Study Finds Texas' 6-Week Abortion Ban Resulted in 10,000 Additional Babies
A study from researchers at Johns Hopkins is the first to look at the effects of Texas' 2021 "Heartbeat Act" on live births.

A new study from researchers at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health has found that Texas' controversial new abortion restrictions resulted in an additional 10,000 babies being born in the state.
The Texas law—S.B. 8 or the Texas Heartbeat Act—bans abortion after fetal cardiac activity (a heartbeat) can be detected, which is typically within the first six weeks of pregnancy.
S.B. 8 went into effect in September 2021. The John Hopkins study, published yesterday in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), looked at the number of babies born in the state from April 2022 (the first birth cohort affected by the policy) to December 2022.
The researchers then used statistical modeling of live births observed in all 50 states and the District of Columbia between 2016 and 2022 to create a "synthetic Texas" that didn't adopt S.B. 8. They found that an additional 9,799 babies were born in actual Texas.
"Although our study doesn't detail why these extra births occurred, our findings strongly suggest that a considerable number of pregnant individuals in Texas were unable to overcome barriers to abortion access," said study author Alison Gemmill.
The Hopkins study is the first to look at the effects of the Texas law on live births specifically. A previous 2022 study published in JAMA found that the law reduced in-state abortions and increased by a smaller number the number of Texans receiving abortions out of state.
Another 2022 JAMA-published study found that Texans' requests for mailed abortion pills increased dramatically after the passage of S.B. 8.
The results of the latest study "suggest not everyone who might have received an abortion in the absence of [S.B. 8] was able to obtain one," write Hopkins researchers.
Abortion advocates, supported by research from pro-choice think tanks, have argued that abortion restrictions won't necessarily reduce abortion, they'll merely increase the number of unsafe abortions performed. The Hopkins study contradicts the former half of that narrative.
The Hopkins study's authors frame their findings in exclusively negative terms.
"The study's findings highlight how abortion bans have real implications for birthing people, thousands of whom may have had no choice but to continue an unwanted or unsafe pregnancy to term," says Suzanne Bell, another one of the study's authors. "The majority of people who seek abortions live below or close to the poverty line. So many of these birthing people and their families were likely struggling financially even before the recent birth."
Their research nevertheless suggests that legal restrictions on abortion are, in fact, stopping abortions and ensuring more children are born. Pro-life supporters can therefore view the Hopkins study as vindication of their stance that abortion restrictions are saving the lives of unborn children.
Pro-choice advocates who have no moral qualms about abortion can also find a confirmation of their worldview in the Hopkins study. By preventing abortions that women would have otherwise chosen to have, the Texas law is resulting in a curtailing of women's reproductive autonomy.
The Hopkins study presents complications for more moderate pro-choice advocates who might view abortion negatively but are skeptical of state restrictions on the practice. It more clearly illuminates the direct tradeoff between legal protections for abortion access and the lives of the unborn.
Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Let me guess, statistical modeling.
Now I'll read the article.
[FOR USA] Google pay 200$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12000 for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it outit..
???? AND GOOD LUCK. ????
HERE====)> https://www.apprichs.com
' controversial new abortion restrictions resulted in an additional 10,000 babies being born in the state
OH NO!
The researchers then used statistical modeling of live births observed in all 50 states and the District of Columbia between 2016 and 2022 to create a "synthetic Texas" that didn't adopt S.B. 8. They found that an additional 9,799 babies were born in actual Texas.
*facepalm*
Alright, it is a SWAG*.
*Scientific Wild Ass Guess
I like how the headline rounds up to 10,000...
Journalism as activism much?
Eh, 9800 is close enough, only a 2% difference.
Yup. I'd be far more suspicious of a report that said 9.799 more babies were born than one that said, 10,000 - precision should never be confused with accuracy.
Yes, or we could all just pull the pretentious sticks out of our behinds and use words like ‘about’ or ‘roughly’. If characters are at a premium, using ‘~’ will likely not break the bank.
Instead, people WILL go out of their way to appear more confident/knowledgeable than they are. And that’s a pansy trait to me.
