»Christians increase abortion rates«
|
|||
 Something that made me think lately when I watched CNN. There were a few Reverends (A reborn Christian, Jesse Jackson, a Catholic Reverend) and the Catholic said an important thing about being against abortion and what president to vote for. He said that although the Republicans are against abortion (and the Democrats are pro-choice), the abortion rate was lower during Clinton's terms (because of the better economic situation.) (Thus Christians actually shouldn't decide by what the Republicans WANT, just by the outcome) This statistic made me think. posted by knn |
|||
|
|
|||
| in-my-opinion.orgReligion and Mysteries, from worship to werewolvesReligious & Philosophical TopicsChristians increase abortion rates |
|
|||
 knn: No, the reason for abortions is a bad economic situation. Wrong. Economic status has never caused anyone to have underage or premarital sex. The cause for abortion is the lack shame in these kinds of immoral sexual behaviours. Religious belief would be the best solution for abortion. posted by stinkz |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 stinkz: knn: No, the reason for abortions is a bad economic situation. Wrong. Economic status has never caused anyone to have underage or premarital sex. The cause for abortion is the lack shame in these kinds of immoral sexual behaviours. Religious belief would be the best solution for abortion. I don't see how this post is ontopic, but since knn hasn't marked it as such I shall make a quick rebuttal. I don't see how premarital sex can be seen as immoral if the people involved in the sexual relationship intend it to be long term (and even hope it to be life long). I don't make moral judgments about one-night stands myself, but I do not personally understand how people can find them rewarding. More importantly I wish to note that it does appear to be more likely that underage sex (and certainly underage pregnancy) occur amongst people of a lower economic status. Even Christians sometimes give in to temptation don't they, Stinkz? posted by fatpie42 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
fatpie42: I don't see how premarital sex can be seen as immoral if the people involved in the sexual relationship intend it to be long term (and even hope it to be life long). If the relationship was intended to be lifelong, where's the commitment? fatpie42: more likely that underage sex (and certainly underage pregnancy) occur amongst people of a lower economic status. The number of people engaged in this kind of immoral activity, and thus the number of teen pregnancies, has been rising drastically. Is it because we have more and more poor people in this country? Hardly. The reason is the decline and removal of religion. posted by stinkz |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
stinkz: If the relationship was intended to be lifelong, where's the commitment? What a bizarre question. How much more committed can you get than "a lifelong relationship"? stinkz: The number of people engaged in this kind of immoral activity, and thus the number of teen pregnancies, has been rising drastically. Is it because we have more and more poor people in this country? Hardly. Good objection! But that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen more often amongst poorer people. But there are many feminist arguments as to why underage pregnancy is rising as well as Christian ones. stinkz: The reason is the decline and removal of religion. Actually the number of religious people is having a resurgence. Atheism hasn't really taken off in the way many people in the 19th century expected it to. Most people now are either "agnostic" or "new age spiritualists". Only a very small number of people are prepared to deny religion entirely. posted by fatpie42 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 stinkz: Economic status has never caused anyone to have underage or premarital sex. Don't change the topic. The topic is abortion not underage sex. Only 12.2% of women are too young (their parents or others object to the pregnancy.)
60% of abortions are performed on women who already have one or more children. Moreover: Teen pregnancies are much higher in the United States than any other developed country - double that of Canada and at least four times France and Germany. I read once that this is directly related to sex education: The less sex education you have the more unwanted pregnancies. In other words: You vote for Republicans and more unborns will be killed. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
fatpie42: What a bizarre question. How much more committed can you get than "a lifelong relationship"? The commitment is marriage. "Intending" a life-long relationship is not the same as commitment. Everyone has had the "feeling" that their love would last a lifetime. That feeling is not guaranteed to stay. Vowing to stay with the person for life, despite changing "feelings," is commitment. Premarital sex is equivalent to uncommitted sex. knn: Don't change the topic. The topic is abortion not underage sex. What do you think causes such astronomical numbers of aborted babies? I'll tell you what: underage, premarital sex. After having committed such acts, the teens would rather kill their own child, than have to deal with the shame they have put on themselves. knn: The less sex education you have the more unwanted pregnancies. In other words: You vote for Republicans and more unborns will be killed. That is the most bogus, ignorant claim I have ever heard. Sex education is not what is needed. Teens know way more than they ever should about sex, and they're learning it from the wrong sources. posted by stinkz |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
stinkz: That is the most bogus, ignorant claim I have ever heard. Sex education is not what is needed. Teens know way more than they ever should about sex, and they're learning it from the wrong sources. This is a typical Christian claim. But baseless. The more sex education you have the less underage pregnancies. The National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles 2000 (Natsal 2000) also found a strong correlation between family background, underage sex and teenage pregnancy. sex education prevents underage pregnancies ♣ posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
the only piece of useful information found on that site... "According to the survey, many people who have intercourse in their early teens regret the experience." It never occurs to Lipper that teen pregnancy doesn't naturally flow from economic status. After all, millions of impoverished immigrants came to America from Europe in the early twentieth century without illegitimacy getting out of hand, thanks to strong religious traditions that stigmatized illegitimacy. What's really missing from the lives of Pittsfield's unwed mothers isn't hope; it's shame about teenage sex or out-of-wedlock pregnancy. The teens talk openly of early sexual escapades, and matter-of-factly pose for book photos with their illegitimate kids—unsurprising in a culture that glorifies sex and in which movie stars and rock musicians proudly flaunt their out-of-wedlock offspring. The demise of shame is a far more plausible explanation for Pittsfield's teen-pregnancy problem than is economic distress.
