Yes, abortion is eugenic
Patterns by poverty status were the same across racial and ethnic groups: abortion rates were highest for poor women and decreased with income. Poor white women accounted for 11.7% (95% CI 9.9–13.9%) of abortions in 2008, similar to the 14.1% (95% CI 11.5–17.1%) and 13% (95% CI 10.0–16.8%) accounted for by poor African American and Hispanic women, respectively. Regardless of poverty group, African American women had the highest abortion rates, followed by Hispanic women and then white women. These same patterns were also evident in 2000. Between 2000 and 2008, abortion rates appear to have decreased for all groups with two exceptions: poor white and poor African American women experienced increases in abortion rates, with the former group experiencing the most substantial increase.
Poor women more likely to have abortion than rich women.
Black women more likely to have abortion than other races.
There’s a myth among comments in conservative blogs that abortion is something that rich white women are doing, when in reality poor black women have a twelve-times higher abortion rate than middle-class white women in 2008. If the link included statistics for wealthier white women, I suspect their rate would be even lower. Wealthy white women are very good at avoiding unplanned pregnancies so they rarely need abortion.
It’s not surprising that abortion leads to less crime. The demographic with the highest crime rate (poor blacks) also has the highest abortion rate.
Lion of the Blogosphere 
“It’s not surprising that abortion leads to less crime. The demographic with the highest crime rate (poor blacks) also has the highest abortion rate.”
Exactly. Which proves the anti-abortion crusade was mostly about political maneuvering and vote capturing. Cuckservatives are getting called out on this at this very moment. Good!
all guns blazing
August 2, 2015 at 5:25 PM
Actually, that doesn’t make sense either. Fulfilling the anti-abortion mandate would only further marginalize the GOP (the party associated most with anti-abortion) since blacks almost exclusively vote for democrats.
Jeff-F
August 2, 2015 at 7:11 PM
Wrong. It’s about stirring the pot to get a greater percentage of registered GOP voters to actually show up and vote. That is what wins elections in this country – voter turnout is trending around 40-45% in presidential elections this century and has consistently dropped each term since 2000.
Viscount Douchenozzlé
August 2, 2015 at 11:26 PM
“That is what wins elections in this country – voter turnout is trending around 40-45% in presidential elections this century and has consistently dropped each term since 2000.”
Are you just winging it or what? I looked this up because, as I recall, 2008 was considered “historic” for voter turnout (Hope and Change and the financial crisis).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_the_United_States_presidential_elections
Note the table is through ’12 while the chart is through ’08. ’96 and ’00 were the low points– voter apathy due to a healthy economy, perhaps?
anon
August 3, 2015 at 2:33 AM
I must have a different data source – recalled that number from some time ago – will have to recheck.
Viscount Douchenozzlé
August 3, 2015 at 1:39 PM
You’re correct – my numbers were averages including midterm elections which bring down the mean quite a bit, particularly for the GOP. My analysis of GOP vote-getting tactics is correct, however, and most GOP strategists will admit this in private and in the right context.
Viscount Douchenozzlé
August 3, 2015 at 4:00 PM
And what needs to be mentioned is that when high IQ women are having abortions, it’s because there’s something wrong with the baby.
Making abortion more difficult has been pretty much the number one priority of Republicans in state legislatures. It’s pretty sad.
Hepp
August 2, 2015 at 5:41 PM
why do so many people on these blogs deny the obvious abortion-crime connection? the same people who insist on blacks being more criminal get all skittish whenever this is brought up.
james
August 2, 2015 at 6:06 PM
Just occurred to me while schlepping a condenser up 5 flights of stairs, that maybe since blacks are very dangerous their abortion can be allowed somehow? Everybody understands that it’s beneficial overall. Just saying….
Yakov
August 2, 2015 at 6:22 PM
Wait, you’re also a criminal defense lawyer, right? More abortions means fewer clients for you.
sorry, I don't hire tattoos
August 3, 2015 at 2:13 AM
Yakov, you are by far my favorite commenter here.
