Internet Mormons, Chapel Mormons, Critics, Apologists, and Never-Mo's all welcome!
https://discussmormonism.com/
I don't watch the news.honorentheos wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2024 9:33 pmI 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.
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 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 15, 2024 8:06 amI don't watch the news.honorentheos wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2024 9:33 pmI 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.
Here is further context:Dr. Shades wrote: ↑Sun Apr 14, 2024 4:52 pmHmm. 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?
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.
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.Chap wrote: ↑Sat Apr 13, 2024 10:56 pmSo, 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 signicantly to recent crime reductions. Crime began to fall roughly eighteen years after abortion legalization. The five 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 ...
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!
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.