Like Shipler, in other words, Lipper has reversed cause and effect. She sees social dysfunction in Pittsfield and blames it on poverty. But it typically is personal failure and social dysfunction that create poverty. To stay out of poverty in America, it's necessary to do three simple things, social scientists have found: finish high school, don't have kids until you marry, and wait until you are at least 20 to marry. Do those three things, and the odds against your becoming impoverished are less than one in ten. Nearly 80 percent of everyone who fails to do those three things winds up poor. That's a crucial truth that left-wing social thinkers have tried to deny from the earliest days of the welfare-rights movement. And as these books show, even after the conclusive failure of the War on Poverty and the resounding success of welfare reform, they are still at it. But, I think the thing that should really show your claim for the idiocy it is, is the fact that, in today's schools, there is more "sex education" than there has ever been, yet also the highest pregnancy rate. posted by stinkz |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Think about this, too: There is a strange combination amongst conservative Christians: 1) Lower sex education and the presence of sex pictures 2) Forbid women to abort Isn't that sweet? #1 causes more pregnancies #2 forces the women to bear a child no matter what In other words there is a hidden effort to punish women and force them to live a life that men want. Combine that with the fact that many priests are homosexual (or for whom it's even forbidden to marry) and many Christians overreact to pictured sex ("sexophobiacs") you get the full picture. Is there actual anything in the bible that proves beyond doubt that homosecuality, abortion, under age sex and masturbation is bad? I never read anything to prove that. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
stinkz: But, I think the thing that should really show your claim for the idiocy it is, is the fact that, in today's schools, there is more "sex education" than there has ever been Exactly. In other words people who leave the school early are prone to underage pregnancies as proven by the study. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
knn: In other words there is a hidden effort to punish women and force them to live a life that men want. You're posts keep getting more and more irrational. Now there is supposedly a conspiracy theory among White Male Supremacists. Whatever. First off, lowering sex education in schools, especially high schools, is most definitely a good thing, which would, if anything, lower the amount of teenage pregnancies. Every sex education class that I've ever been forced to sit through has sickened me. Do you know why? Because of the ridiculously immoral biases which pervade the entire ordeal. It would be "wrong" for the school to come out and say that these teens probably shouldn't be having sex. That would be a "religious bias" or some garbage. And we all know that the blatant disregard for all morality is the "default" belief system, which is OK to bias our children toward. posted by stinkz |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Once again, however, I think that privatized schooling could again be the answer. If you want to send your kid to a place where sex is commonplace, and sex education means putting a condom on correctly, that's your perrogative. However, I would rather have my kids grow up in a place which ACTUALLY educates children on the morality of the issue. posted by stinkz |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
stinkz: First off, lowering sex education in schools, especially high schools, is most definitely a good thing, which would, if anything, lower the amount of teenage pregnancies. Proof? Statistics for this Christian claim? Moreover you didn't response to my comment: What is so bad about underage pregnancies? The population needs to grow. Is an under age pregnancy forbidden by the bible? posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
"millions of impoverished immigrants came to America from Europe in the early twentieth century without illegitimacy getting out of hand, thanks to strong religious traditions that stigmatized illegitimacy" posted by stinkz |
|||
|
|||
1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Goto page
1, 2, 3, 4 Next
 Register Log in |
The time now is 23 May 2012, 08:05 php B.B. |