I am really impressed with how the abortion lobby, who greedily swallows up the innocent lives of unborn children, is able to bold-facedly lie and say if they aren’t allowed to kill hundreds of thousands of babies with federal funding, then MORE babies will be killed. That’s quite an argument.
Watch below:
Unfortunately, dimwit liberal Ana Marie Cox actually screwed up her own argument because she said abortions would be 2/3rds as high, when she meant to say 2/3rds higher. Here’s the abortion institute that makes the claim:
Surveying data from the 2006 fiscal year, the report says the national family planning program prevented 1.94 million unintended pregnancies, including almost 400,000 teen pregnancies. Based on statistical analysis and projections, these pregnancies would have resulted in 860,000 unintended births, 810,000 abortions and 270,000 miscarriages, according to the report.
Without publicly funded family planning, it said, the U.S. abortion rate would be nearly two-thirds higher, and nearly twice as high among poor women.
I guess Ana knew the argument was absurd because she had a tough time spitting it out.
Except that same institute made the opposite claim, ostensibly to those who want MORE abortions, in a different study:
Perhaps the most tragic result of the funding restrictions, however, is that a significant number of women who would have had an abortion had it been paid for by Medicaid instead end up continuing their pregnancy. A number of studies have examined how many women are forced to forgo their right to abortion and bear children they did not intend. Studies published over the course of two decades looking at a number of states concluded that 18–35% of women who would have had an abortion continued their pregnancies after Medicaid funding was cut off. According to Stanley Henshaw, a Guttmacher Institute senior fellow and one of the nation’s preeminent abortion researchers, the best such study, which was published in the Journal of Health Economics in 1999, examined abortion and birthrates in North Carolina, where the legislature created a special fund to pay for abortions for poor women. In several instances between 1978 and 1993, the fund was exhausted before the end of the fiscal year, so financial support was unavailable to women whose pregnancies occurred after that point. The researchers concluded that about one-third of women who would have had an abortion if support were available carried their pregnancies to term when the abortion fund was unavailable.
Wait a minute… how can funding cause MORE abortions AND “tragically” end up with fewer abortions?!?! It’s almost as if they’ll say anything they want to just to keep that precious government money flowing!
What a great argument – let us do whatever we want, or you’ll get more of the thing you don’t want us to do!! Just like, if we don’t spend more money, the debt will be way bigger!!