Diddlerontheroof
August 3, 2015 at 5:21 PM
I’m glad you enjoy them. Thanks.
Yakov
August 3, 2015 at 10:44 PM
Ditto.
Viscount Douchenozzlé
August 4, 2015 at 2:58 AM
There’s a myth among comments in conservative blogs that abortion is something that rich white women are doing, when in reality poor black women have a twelve-times higher abortion rate than middle-class white women in 2008.
This could be used to sell Christian conservatives on preemptively sterilizing ‘at risk’ populations.
The argument goes:
i) Ideally, abstinence education would reduce unwanted pregnancy among the ‘least advantaged’
ii) In practice ‘those’ women will continue to have premarital sex
iii) Burdened with low future time orientation – brought about by ‘bad schools’ they’ll forget to use the pill and/or condoms; ending up pregnant
iv) If the poor are too ‘disadvantaged’ to be trusted to avoid unwanted pregnancies with short term birth control then they should be strongly incentivized to use long term birth control or be sterilized because these long term methods will be less dependent on their remembering to do anything remotely responsible before they screw like mindless animals.
The fewer of them get pregnant in the first place, the fewer of them will resort to abortion.
The Undiscovered Jew
August 2, 2015 at 6:38 PM
You basically just paraphrased the reasoning process of aging white Mainline Protestants.
Evangelical cuckservatives, with their idealism and born-again blank slatery, are a whole ‘nother ball of wax
ATC
August 3, 2015 at 5:00 AM
You basically just paraphrased the reasoning process of aging white Mainline Protestants.
Where are you meeting these conservative Mainline Protestants? They’re liberals who endorse abortion on grounds of feminism.
The Undiscovered Jew
August 3, 2015 at 9:01 PM
Evangelicals don’t necessarily know the demographic composition of abortion patients. They could sincerely think it’s wholesome middle American girls who are flushing their embryos.
The Undiscovered Jew
August 3, 2015 at 9:03 PM
Because everything they know about the demographic of abortion patients came from watching the movie Juno?
Lion of the Blogosphere
August 4, 2015 at 12:24 AM
Because everything they know about the demographic of abortion patients came from watching the movie Juno?
It could very well be true.
The Undiscovered Jew
August 5, 2015 at 11:56 PM
I do find it weird how abortion is such a big time issue for upper-class lefty white women given how little they actually utilize it. I guess it fits the pattern of smarter people being more open-minded in principle but behaving in very traditional, conservative ways in their own personal lives.
Although I am pro-abortion, mostly from reading this blog, it still annoys me that the mainstream arguments on both sides are utterly ridiculous (eugenics is not a mainstream argument). There is no god or constitution that decrees a “Right to Choose” that must always be possessed by the female and theoretically the law governing it could be set up another way – hence all the debate. On the other hand, like you have said, there are degrees of humanness, and given that most abortions occur very early in a pregnancy, the argument that fetuses are human doesn’t hold up, either.
Jokah Macpherson
August 2, 2015 at 6:46 PM
You can’t call it eugenics in public for obvious reasons. You can market/propagandize it like Kraft markets its boxed and canned “food” which is “fresh nutritious food”. Free speech, er bullshit, works like that. Put a positive spin on it while covertly knowing who really needs it most. Of course libs can’t tell their allies this because it’s condescending. Rich white women could care less about “choice”. They already have it! They use(d) condoms. So did their mothers. Libs don’t want poor people around them. Libs don’t want intergenerational poverty in the cites. That’s really why they want population controls like easy abortion. Nowhere in their narrative do they say they actually like poor black people.
all guns blazing
August 2, 2015 at 7:23 PM
You’re missing the point. What keeps poor people poor is an oversupply of unskilled labor, which holds wages low. If they had fewer children, they’d be far better off.
