Abortion and Population

[arewethereyet]

Um.......... not quite right. Fertility is the ability to create viable gametes and conceive. I think you mean birth rate.

I think we’re both right here. Yes, abortion reduces the birth rate. It also reduces the fertility rate, which is the number of live births per woman. That’s how the UN, demographers, and others (probably sociologists, too!) who study this define it.

And what about miscarriages, how does that affect fertility?

Fertile with regard to people means a person is able to conceive.  It has nothing to do with carrying to term.

[no one]

Now, now, awty, there is no way you know more about women and their womanly parts more than this guy.

[arewethereyet]

Now, now, awty, there is no way you know more about women and their womanly parts more than this guy.

Yeah, I know...his Simpleness is surely an expert in womanly parts.

[SimpleCaveman]

Hi Boru,

Thanks for pointing out the most important part of the post. <You all crack me up. >

And yet, you yourself used ‘fertility’ and ‘fertility rate’ interchangeably. That’s a no-no.

I did or the UN did in the quote from them? I can’t help what they do. Feel free to write to them and explain the faux pas.

[SimpleCaveman]

And what about miscarriages, how does that affect fertility?

Yes, good point. By the definition given miscarriages would affect the fertility rate.

Fertile with regard to people means a person is able to conceive.  It has nothing to do with carrying to term.

Yeah, not sure how this relates, but if you want to argue the point, I’m sure they have an email address.

[arewethereyet]

And what about miscarriages, how does that affect fertility?

Yes, good point. By the definition given miscarriages would affect the fertility rate.

Fertile with regard to people means a person is able to conceive.  It has nothing to do with carrying to term.

Yeah, not sure how this relates, but if you want to argue the point, I’m sure they have an email address.

Who is 'they'?

The Fertility Commission?

[SimpleCaveman]

Hi Thumpalumpacus,

You are contradicting yourself here. Population shrinkage cannot be "already happening" if the population is still growing and expected to continue doing so for decades.

I was going to try and explain it again, but the original post was very clear. For example,

There are countries like China, Italy, Spain and India whose population is or soon will be declining. … In India, the number of children peaked more than a decade ago and is now falling.

Population decline is happening in many countries. The bolded part of the quote I gave from the UN also makes this clear.

As scenarios go, aborting humanity into extinction is laughably unlikely.

I am not going to disagree here. I didn’t make that point. You are arguing against someone else.

We are shitting up the only planet we know we an survive on, and that is largely because our population requires enormous food supplies, energy supplies, and so on. But abortion is no way to address that.

Again, we agree.

[SimpleCaveman]

Yeah, not sure how this relates, but if you want to argue the point, I’m sure they have an email address.

Who is 'they'?

The Fertility Commission?

The people I referenced in the original post.

[arewethereyet]

Doesn't PhatMass need you?

[The Grand Nudger]

 People, countries, agencies have bought into the Malthusian lie that our population will outrun our resources. According to them, my gas-based car should be a terrarium.

So, you can be for abortion if you want. But don’t argue based on population levels.

It's so much simpler than that.  Kids are expensive, and right now..circumstances across the board are dogshit.  Single family housing got hoovered up by hedge funds.  Wages have been stagnant for decades.  The price of everything under the sun never stopped going up.

You want more people to have babies, the answer isn't to make america shittier with some bananapants abortion ban that wont...btw, work.  It's not like we haven't been here before.  Abortion bans don't save babies.  They kill women.