the fact remains that many do. I also restate my claim that Ireland is not of relevence.
If it were, I could state that until relatively recently it was a 3rd world country and that this was down to the fact that abortion is illegal but that because Ireland is in the EU it's whole reason for having a high standard of living is due to the subsidies and handouts that it receives.

You still miss the point,isn't there any statistical evidence you can point to illustrating the price Ireland is paying;crime,housing,poverty,e.t.c. If there was any evidence that prohibiting abortion is a burden to a nation,surely,Ireland must have something to illustrate this.

You admit that not all Irish women looking for abortion go to the UK but that many do. That is a tacit admission that some don't;that there are Irish people today who would have been aborted if the laws had been liberalised. Surely,you must have some evidence of the net costs these people are having on society.

You admit that not all Irish women looking for abortion go to the UK but that many do.That is a tacit admission that some don't

OK. Let's do the math.

The abortion number in the UK is roughly 180,000. Of those, 8000 were from Ireland.
That means that roughly 4.5% of all abortions in the UK were to Irish women.

Now let's go to populations:

The UK has roughly 60 million people.
Ireland has roughly 4.5 million people.

So Ireland has about 7.5% of the UK population.

That would mean that roughly, Irish women are 60 to 70% as likely to have abortions in the UK as UK residents themselves.
Factor in the amount of Irish women who travel to elsewhere in the EU to get the procedure and you'll see that, although abortion is illegal in Ireland, if an Irish-woman wants an abortion, she gets it.

The Irish anti-abortion law is therefore a waste of time.

Therefore Ireland is not a relevant model to use as an example in your argument.

4 Play:

You admit that not all Irish women looking for abortion go to the UK but that many do. That is a tacit admission that some don't;that there are Irish people today who would have been aborted if the laws had been liberalised. Surely,you must have some evidence of the net costs these people are having on society. 

Net costs are swallowed up by net gains. . . I have told you to drop this Ireland thing, it isn't fooling anyone. . . . we all know why Ireland is resurgent. . . firstly, Irelands case is completely different from USA. . . whether you are looking at the extended family unit, religion etc. . . . still, we all know that crime is rising in Ireland. . . .EU named Ireland as the most crime ridden country within it. . . . even US state department warned visitors about a rise in crime in Ireland. . . . all these are the costs we would see if not for their economic resurgence.

OK. Let's do the math.

The abortion number in the UK is roughly 180,000. Of those, 8000 were from Ireland.
That means that roughly 4.5% of all abortions in the UK were to Irish women.

Before we start,I think it's good practice to link were you get your figures from.

@Ibime

Touche at the 48% claim . Though,it is a bit of a wide leap to go from saying that one study in '03 found that 51% of blacks in NYC have jobs to saying that 48% are unemployed. The "unemployed" figure will include blacks in education and I wonder whether it includes the self-employed.

I saw somewhere that 7,000 irish women travel to Uk for abortion each year so I would not dispute that.

Ibime:

Net costs are swallowed up by net gains. . . I have told you to drop this Ireland thing, it isn't fooling anyone. . . . we all know why Ireland is resurgent. . . firstly, Irelands case is completely different from USA. . . whether you are looking at the extended family unit, religion etc. . . . still, we all know that crime is rising in Ireland. . . .EU named Ireland as the most crime ridden country within it. . . . even US state department warned visitors about a rise in crime in Ireland. . . . all these are the costs we would see if not for their economic resurgence.

Precisely, the gains that these people bring(economic output/taxes) outstrips their costs(crime/welfare). You have in one sentence, ineloquently put,undermined your argument.

You want Ireland to be dropped because it undermines your claim that legalising abortion would have net costs to society. It is virtually impossible to do a like-for-like comparison though. The underlying thing is that you are seeking to prove the existence of a problem,the potential net costs of unwanted people, which you can't unless you can show that people who could have been aborted but weren't,because of legal constraints, cost more than they give back to society.

You still do not answer my assertion that those who could afford to travel to New York for abortions before Roe vs Wade did. Therefore Roe vs Wade only catered for the disadvantaged.

Same as above. There is no proof that the very disadvantaged are a generally a societal burden. No proof that society will be better off if they were dead.

Ibime:

I saw somewhere that 7,000 irish women travel to Uk for abortion each year so I would not dispute that.

It can't be too much to ask to link something. The total abortions in the UK versus the total abortions in the UK by ROI women.

4 Play:

Precisely, the gains that these people bring(economic output/taxes) outstrips their costs(crime/welfare). You have in one sentence, ineloquently put,undermined your argument.  

Silly you! I wasn't talking about net gains from anti-abortion laws. I was talking about net gains from joining the EU and strong fiscal policy.  

You have been dodging many issues I have raised.