Viscount Douchenozzlé
August 3, 2015 at 10:53 PM
Except the poor people regardless of fertility are being replaced by the latinos who do the jobs etc etc.
Also, it would from a distance appear most if not all of the poor blacks are unemployable anyway due to lack of education, lack of skills and plentiful criminal records. Society does not require their labor.
Glengarry
August 4, 2015 at 6:55 AM
I do find it weird how abortion is such a big time issue for upper-class lefty white women given how little they actually utilize it
Well, it’s similar to voting in the South or gay marriage. Most upper-class lefty white women aren’t black, don’t live in the South and aren’t gay. So what. They see it as a moral cause to allow other people to have the rights they could enjoy.
It’s a motivation that is not hard to understand even if you don’t agree with it.
Rifleman
August 2, 2015 at 8:39 PM
“I do find it weird how abortion is such a big time issue for upper-class lefty white women given how little they actually utilize it.”
Most people aren’t looking at statistics. Leftists are very “open-minded” when it comes to sex. Abortion plays into that. They also see it as a feminist issue in that they 1) want to be promiscuous but 2) don’t want an unplanned pregnancy so 3) want abortion as insurance just in case.
destructure
August 2, 2015 at 9:13 PM
I do find it weird how abortion is such a big time issue for upper-class lefty white women given how little they actually utilize it.
Occam’s Razor suggests it’s because they “utilize it” more than is reported.
Dave Pinsen
August 2, 2015 at 11:42 PM
No, the obvious reason is because they want an insurance policy, just in case.
Lion of the Blogosphere
August 3, 2015 at 12:15 AM
So abortion on demand is lefty women’s equivalent of the 2nd Amendment?
Dave Pinsen
August 3, 2015 at 1:23 AM
It’s interesting how a prole chick will be proud to have gotten knocked up by the local studmuffin who plays along and pretends he’s her fiancee for a few months so she doesn’t lose face with the local cuckservatives.
But a UMC college girl is so worried about the shame of LOOKING prole and deviating from her class’ conformist script, that even though she (and likely daddy splooge as well) has the resources to raise the child comfortably, she’ll still abort to keep up appearances.
ATC
August 3, 2015 at 5:32 AM
No, the obvious reason is because they want an insurance policy, just in case.
That’s true, but I still don’t see why you persist worrying about abortion access. Do you really suppose the Republicans would ever seriously restrict it? The same Republicans who can only with great difficulty pass modest corporate tax cuts despite big business bribing both parties with donations, escort girls, luxury vacations, and drug parties?
The Undiscovered Jew
August 3, 2015 at 9:15 PM
It would probably be sufficient to have abortion legal only in Hawaii (or Alaska … or Canada perhaps?) to just provide the upper classes with their out. There’s pills, condoms, morning after pills, and so on to avoid the problem in the first place. Since that’s not enough, I think it’s a deeper need than just having an emergency way for the office queen to suck out crushed bad babby while awaiting age 35 to produce the perfect specimen.
Glengarry
August 4, 2015 at 7:03 AM
“On the other hand, like you have said, there are degrees of humanness, and given that most abortions occur very early in a pregnancy, the argument that fetuses are human doesn’t hold up, either.”
What an asinine thing to say. If the fetus isn’t human, what is it? A cow? An alien? The question with abortion is the level of personhood(legal concept), not the level of humanness(biological concept). I think that a big part of why this debate still exists is due to the profound ignorance on both sides of the debate, it’s like everything from Mendel onward is forgotten as soon as the topic is abortion.
Mad Hatter
August 3, 2015 at 1:05 AM
You have to look at the repeat abortion rate of blacks and hispanics. They use abortion as a revolving door, whereas white women use it as a one time emergency measure and then go on to have fewer children than non asian minorities.
