And here we go again (School shooting)

[reklawd]

I'm pretty sure that was one of margaret sanger's goals. Much easier to kill undesirables when they are in the womb.

Sanger was for birth control but against abortions for the most part.

 

[karlvv30]

Sanger was for birth control but against abortions for the most part.

Like president Obama was against gay marriage, for the most part?

 

[Don231s]

Foote and Goetz destroyed Donohue and Levitt's theory in 2008. There is no meaningful statistical connection between crime and abortion. Here's the link to the paper: https://www.bostonfed.org/-/media/Documents/Workingpapers/PDF/wp0515.pdf

A beating heart is a child, not a choice.

 

[reklawd]

Foote and Goetz destroyed Donohue and Levitt's theory in 2008. There is no meaningful statistical connection between crime and abortion. Here's the link to the paper: https://www.bostonfed.org/-/media/Documents/Workingpapers/PDF/wp0515.pdf

A beating heart is a child, not a choice.

http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/ - The freakonomics guys are conservatives btw

I understand why people are against abortions, but what I don't understand is why those same people won't help support those beating hearts once they are outside of the womb with a stronger social safety net. Again, hypocritical.

 

[karlvv30]

http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/ - The freakonomics guys are conservatives btw

I understand why people are against abortions, but what I don't understand is why those same people won't help support those beating hearts once they are outside of the womb with a stronger social safety net. Again, hypocritical.

The social safety net is too large already. We teach generations to be dependent. Work requirements for the able bodied is a good starting point. Wanted people to work twice as hard so people not willing to work will have more stuff is hypocritical.

 

[Don231s]

http://freakonomics.com/2005/05/15/abortion-and-crime-who-should-you-believe/ - The freakonomics guys are conservatives btw

Irrelevant. The study was flawed.

I understand why people are against abortions, but what I don't understand is why those same people won't help support those beating hearts once they are outside of the womb with a stronger social safety net. Again, hypocritical.

It's easy to regurgitate this old and tired liberal talking point, but what evidence do you have to support it? None, I'm guessing.

 

[reklawd]

The social safety net is too large already. We teach generations to be dependent. Work requirements for the able bodied is a good starting point. Wanted people to work twice as hard so people not willing to work will have more stuff is hypocritical.

I just reread Mark Twain's quote. Thanks for the reminder.

 

[reklawd]

Irrelevant. The study was flawed.


It's easy to regurgitate this old and tired liberal talking point, but what evidence do you have to support it? None, I'm guessing.

This is a thread about school shootings. I don't think Roe v Wade in any way caused them. Have a good night.

 

[Don231s]

This is a thread about school shootings. I don't think Roe v Wade in any way caused them. Have a good night.

If it is, then why did you post this?

I strongly disagree with almost everything you said ... but ... I had to comment on #1. Abortions are a root cause of mass school shootings? Not only is that absurd but abortions have reduced #5 on your list and has been linked to falling crime rates over the last half-century.

 

[reklawd]

If it is, then why did you post this?

****s and giggles