Ibime:

Silly you! I wasn't talking about net gains from anti-abortion laws. I was talking about net gains from joining the EU and strong fiscal policy.  

You have been dodging many issues I have raised.

The task is clear: Isolate these unwanted people who have lived merely because of ROI's strict laws and show us that they are a net cost to society. It's that simple. All we have had from you is conjecture

Before we start,I think it's good practice to link were you get your figures from.

I managed to find a more up-to-date link. The one I did my calculations from was dated 2003. Granted the figure is down to roughly 7000 but please take into account that the woman is not forced to give an Irish address by the NHS, so 7000 is probably a very conservative figure. Living in the UK, you'll know that many Irish people can give UK addresses because they have relatives living here.
Also take into account that with my last post I did not factor in back-street abortions in Ireland itself nor the fact that Irish women are now travelling to the Netherlands for abortions in far greater numbers, where it is 50% cheaper to have it done privately in than in the UK.
Also be aware that although the number of abortions in the UK has risen by 10,000, I did not compensate for my rough estimates by removing the Irish figure so that increase should already be accounted for in my calculations.

Here's the link.

http://www.irishcatholicdoctors.com/documents/AbortionintheUKMay2007.htm

The reduction of 1000 does seem to fit in with figures presented elsewhere: it does seem that Irish abortion rates have dropped over the last 5 years. But the problem there is that we can't really read anything into that unless we go hunting for birth rates per head of population and wether or not they've increased or decreased. And wether we hunt up figures for abortion rates elsewhere in the EU.

And to tell the truth, I'm a bit too tired to do that right now!!!  

Finally, I'd also suggest that a drop in the past 5 years isn't really relevant to this topic when you consider the length of time that Ireland has had it's anti-abortion laws in place.

4 Play:

It can't be too much to ask to link something. The total abortions in the UK versus the total abortions in the UK by ROI women.

An estimated 7,000 women cross the sea for abortions each year. A recent survey found that nearly one in 10 Irish pregnancies ends in a UK clinic.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1859287.stm

According to that link above, an Irish woman can have a free abortion if she threatens suicide.  Soon many pregnant women in Ireland will be threatening suicide. .

http://struggle.ws/wsm/rbr/rbr7/abortion.html

Yet in spite of the ban on abortion and continued attempts to make all access virtually impossible, approximately 7000 Irish women every year exercise their right to choose abortion and travel to England to access legal abortion there, largely through charities provid - ing abortion services and private clinics. This figure of 7000 includes only those who are documented in English statistics by the giving of an Irish address. It does not include those who use UK addresses for reasons of confidentiality or those who travel to other countries. There has been about a 10% rise in the figures every year. An interesting statistical fact is that the majority of Irish women who have had abortions are married and already have children. It is estimated that about 150,000 Irish women have had an abortion - this averages about 1:10 of adult Irish women. Thus for Irish women abortion is common and important.

@Bastage

If they are "not forced to give an Irish address",how the hell do you keep tabs on who is Irish and who isn't? I hope that site isn't an abortion lobby site.

You are too tired? I have been posting half asleep for the past couple of hours.  

4 Play:

The task is clear: Isolate these unwanted people who have lived merely because of ROI's strict laws and show us that they are a net cost to society. It's that simple. All we have had from you is conjecture

What a Herculean task! Abi this na PHD thesis? I have already shown you that crime has risen in Ireland which is what I claimed. I have also given you some statistics for you to form some mathematical assumptions from. I challenge you to prove that they have been a benefit to society. You cannot - yet you expect me to do likewise, knowing it will take a long time to do any indepth mathematical calculations. There are so many variables involved, no economist or political scientist has been able to prove a mathematical figure.

If they are "not forced to give an Irish address",how the hell do you keep tabs on who is Irish and who isn't? I hope that site isn't an abortion lobby site.

No. To the contrary, it's actually an anti-abortion site. Which is why I would tend to think it's figures would be either accurate or conservative.

And yea, as you say, how do you keep tabs? This, again would seem to point out that the figures I've given are conservative.

Do you see what I mean now when I say that Ireland is a bad example to use?
Or are you going to carry on fighting me over this one? 

Heck dude. No reason why you can't argue for the Palin anti-abortion lobby. Just drop the freaking Irish angle.

Ibime:

What a Herculean task! Abi this na PHD thesis? I have already shown you that crime has risen in Ireland which is what I claimed. I have also given you some statistics for you to form some mathematical assumptions from. I challenge you to prove that they have been a benefit to society. You cannot - yet you expect me to do likewise, knowing it will take a long time to do any indepth mathematical calculations. There are so many variables involved, no economist or political scientist has been able to prove a mathematical figure.  

You have admitted that you made an unprovable claim.