I’m agnostic on the abortion issue, but I don’t believe for one second it’s eugenic in the way you’re imaging. We have without a doubt lost untold brilliant men and women to abortions- most of them from women knocked up in college. Columbia is nicknamed “the fetal slaughterhouse” in nyc pro-life circles.
slithy toves
August 2, 2015 at 6:47 PM
Yeah, it’s a lot more common among educated young women than Lion thinks.
Dave Pinsen
August 2, 2015 at 11:43 PM
There are no abortions in the positive glimpses of Gene Roddenberry’s imagined future. You can’t get more embarrassingly SJW than Star Trek and even the uber-SJWs responsible for Star Trek obviously realize that they will be ashamed, one day, of abortion advocacy. Also, eugenics is a real thing, but it is way more complicated than anyone who has not spent years thinking about accurate logic can understand. When one considers the ramifications, outlawing the provision of abortion is the most positive eugenic step that a country subjected to the lies of modern media and modern corporations could possibly take.
howitzer daniel
August 2, 2015 at 8:29 PM
There was even that TNG episode where Troi was impregnated by an alien and didn’t get an abortion.
Dave Pinsen
August 4, 2015 at 3:33 AM
But the kid disappeared into energy, how convenient. It didn’t show what happens when a Starfleet officer gives birth to a real baby while on duty. Does it ruin their careers? Is the baby cared for by the computer?
Lion of the Blogosphere
August 4, 2015 at 8:27 AM
if we consider just poor people, to see who is more likely to have an abortion, i believe the answer is that just the smarter poor people will have the abortion so it is dysgenic amongst the poor population. abortion does not lower the overall birth rate, so even with a higher abortion rate, poor people are still having more kids. abortion may help them feel it is “safe” to have more kids and just the smarter ones will actually prevent themselves from doing so.
ralph
August 2, 2015 at 8:42 PM
“abortion does not lower the overall birth rate,”
Wrong. Since 1973, the birth rate had declined significantly.
And no one gives IQ tests to women who have abortions, but it’s highly likely that it’s correlated with lower IQ and not higher IQ, because higher IQ women don’t get accidentally pregnant in the first place.
Lion of the Blogosphere
August 3, 2015 at 12:13 AM
I thought the decline was because of women choosing casual sex and career per instructions from television. I am 45 with no kids, but I certainly would have had them if women 20 years ago had the values and personalities of women 50 years ago.
Copperhead Joe
August 3, 2015 at 1:53 PM
LotN: The demographic with the highest crime rate (poor blacks) also has the highest abortion rate.
Just imagine how many more software developers, astro-physicists, and neurosurgeons there would have been had Robert Bork been confirmed to the US Supreme Court!
E. Rekshun
August 2, 2015 at 9:15 PM
“Black women more likely to have abortion than other races.”
Thankfully so.
Vodka
August 2, 2015 at 10:24 PM
The 69% of women getting abortions who are “economically disadvantaged” — does that term encompass college students, who aren’t making money because they are in school?
Dave Pinsen
August 3, 2015 at 12:05 AM
Why is it so important for you to believe that rich high-IQ privileged women are the one’s getting abortions? The statistics speak loud and clear. We are talking about an extremely large difference in abortion rates.
Lion of the Blogosphere
August 3, 2015 at 12:17 AM
So you don’t know what the study authors meant by “economically disadvantaged”?
My issue is that your claim that educated women rarely get abortions is inconsistent with my anecdotal experience and the study’s own claim that 3 in 10 American women have had abortions. Ask your sister how many educated women she knows have had abortions. The answer may surprise you.
Dave Pinsen
August 3, 2015 at 1:21 AM
You have no hard statistics to back you up, just a feeling based on reading right-wing-blog echo chambers.
Lion of the Blogosphere
August 3, 2015 at 9:15 AM
@Lion:
It’s not strictly an echo chamber, because the christian conservative view aligns with the self-portrayal of liberals. Liberals outwardly promote promiscuity and abortion. They use psychoanalytical concepts like sexual frustration and sexual repression to denigrate conservative politics.
