Traveling Back in Time

[Dr. Shades]

I have to question how an adult person in the US hadn't heard the story or at least the general headline? Seemed like it was in every feed and on every news program I saw.

I don't watch the news.

[honorentheos]

I have to question how an adult person in the US hadn't heard the story or at least the general headline? Seemed like it was in every feed and on every news program I saw.

I don't watch the news.

Then didn't matter if the OP didn't share more information? Folks who pay attention probably understood the context. And folks who didn't probably aren't going to do much with the information because they can't be bothered anyway.

[Dr. Shades]

I can be bothered to read this board. Similar to how the burden of proof lies on he or she who makes the assertion, the opening poster has the responsibility to do the “heavy lifting” of providing background and context. This has always been so around here.

[Brack]

Hmm. Judging from the context of your post, it looks like Arizona passed some sort of law regarding abortion with which you disagree.

Will you please provide us with some further context, specifically the details of this law and why you disagree with them?

Here is further context:

The history of abortion regulations in Arizona

Even before the Arizona Supreme Court decided that a near-total abortion ban first adopted in 1864 is the law of the land, the state had a long history with restricting access to and pursuing criminal charges against those who provide abortions.

In 1864, nearly 50 years before Arizona became a state and a year before the Civil War ended, the territorial legislature passed what is now known as ARS 13-3603.

The law states that any person who “provides, supplies or administers” an abortion “shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not less than two years nor more than five years” unless it is necessary to save the life of the mother.

That law was the law of the land in Arizona for many years and after the territory became a state, was codified into state law.

[Dr. Shades]

Thank you, Brack. That was very helpful.

[Some Schmo]

Yeah, sorry Shades. It was plastered everywhere the day is was reported, so I had assumed everyone heard about it.

Thanks for helping, Brack and honor.

[Res Ipsa]

AZ is an extreme case, but this is a general problem with state laws that have been struck down as violating the U.S. Constitution. Sometimes those laws are never repealed: either the state simply stops enforcing them or a court issues an injunction against enforcement. If the Court then reverses itself down the road, those laws can come back into effect. It hasn't been as dramatic in other red states because many of them persistently passed new laws that violated Roe in the hopes it would be overruled.

[Gunnar]

... disrespect and abuse of our creative powers is offensive to God. Such disrespect is also a recipe for child poverty juvenile delinquency that plagues our society today.

So, more abortion should equal more crime. But:

https://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt ... ed2001.pdf

THE QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS
Vol. CXVI May 2001 Issue 2
THE IMPACT OF LEGALIZED ABORTION ON CRIME* JOHN J. DONOHUE III AND STEVEN D. LEVITT


"We offer evidence that legalized abortion has contributed signiŽcantly to recent crime reductions. Crime began to fall roughly eighteen years after abortion legalization. The Žfive states that allowed abortion in 1970 experienced declines earlier than the rest of the nation, which legalized in 1973 with Roe v. Wade. States with high abortion rates in the 1970s and 1980s experienced greater crime reductions in the 1990s. In high abortion states, only arrests of those born after abortion legalization fall relative to low abortion states. Legalized abortion appears to account for as much as 50 percent of the recent drop in crime."

Is it not reasonable that children born to and brought up by women who did not want them will live under worse circumstances (and hence be more likely to turn to crime as adults) than those born to women who bear them willingly and have the resources to look after them? It does look rather like it ...

Thanks for posting that article showing that crime, in general (including murder) is significantly reduced when pro-choice laws and policies are implemented. This convincingly further undermines the notion that anti-abortion policies are effectively equivalent to pro-life. Pro-choice is actually more pro-life than is anti-abortion, when all relevant factors and evidence are rationally considered.

[Gunnar]

Democrats are running on this because it led them to victory in 2022 in spite of their horrendous economic record.

Will you please cut out this easily and often refuted nonsense! By almost every statistical measure, Biden and his administration's economic record are doing far better than Trump ever did, even before the beginning of the Covid pandemic!

[Some Schmo]

Pro-choice is actually more pro-life than is anti-abortion, when all relevant factors and evidence are rationally considered.

Very few people who call themselves "pro-life" actually are. It's far more accurate to call them pro-control, pro-fascism and pro-ignorance.