Abortion's lost generation: what it might have accomplished

Fairbanks Daily News miner ^ | 1/23/05 | Debbie Joslin

[orionblamblam]

> imagine 50 million more wage earners paying Social Security

Well, that's a shudderful thought, regardless of the source.

[r9etb]

What a truly sick attitude to take. We shouldn't oppose abortion for such socialist and selfish reasons. We should oppose abortion because it's wrong. Period.

You've pointed out a symptom of something more general in our society. Our culture is unwilling to state that something is right or wrong, good or bad. Whether intentionally or not, we've instead slipped into a de facto utilitarian moral mindset. We see it in a lot of places other than this sort of abortion discussion.

For example, our free market friends -- especially those of the libertarian religion -- love to invoke The Market as a moral arbiter. Social mores have degraded into various versions of "whatever feels good." And of course, the major argument for abortion reduces to an appeal to the sacrosanct convenience of the mother.

That helps to explain why Christianity is under attack, too: it leads us to the idea that right and wrong are real things that exist outside of what's convenient for us.

[nicolezmomma]

We should oppose abortion because it's wrong. Period.
I know that, but telling that to a lib doesn't make any sense to them at all. It's got to be explained in the context of consequences to them. Because to a lib, it's all about them.

[ashtanga]

We tend to forget that people, by and large, are a country's greatest resource. This may not be the case in some areas of the world where superstition and hate are the order of the day, but a well educated public is worth its weight in gold. There is some surface logic in fetacide for stupid people, or those whom we think will be stupid when we study the parents. However, when we allow the State to cease protecting the most vulnerable of us all, we open the Pandora's box of unintended consequences, chief among them the disappearance of a continued Democrat voter base. Forgive my lack of eloquence today.

[Mr. Silverback]

Awesome post, Qam. An exceelent analysis of the economic impact of abortion.

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[LibertarianInExile]

Not if we didn't do it retroactively. Babies aren't all that expensive--kids and seniors are. If we aborted every single baby in the U.S., we'd still have to pay social security and other "entitlements" that the Great Society managed to put into place. We'd have to kill everyone under the age of 18 and over the age of 62 to really make a significant dent, I think. :)

Why do I feel like I'm writing a "Not too brite!" article?

[stands2reason]

You can even it out by taking into account the women made sterile by an abortion.

[stands2reason]

You do know there are Freepers who have had abortions right?

[HostileTerritory]

I don't see how that evens it out... of course there's going to be some population difference, because many women who had abortions won't have had children.

[r9etb]

You do know there are Freepers who have had abortions right?

I know of at least one who has. Doesn't affect the larger (statistical) point....

[LaBradford22]

The Democratic party is being punished by God today for its stance in favor of abortion in the 1970's. In a nutshell, abortion cost the Democrats the presidency in 2000 and 2004.

How, do you ask?

Democrats tend to have abortions at a higher rate than Republicans.

Children tend to grow up to have political beliefs similar to those of their parents.

Abortion was made legal nationwide by Roe vs. Wade in the mid 1970's.

Individuals born in the mid 1970's would be eligible voters in the 2000 and 2004 elections.

The 2000 and 2004 elections were both extremely close - so close that a couple million aborted would-be-Democrats could easily have tipped the scales.

Like I said, the Democratic party is being punished by God for its stance on abortion.

[KPfromDerryNH]

My neighbor's hypothesis assumed all of these children would be born to single women or at least families on public assistance.
I have always taken this argument personally because I grew up on welfare thanks to a deadbeat dad and it's like hearing people say I should have been aborted. I'm a taxpayer now, and I take care of my elderly Mom in law. I guess now all these bleeding hearts would say.."Oh, now your ok, your valuable now." I hate hearing I'm special, that not everyone turns out like me. It's well meaning but also so ignorant and cruel and above all arrogant and elitist Babies should get a chance, poor or not.