Another one of the truths you will never see reported in the mainstream media. Shame on them for hiding this from women.
bttt
I’ve heard mixed reports of whether the connection between abortion and breast cancer actually exists. I couldn’t be any more pro-life than I already am ... but if the science is shaky, there are much better reasons to be pro-life.
SnakeDoc
Assuming the data, 300,000 deaths over 37 years is approximately 8100 deaths per year.
That amounts to 162 per state, assuming all states had equal populations, which they do not.
Still, an annual death toll of 162 people is more than any state I know of would accept as a tolerable price for anything that is not an essential of life.
We have to have transportation, so we accept accidents. We can, arguably, get along without the number of abortions we now have.
Just notin’.
And how many innocent babies?
Of course, 300K is a drop in the bucket compared to the 50 million BABIES who died from abortion during this period. Nevertheless, even the most crackpot liberal is likely to concede that these women who died were human beings.
In the 37 years since Roe v. Wade, 300K deaths = 8,100 deaths a year. There currently are about 8,000 handgun deaths a year
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg
—an “unconscionable” number that the left has said is completely unacceptable and should be substantially reduced or eradicated by strict gun control. In the case of handguns, it’s an open question whether strict gun control would in fact reduce deaths. In contrast, there’s NO empirical question that every abortion results in a death.
Thus, if liberals really cared about life, they should be as fervent about “banning” abortions as they are about banning or strictly regulating handguns. The fact that they are not at all concerned about doing something to curb the known death of more than 8,100 women suggests that their real agenda in the gun control debate is to control behavior/limit freedom, as opposed to saving lives etc.
I am pro-life but this is total bull.
To the body, JUST THE BODY, NOT THE SOUL HERE!!!, whether a new pregnancy ends from induced abortion or a natural miscarriage, the situation is identical.
To say that abortion causes breast cancer is wholly irresponsible and cruel, because you are condemning many innocent women who suffer miscarriages, sometimes repeatedly, to undue mental suffering. They’ve lost their precious baby, and now you hit them with these breast cancer risks??
You make your true argument against abortion look STUPID. Don’t have one because it could lead to breast cancer??? What?? Your original argument that it is killing a baby wasn’t satisfying enough to you??
This is wrong, anyway. Women get pregnant and lose the embryo all the time. Their period is a little late. Yet they lost a pregnancy. Plenty of women miscarry in the first trimester, with every hormonal shock an abortion would give.
Drop this argument.
As you sow, so shall you reap! If you kill a baby, why should you have a clear conscience?
We need to tax it in order to pay for free healthcare for the disabled.
9,000 per abortion should be reasonable due to the cost of all these breast cancers inflicted on the public./sarc
State class action against abortion providers following the model of the tobacco company lawsuits???? Nah, I don’t think so....
For years they knew that the very early stages of pregnancy caused changes in a woman that could produce extra strength and stamina. For years they had their female athletes deliberately get pregnant and then abort before their condition would be detrimental to their performance. Some of these women did this numerous times over numerous years.
They should all have breast cancer by now if this theory is correct.
I don’t know if there is a correlation between abortion and breast cancer. Does anyone know how many women who have miscarried got breast cancer? What about the men who get breast cancer?
Group Wants Probe of National Cancer Institute Abortion-Breast Cancer Cover-up
Ping