I'm sure the Pro-Life, Pro-Catholic Reason correspondent, Stephanie Slade, was really pushing for the "Study Finds Texas' 6-Week Abortion Ban Resulted in 10,000 Fewer Murders" until Britschgi mansplained to her that that's not how you Feminism.
10,000 wombs conscripted to raise 10,000 fetuses that showed up there uninvited somehow.
They shoulda built 10,000 walls.
At a dollar each it's not like they're expensive.
This is actually proper. When you do any form of modeling or calculation, You always get an exact number. However, due to uncertainty, you don't report the conclusion as that.
To give an example, if you are going to build something and your math shows that it will cost $49,231.23. Depending on the precision of your inputs, you say the cost will be $49K or $50K. The to-the-cent cost is false-precision.
Using significant figures is easier than putting ranges on everything.
"Study Finds That Political Bloggers Will Publish Anything a Study Finds That Confirms Their Bias"
Catastrophic climate change, is that you?
Look, we just lost 10,000 highly-skilled immigrants to other side of The Great White North Maple Syrup Wall. We've got to make up the numbers somehow.
When considering the issue of human depopulation and the problems that can cause, is an additional 10,000 humans all that bad? One might say that's it's a good thing.
Pragmatically good or bad, killing human beings is wrong. Even if the nihilist malthusians were right that humans are consuming the resources of the planet (and they have been consistently wrong on that matter), it would still be wrong to kill people in order to save resources for the living. Likewise, the general impact on the world of an extra life should not determine whether that life has a right to exist or not.
All that said, it is noteworthy how utterly cynical these Pro-Abortion people are. Look at the quotes above, and it is all the same cynical script- the base assumption that a human being is nothing more than a burden on mother, society and ultimately the planet. If we could start turning that narrative around, it would not change whether killing humans is wrong, but it would reframe how society sees morality- not as a burdensome duty, but as a wonderful obligation that optimistic and compassionate human beings celebrate instead.
Thank you for writing this. I have been trying to communicate a similar sentiment for years. I don't believe that abortion should be punished, but I don't think it is a solution worthy of encouragement. Birth should be celebrated and a life ended should be mourned.
Yes, you two have said it well.
My main objection to anti-abortion laws is they are arbitrary and unenforceable. They bear a strong resemblance to speeding laws. No one agrees on when conception starts, what exceptions should be allowed, when it changes from a fetus to a baby, when it can feel pain, yada yada yada. Society celebrates birth days, not conception days. Some cultures used to consider babies one year old when born, but not European / Abrahamic cultures, far as I know.
It's an incredible mess suited only for legal quibbling.
It reminds me of an old short story of a Christian father ecstatic at his kid's school starting to teach religion again after years of agitation, then each day being more and more horrified at them teaching the wrong variety of religion, then the wrong variety of Christianity, and finally agitating to keep schools out of teaching religion altogether.
From http://www.churchofsqrls.com/Jesus_Validated/#_Toc117957740
... WHY do anti-abortion fanatics want to KEEP the poor DOWN?
Bad parenting and early, irresponsible sex is passed on through the generations! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_investment From there, “Men are more likely than women to give no parental investment to their children, and the children of low-investing fathers are more likely to give less parental investment to their own children. Father absence is a risk factor for both early sexual activity and teenage pregnancy. Father absence raises children's stress levels, which are linked to earlier onset of sexual activity and increased short-term mating orientation. Daughters of absent fathers are more likely to seek short-term partners, and one theory explains this as a preference for outside (non-partner) social support because of the perceived uncertain future and uncertain availability of committing partners in a high-stress environment.”
Abortion is a tool for STOPPING this cycle, when mother-to-be consents to deploying it, clearly!
When was the last shotgun wedding you attended?
The lower classes don't even BOTHER with weddings, when 1 woman has 6 kids by 5 different fathers! Butt... I'm not personally an expert here, not associating much with these folks. Not to be too snooty; it's just the way things are. My wife being immune-suppressed, we don't associate much with ANYONE, actually!
What I AM expert on, is NUDIST weddings! (From my younger days.)
