Abortion

Response to Point 1:"By 1972, the year before the Roe v. Wade decision, the Centers for Disease Control reported that 39 women died from illegal or self-induced abortions.": http://www.straightdope.com....... Yes, few women were reported to have died from illegal abortions the last full year before Roe vs. Wade. But the key word there is "reported". Hundreds or thousands of deaths could have gone undocumented even in 1972.I dont like Ron's source. I'm just saying. 100,000 is also alot of deaths to miss.Point 2: Prohibiting abortion will just increase crime and poverty. The kind of people that abort are either young or poor. The young will not take care of the baby for society has already cast her out. She will get rid of the baby. The poor will not take care of the baby either. Because poor tends to breed poor. Crime tends to breed crime. If the woman does not abort, the baby could grow up into a criminal, or live an under-privaliged childhood. The baby would be better off not being born. Plus, chances are high that he or she will be murdered when they are older if they are poor and live in a bad part of town.This is your theory, I assume. I will break it down. Correct me if I am wrong.P1-- Abortion is a taboo. proscribed by society as improper or unacceptable: Taboo language is usually bleeped on TV. Synonyms: prohibited, banned, forbidden, proscribed. Antonyms: allowed, permitted, permissible; sanctioned.http://dictionary.reference.com...http://www.pollingreport.com...As you can see a large population of people support abortion. It cant be unacceptable and supported at the same time. Abortion is not a taboo to the supporters. Its not happening. So the only reason if they went dark is to cover other social issues.Also, poor dont always breed poor. The fetus could grow in a nice place. I won't touch speculation.Since their wasn't really a major crackdown of these "underground" aborters prior to Roe vs. Wade, thousands could have gone undocumented. And once the family learned of the woman's death from an abortion, the family usually hid it, for as the same reasons above, it was illegal and immoral and would tarnish the family name.Please clear.Here are the effects on abortion and crime: "One of the four major factors that decreased crime in the 1990s was abortion: http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu.......... "The underlying theory rests on two premises: 1) unwanted children are at greater risk for crime, and 2) legalized abortion leads to a reduction in the number of unwanted births." :http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu......... "These children who were born because their mothers were denied an abortion were substantially more likely to be involved in crime, even when controlling for the income, age, education and health of the mother.":http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu.......... "For instance, homicide fell 25.9 percent in high-abortion states between 1985 and 1997 compared to an INCREASE of 4.1 percent in low-abortion states. Panel data estimates confirm the strong negative relationship between lagged abortion and crime. An analysis of arrest rates by age reveal that only arrests of those born after abortion legalization are affected by the law change.":http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu.......... There are so many great passages on this website to list all here. To have a better understanding of what this article is saying, read the article from the bottom of page 19 to the top of page 21. Also, look at the graphs throughout the article. Here is the article again: http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu.......... And no, I can not prove the prohibiting abortion would just increase crime and poverty in the United States, but I can prove the legalizing abortion has decreased crime."But does abortion cause this? What happens if Lady GaGa takes one in?Not to mention, abortion most certainly increases poverty. If you are single with 3 kids and in poverty, and you end up pregnant, and are denied an abortion, that is another person in poverty. So people shouldn't give birth if they are poor. Ok. Fair enough. But thats your problem. What makes the fetus the target?One, your source's website name is pro-life. So voters, please immediately discredit the source as having bias. Two, one of the whole arguments of abortion is when a fetus is considered a human. Pro-Life people usually either say at conception or at some very early milestone. Pro-Choice and everyone else have a variety of different beliefs and thoughts on when a fetus is considered a human. The belief that life begins at conception is not a fact, and is one of the main subjects of this debate. Because if life does not begin at conception, but at some other date of pregnancy, than abortion before that date is not murder.So? Give me a example of bias on the website. Also, what makes a human? Tell me this....fetus is a human will probably never be proven using a scientific study, so we must look at the legal aspect, and the legal aspect says no...Science? It is proven that DNA is tied to which speicies one is. Run a fetus thru a DNA test and it will come up as a human. To save us from drawn out, character wasting link wars, the aspect of when a fetus feels pain is only one side of the when a fetus is a human debate. That is one opinion. We could debate or prove when a fetus has a heartbeat, or when it starts breathing, or when it can survive outside the mother's womb, or even at conception. So when a fetus feels pain is only one (but most important) side of the when a fetus feels pain debate. I want to see how you will handle this issue.I will handle the rest later. I have not dropped the last points