It is reasonable for conservatives to assume that those promiscuous, childless liberal pro-choicers must be getting lots of abortions.
acolyte
August 3, 2015 at 11:43 AM
The only blogs I read regularly are yours and Sailer’s. Did you ask your sister yet?
Dave Pinsen
August 3, 2015 at 11:46 AM
You have no hard statistics to back you up,
re: abortion rates and crime: “it is in all likelihood not even possible to prove or disprove Donohue and Levitt’s conclusion.”
more than enough truthiness to go around.
swank
August 3, 2015 at 1:29 PM
Lion, he has a decent point here. If a privileged college student has an abortion during her college years, she will go into the statistics as low income. Also, if we consider the proportion of women who have had abortions rather than the total number of abortions, the statistics look a lot closer. I’m in agreement with you, but these are reasonable points that would demand greater scrutiny.
muelleau
August 3, 2015 at 5:56 PM
From a study in Barcelona, Spain:
“Only 19.7% of pregnancies among women without primary education completed are intended, whereas in women with university studies this proportion reaches 72%.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2430141/
Once again, the REALITY is that uneducated women are unable to avoid getting accidentally pregnant, and thus they have more abortions.
* * *
Also, women with medicaid coverage have a 3.2 times higher abortion rate than women without medicaid coverage. Do you know of any middle-class or upper-middle-class college students with medicaid coverage? I don’t.
Facts are facts. Women from lower social classes have a much higher abortion rate than women from higher social classes.
Lion of the Blogosphere
August 3, 2015 at 7:36 PM
Jeez… imagine the shitshow we would be in without it…
Kaz
August 3, 2015 at 1:36 AM
The fact is that if abortion were outlawed, then educated and/or high-income women would be even LESS likely to have an unintended pregnancy. If these women *did* get pregnant, then they would have the means to get an abortion in Canada (or bump up their vacation to Europe).
Lion’s linked paper received funding from the same group behind this website, which looks at the issue in depth: http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Unintended-Pregnancy-US.html
They break pregnancies down into three categories: intended, unintended, and mistimed. Maybe some claim abortion is dysgenic because…
“Compared with higher-income women, poor and low-income women are less likely to end an unintended pregnancy by abortion. Consequently, poor women have a relatively high unintended birth rate.”
However, poor women are also much more likely to have an unintended pregnancy:
“Poor women’s high rate of unintended pregnancy results in their also having high rates of both abortions (52 per 1,000) and unplanned births (70 per 1,000). In 2008, poor women had an unintended birth rate nearly six times as high as that of higher-income women (at or above 200% of poverty.)”
There has been a trend away from abortion:
“In 2008, 40% of unintended pregnancies (excluding miscarriages) ended in abortion and 60% ended in birth. This was a shift from 2001, when 47% ended in abortion and 53% ended in a birth”
The main issue is preventing pregnancy in the first place:
“In 2013, these [publicly funded family planning] services helped women avoid 2 million unintended pregnancies, which would likely have resulted in about 1 million unintended births and nearly 700,000 abortions.[15]”
Granted, this last stat is most vulnerable to sleight-of-hand, but women in general should not be terminating as many pregnancies as they do; they should be avoiding pregnancy altogether!
Vince
August 3, 2015 at 2:53 AM
The same basic attitude that encourages Black abortions discourages White reproduction as well: “Life is garbage, so cram your face with the junk food you prefer and toss the rest.” (And lots and lots of White girls, including smart ones, have abortion. My own child was killed that way — I did the nice liberal boyfriend thing and said, “Whatever you decide, I’ll support you, honey.” That child might have become a much better person than I am.)
Garr
August 3, 2015 at 5:59 AM
Sounds like you’ve been reading the same right wing echo chamber blogs as me.
Dave Pinsen
August 3, 2015 at 11:49 AM
Well, some of those right-wing echo chamber guys dimly perceive or imagine (as I do) that there’s a sort of supernatural world-program looming overhead; it seems to me that we either go with that fantasy or perception or whatever it is or we cram our faces with shiny junk food until we puke and our bodies ooze slime from every pustule.
