Hey Mr. Joseph,Ms. Cahn is a fool for trying to argue that states in which contraception is available should have lower abortion rates. THIS WILL NEVER BE THE CASE. Why?Consider the statistic of abortion rate. Abortion rate measures the number of abortions per pregnant woman, correct? This understood, why is it surprising that states with available contraception have higher rates of abortion? Consider the following: one can be reasonably justified in saying that states which subsidize contraception are socially liberal, therefore, because the populace tends to be socially liberal, it will also be pro-choice. That is, A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN WILL BE PRO-CHOICE and thus seek abortion. In the exact same vein, pro-life (red) states will have lower abortion rates because fewer pregnant women will feel comfortable getting an abortion. So, independent of the number of pregnant teens, the rate will always be higher for abortion in socially liberal states, which, not surprisingly, will also most often support distribution of contraceptives. Mr. Douthat is foolishly arguing that the presence of contraception drives up abortion rates. This is completely and utterly FALSE. The correlation between pro-contraception policies and pro-choice beliefs in liberal (blue) states is what brings about this false notion.In light of the above statements, what should be the discussed topic is, "does availability to contraception decrease the number of births per 1000 teenagers?" Not surprisingly, the answer is yes, and there seems to be a stronger case for causation here. Throwing out a few data points here, according to a 2006 study, Mississippi, Texas, and Arizona (all red states) had the most out of wedlock teen births per thousand girls aged 15-19. This is partially attributable to the fact that abortion rates for states like Texas (32%) are far lower than for MA (51%), but also because a far higher proportion of Texans become pregnant in the first place (101 per 1000 compared to 42 per 1000). Considering these numbers, one can reasonably state that contraceptive lowers teen birth rate (and pregnancy rate). James
Hey Mr. Joseph,
ReplyDeleteMs. Cahn is a fool for trying to argue that states in which contraception is available should have lower abortion rates. THIS WILL NEVER BE THE CASE. Why?
Consider the statistic of abortion rate. Abortion rate measures the number of abortions per pregnant woman, correct? This understood, why is it surprising that states with available contraception have higher rates of abortion? Consider the following: one can be reasonably justified in saying that states which subsidize contraception are socially liberal, therefore, because the populace tends to be socially liberal, it will also be pro-choice. That is, A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF WOMEN WILL BE PRO-CHOICE and thus seek abortion. In the exact same vein, pro-life (red) states will have lower abortion rates because fewer pregnant women will feel comfortable getting an abortion. So, independent of the number of pregnant teens, the rate will always be higher for abortion in socially liberal states, which, not surprisingly, will also most often support distribution of contraceptives. Mr. Douthat is foolishly arguing that the presence of contraception drives up abortion rates. This is completely and utterly FALSE. The correlation between pro-contraception policies and pro-choice beliefs in liberal (blue) states is what brings about this false notion.
In light of the above statements, what should be the discussed topic is, "does availability to contraception decrease the number of births per 1000 teenagers?" Not surprisingly, the answer is yes, and there seems to be a stronger case for causation here. Throwing out a few data points here, according to a 2006 study, Mississippi, Texas, and Arizona (all red states) had the most out of wedlock teen births per thousand girls aged 15-19. This is partially attributable to the fact that abortion rates for states like Texas (32%) are far lower than for MA (51%), but also because a far higher proportion of Texans become pregnant in the first place (101 per 1000 compared to 42 per 1000). Considering these numbers, one can reasonably state that contraceptive lowers teen birth rate (and pregnancy rate).
James