Worldwide Abortions Fall by Four Million per the Guttmacher Institute: The study found that an estimated 20 million unsafe abortions occurred in 2003, 97% of these in developing regions. Developed regions, where almost all countries allow abortions with few restrictions, had an average unsafe abortion rate of two per 1,000. The consequences of unsafe abortion-death, serious injury, infertility and increased health care cost are largely borne by poor women. The report concludes that reducing the incidence of unsafe abortion would result in an immediate and substantial reduction of maternal mortality and improve maternal health. The widespread unmet need for contraception must be addressed if we are to see further decline in abortion rates, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, where contraceptive use is low.
Why does the right-wing & our government support measures that limit access to birth control & abortion, in our country and world-wide? http://us.oneworld.net/article/view/153922/1/
2007-10-12 17:08:55 · 14 answers · asked by edith clarke 7 in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
Marty you can teach abstinence till you're blue in the face, but it won't make as much of a difference as teaching responsible sexual practices would.
Abstinence teaching has been proven dozens of times over not to work. Teaching our children how to properly use a condom is the best thing we could ever do for them. Teaching our children about the anatomy and physiology of the opposite sex is the best thing we can do for them. Teaching our children how to be responsible lovers is the best thing we can do for them.
Allowing a bigoted, xenophobic, ignorant religious minority to dictate what two responsible mature well educated people do in there private lives is the WORST thing we could ever do for our children. If and when the day comes that all contraception and sex for that matter becomes illegal, I'll be giving out prophylactis in my basement, there's no doubt about it.
2007-10-12 17:29:43 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 3⤋
Because they are idiots, that's really the only reason for going against reality out there.
If religion were to disappear overnight you'd probably find most of the problem we've got on this planet get solved very quickly.
marty: You're an idiot.
squeak: Whilst abstinance is the most effective birth control method the simple fact is that people don't do it so we just have to rely on other methods that actually will be used, even if they aren't 100% effective (although birth control should be the responsibility of both partners, not just one).
Emily L: You've earned my respect.
2007-10-13 01:03:55 · answer #2 · answered by bestonnet_00 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
The Repugnant party wants us to look stupid to the entire rest of the world, that's why. They've so far up the southern orifice of the religious right that they can't make a decision based on good research. Personally, since this policy impacts women more than men, I think its sexist. But this policy has a negative impact on both genders.
2007-10-13 23:09:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's not sexist to limit birth control - it's just stupid. Anyone who's willing to make decisions based on a reputable study instead of the blindly following the Bible would come to the conclusion that accessible birth control makes a whole lot of sense.
Really wassy, just because a policy tends to AFFECT women more doesn't necessarily mean that the policy is sexist.
2007-10-13 03:39:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
I don't know if the motives are necessarily sexist (I do know some Catholic women who are feminists who would disagree), but I DO think that it is very short-sighted and rather stupid. Supporting birth control is definitely a constructive way to work to reduce the number of abortions.
2007-10-13 00:24:50 · answer #5 · answered by Gnu Diddy! 5 · 5⤊ 0⤋
This is a result of narrow minded religious idiots who would rather see their right to choose supersede the right of the individual's in need. Male dominated ignorance and subjugation of their witless ewes at the highest of political levels will continue to perpetuate the unnecessary deaths of women at the hands of the butcher abortionists. By denying access to safe, humanitarian, and government sanctioned clinical procedures, the world is condemning it's future to a ghastly evil disequilibrium.
2007-10-13 01:01:51 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Conventional wisdom dictates that less restrictions on abortions and birth control mean more of each. Statistics now appear to dictate the exact opposite. So who are you going to believe: The Guttmacher Institute, or a bunch of random anti-choice lobbyists on a message board?
2007-10-13 00:12:07 · answer #7 · answered by Rio Madeira 7 · 5⤊ 4⤋
When people say to teach abstinence, does that include married couples? We keep hearing about how people should abstain from sex until marriage but we all know that marriage in itself offers no protection from unwanted pregnancy.
2007-10-13 02:08:12 · answer #8 · answered by RoVale 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
Yes and you will only increase abortion. I favour a limit on abortions in accordance with the principles of Roe vs. Wade. No partial-birth abortion, no multiple abortions, no gender-selective abortions.
2007-10-13 00:28:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Because if teens had easier access to birth control they would probably have more sex and no contraceptive is one hundred percent effective however (at least thats the theory) they don't take into consideration peoples stupidity and that whether people have access to contraceptives or not the horny bastards aren't gonna stop humping. The best birth control is abstinence.
2007-10-13 00:31:22 · answer #10 · answered by nobody 5 · 2⤊ 5⤋