Garr
August 3, 2015 at 6:31 PM
Um haven’t all you HBD types overlooked one crucial fact? The rich high IQ white women who aren’t having abortions aren’t having babies either. The pro-life message pushed by conservative religions is not really aimed at you or me or LaTrina but at their own girls and young women. It tells them “babies are so good and morally pure why not have one or two or seven?” Sure enough they are the only white demographic that are actually expanding.
Tell me what is more eugenic, one living prole child or one perfect non-existent one?
Cecil of the Blogosphere
August 3, 2015 at 8:38 AM
If the prole child has an IQ below the average, then it’s dysgenic.
Lion of the Blogosphere
August 3, 2015 at 9:18 AM
The statistical average IQ of a non-existent child is 0. (There are some outliers amongst the Scandinavians & Ashkenazim.)
Cecil of the Blogosphere
August 3, 2015 at 10:28 AM
Evangelicals have more kids despite their ideology. They are more promiscuous, cheat more on their spouses, have more divorces, teen pregnancies, etc.
It tells them “babies are so good and morally pure”
What are you talking about? Have you heard of original sin? Evangelicals proudly promote child abuse as a necessary component of child rearing.
It’s privileged liberals who believe that all children are precious little snowflakes. That is why they spend endless time planing, preparing and caring for their children. They engage in over-investment parenting. The Idiocracy trailer nails it.
If you want to encourage privileged liberal women to have more kids, you need to tell them that parenting doesn’t matter much. They should ease up. Their kids will do just fine. An abortion ban would have the opposite effect. It would cause them to become even more victorian about their relationships. Spinsterhood would increase.
acolyte
August 3, 2015 at 11:17 AM
“Um haven’t all you HBD types overlooked one crucial fact? The rich high IQ white women who aren’t having abortions aren’t having babies either.”
That’s a question entirely different from abortion.
“Tell me what is more eugenic, one living prole child or one perfect non-existent one?”
None of these choices are eugenic.
Thomas
August 3, 2015 at 2:36 PM
This is a good point, but it becomes a problem when these ideas start getting turned into policies. Some of these state abortion “regulations” that have been enacted in Red states are particularly bad because wealthier and more knowledgeable women will be more able to go across state lines to avoid them.
jasonbayz
August 3, 2015 at 9:35 PM
I think Lion is wrong here, although his basic point and statistics are correct.
There are high IQ black women and lower IQ black women. Are the high IQ black women aborting, while the low IQ women are having 6 babies with 5 baby daddies? I think this is the case & if that’s true then abortion is dysgenic: future time orientation and IQ are being bred out of the community.
Rotten
August 3, 2015 at 9:50 AM
“There are high IQ black women…”
Where?
Vodka
August 3, 2015 at 9:51 PM
Here’s the link to Steve Sailer’s 4 part discussion on Abortion & Crime:
“Does Abortion Prevent Crime?” Steven D. Levitt’s opening statement to Steve Sailer in 1999 “Slate” debate
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2014/04/does-abortion-prevent-crime-steven-d_26.html
Nedd Ludd
August 3, 2015 at 1:23 PM
What’s the TFR of the various groups? Seems more to the point.
Glengarry
August 3, 2015 at 1:52 PM
Actually, we already know that the white majority is projected to be gone in 20-30 years, don’t we? If so, the winners have for the most part already been born.
Glengarry
August 3, 2015 at 1:53 PM
The future belongs to those who show up.
uatu
August 4, 2015 at 2:57 AM
The thing you need to remember is the drive to defund Planned Parenthood really has very little to do with abortion. Planned parenthood is not allowed by law to use and federal money for abortions. The defunding is mostly about cutting off access to birth control for poor women.