I took the default position that humans in a nation like the US are a net gain;you claimed that some(those who aren't wanted by their mums) are effectively a net burden to society. The only way you can prove your claim is undertaking the "herculean task". Isolating those that lived and showing that what they take out of society is is more than what they give.

Until you can prove your original assertion,which sparked off the debate, all the conjecture from correlations(remember,correlation isn't the same thing as causation) doesn't prove they are a net burden to society.

Bastage:

No. To the contrary, it's actually an anti-abortion site. Which is why I would tend to think it's figures would be either accurate or conservative.

And yea, as you say,how do you keep tabs? This, again would seem to point out that the figures I've given are conservative.

Do you see what I mean now when I say that Ireland is a bad example to use?
Or are you going to carry on fighting me over this one? 

Heck dude. No reason why you can't argue for the Palin anti-abortion lobby. Just drop the freaking Irish angle.

Hang on a sec,if you agree that tabs are not kept,why presume that these figures are conservative? They could go either way;it can be an overestimate as well as an underestimate. 

You are using figures you cannot vouch for.

4 Play, go and sleep. Your claim that they are a net gain is completely unprovable. Infact, people have shown that they lead to a rise in crime. This is not measuring all the other factors such as human happiness which Republicans tend to overlook in their quantitative way of measuring everyone's worth.

I am off to bed.

Ibime:

4 Play, go and sleep. Your claim that they are a net gain is completely unprovable. Infact, people have shown that they lead to a rise in crime. This is not measuring all the other factors such as human happiness which Republicans tend to overlook in their quantitative way of measuring everyone's worth.

You haven't even proven your initial assertion and you are introducing unverifiable elements like "human happiness".

Lets for the sake of argument presume that these unwanted people contribute to a rise in crime,does that prove that their total negative contributions outstrips their total positive contributions? Blacks in the West contribute to a rise in crime but unless you are Grand Wizard in the KKK,you can't claim that blacks are generally a burden to society.

As for my position being unprovable,we know that humans are a net gain to societies,like the US,with demographic challenges . Anybody who wants to claim that those unwanted by their mothers aren't part of this net-plus must show why or forever keep quiet.

Hang on a sec,if you agree that tabs are not kept,why presume that these figures are conservative? They could go either way;it can be an overestimate as well as an underestimate.

I can't give you that one.

Think about it. If a woman enters the clinic and says she is from Ireland it's likely that she's telling the truth, isn't it? Therefore the 7000 is not going to be an underestimate. Why say you're from Ireland when you're not? And how many English women do you know who can do an authentic Irish accent and keep it up for hours?

Yet an Irish woman can easily enter a clinic and give a UK address and nobody will know the difference.

Therefore, logically, the figures are far, far more likely to be conservative.

Now I'm off to bed too!!!

Bastage:

I can't give you that one.

Think about it. If a woman enters the clinic and says she is from Ireland it's likely that she's telling the truth, isn't it? Therefore the 7000 is not going to be an underestimate. Why say you're from Ireland when you're not? And how many English women do you know who can do an authentic Irish accent and keep it up for hours?

Yet an Irish woman can easily enter a clinic and give a UK address and nobody will know the difference.
Therefore, logically, the figures are far, far more likely to be conservative.

Now I'm off to bed too!!!

You are presuming that the "7000" figure only includes those who say they are from Ireland. You don't seem to know the source of your 7000 figure and your extract refers to "estimates of 7000". We don't know who did the estimate and the basis of the estimate so we can't conclude on whether it's exaggerated or not given how clueless we are as to how the figures were obtained.

Dem don run? Crazy people,depriving me of my sleep!

David, come take back your thread. Don't mind these nutcases always diverting topics.

A former beauty queen who proudly calls herself a "hockey mom" as though that's a big accomplishment.

A former beauty queen who proudly calls herself a "hockey mom" as though that's a big accomplishment.

It is. It is called * Little League*. To see how effective it is, go and apply for a management or executive job at a Corporation and put on your resume that you were in competition sports. It won't matter in what capacity but it even carries more weight if you say you are little league coach. If you can coach Little League kids you are also coaching their parents and you are coaching the community. Thats sign of leadership, it is an accomplishment. Little League moms are viewed as team motivators, very crucial part in coaching. Get it? This is how Americans interprete it, although it is a foreign concept for us Africans.

You couldnt even tell your parent you wanted to play professional sport and not risk their annoyance and confrontation. Whattt, you want to play soccer? Soccer ko, roccer ni! Alakori, look at Timi, he just got addmission into University to study accountancy, you idiot want to play soccer.

These things are not approved and taught to us Nigerians as elements of community leadership.

This is too funny:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2OUJ8ZUTiI

get more at sarahpalinexposed.com

Amazing how people will reduce themselves to sources that they normally would not go for, all in bid to discredit the woman. ** shudders***!