If Congress was really upset about fetal body parts being used for research, they could simply pass a law making that illegal.
mikeca
August 3, 2015 at 2:32 PM
Well said.
ModernReader
August 3, 2015 at 9:07 PM
Nonsense. Money is fungible. If PP didn’t receive federal funds for Not Abortion, they’d have to divert money from abortion to cover their overhead. With federal funding, they don’t have to.
If I paid you 50k each year in addition to whatever your income is now but you weren’t allowed to spend it on eating at restaurants, would you spend more, less, or the same amount on eating out than you did before?
ivvenalis
August 4, 2015 at 5:43 AM
off topic
It’s time to clean up your blogroll Lion, but let me help:
Anatoly Karlin moved to http://www.unz.com/akarlin/
blograju.com is gone, the domain is now parked
destructure went private/is gone?
glpiggy.net is gone, the domain is now parked
Mencius Moldbug is on hiatus since 2014
mikestreetstation hasn’t been updated since 2014
Pumpkin Person moved to http://pumpkinperson.com/
Volokh Conspiracy moved to https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/
THE replacement i recommend is The Z Blog, a must read, updated daily!
Z Man is also a lawyer, living on the ghetto edge, offering his insights:
http://thezman.com/wordpress/
That’s it, cheers…
Oh and if you like Fred Reed, you will love James LaFond, Baltimore’s violence guy, blogging from ghetto proper!
guest
August 3, 2015 at 3:00 PM
Thank you I will take your advicse.
Lion of the Blogosphere
August 3, 2015 at 4:06 PM
I’m not gone. I hadn’t updated my blog in a very long time so I took it private. I intended to relaunch with a clean slate. Now that you’ve made an issue of it I’ll make a point to relaunch within the next week or so.
destructure
August 3, 2015 at 11:31 PM
After some more reflection, a temporary ban on abortion is probably ideal. If nothing else it would raise awareness about contraceptives (because dumb, poor women really do use abortion as a form of birth control).
Vince
August 3, 2015 at 11:21 PM
“Facts are facts. Women from lower social classes have a much higher abortion rate than women from higher social classes.”
Wouldn’t it be more eugenic to convince your lower class dumb proles to not get pregnant in the first place? Or if they insist upon getting pregnant, reward them for doing it within a stable marriage to a decent guy with some reasonable prospects and punish them for anything less? And reward/punish the men similarly? Banning abortion might then be sort of like Guiliani’s ‘broken windows’ law enforcement theory. Wik: “The theory states that maintaining and monitoring urban environments to prevent small crimes such as vandalism, public drinking and toll-jumping helps to create an atmosphere of order and lawfulness, thereby preventing more serious crimes from happening.”
One objection I imagine you might make is that the proles might take this newfound morality and run with it, becoming like some muslim families in europe who have a dozen kids, each one of lower IQ than the average native French population. Then we might have to discuss other aspects of the situation, such as contraception, welfare, migration, etc.
CMC
August 4, 2015 at 7:07 AM
Mayor Bloomberg had these excellent anti-pregnancy ads in the subways, but unfortunately De Blasio is the mayor now.
Lion of the Blogosphere
August 4, 2015 at 8:28 AM
Meh, as I recall they weren’t that good.
But, lol, I see Planned Parenthood didn’t like them either.
CMC
August 4, 2015 at 12:02 PM
By the way, now that Planned Parenthood has been hacked, it might be possible to answer questions about who gets abortions and in what quantities in great detail.
Glengarry
August 4, 2015 at 7:11 AM
Although Lion is likely right that abortion is relatively eugenic, that one bright spot is not enough to change the tide. America overall is dsygenically breeding and maintaining an extremely dysgenic immigration policy. Next stop, Third World sh*thole.
Mark Caplan
August 4, 2015 at 10:29 AM
Been to LA/Miami/NYC lately? I can assure you we’ve already arrived.
Viscount Douchenozzlé
August 4, 2015 at 1:37 PM