Y’all “intimately familiar” with nudist culture, like me? Did you know that after the vows, at a nudist wedding, the officiator doesn’t say, “You may kiss the bride”, he or she says, instead, “You may fuck the bride”?
So then nudists ALSO have some pretty fancy blow-out Halloweenie parties, even at swank hotels! At normal parties, we impress one another with fake Frankenstein plastic masks and fake stitches and bolts on our necks and heads? The nudists do that same thing with their peckers!
Terry Brazier, now, HE, with his REAL stitches with his added-back-on hoodie… Especially if they add some small, tasteful golden Frankenstein-style bolts to it ass well… He will have a SWANKER WANKER than ALL the rest!
Butt no, sorry, I will ***NOT*** be his SWANKER WANKER YANKER!!!
Well, it can always get worse!
Recall the gay Canadian airline steward way back when, who spread (just then “going viral”, literally) AIDS all over the place? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ga%C3%ABtan_Dugas … Kaposi’s sarcoma spread all over the place… (As a prominent sign of the new mystery disease).
Terry Brazier (see https://reason.com/2019/08/23/brickbat-the-first-cut-is-the-deepest-2/ ), now, HE, with his REAL stitches with his sewed-back-on hoodie… Especially if they add some small, tasteful golden Frankenstein-style bolts to it ass well, for swank nudist Halloweiner Parties… He will have a SWANKER WANKER than ALL the rest! Butt no, sorry, I will ***NOT*** be his SWANKER WANKER YANKER!!!
Well anyway, hopefully Terry Brazier will NOT be the starring attraction for a bunch of young fan boys, who might otherwise become the spreaders at the nexus of the next AIDS-like horror, known as SWANKER WANKER YANKER CHANCRE!!!
Greedy capitalists as usual will crank out new drugs to cure it, at VASTLY inflated expenses, backed up by their bankers, so then we’ll have SWANKER WANKER YANKER CHANCRE drug-CRANKER BANKERS!!! Riots in the streets, from the anti-1% folks, I’m a-tellin’ ya!!!
Many newscasters will take the side of the bankers… But one of these newscasters will be caught by a mob of angry anti-1% rioters, some of whom will proceed to PUNISH the newscasters… Said punishment-dishers-outers will be known as…
SWANKER WANKER YANKER CHANCRE pro-drug-CRANKER-BANKER-ANCHOR SPANKERS!
There will be those who are squeamish about personal punitive violence, but who still secretly support those with less such squeamishness. When no one is looking or listening, they will privately utter their support of the punitive, anti-gay and anti-banking ones. These more shy and secretive supporters of such things will be known as…
SWANKER WANKER YANKER CHANCRE pro-drug-CRANKER-BANKER-ANCHOR SPANKER THANKERS!
There will inevitably be those who will want to play gay hanky-panky with those who semi-secretly oppose the pro-gay bankers and anchors in this case, as a method of embarrassing them. Gay passes will be made! Gay hanky-panky will be attempted! Such prospective unwanted-gay-pass-makes will be known as “hanker-pankers”. The recipients of such unwanted passes will be tempted to SPANK the makers of unwanted passes! They will be known as…
SWANKER WANKER YANKER CHANCRE pro-drug-CRANKER-BANKER-ANCHOR SPANKER THANKER HANKER-PANKER SPANKERS!
Wow, that's a lot of words for "I'm sorry, but I don't want to answer that".
Literally no one reads your shit, sarcasmic.
Literally EVERYONE (and their mother, donkey, horse, zebra, weasel, and ptarmigan) has fucked your slutty pussy AND eaten your brains, Lucile, which is why you have none left!
“…we don’t associate much with ANYONE, actually!”
Color me shocked. It’s cute that you believe that people would voluntarily associate with your nutty ass if only you weren’t forced to avoid them due to health issues.
Tell yourself whatever you have to, nutcase. It’s kinda sad.
Well, at least we don't associate with right-wing wrong-nuts, who could do NOTHING for us, other than pollute the purity of our essences!
There’s a lot out there (“The Google Knows All”) about the “battle of the sexes”, which is MUCH-so involved here! I’ll just drop a few more links here casually: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/how-train-your-boyfriend/202008/is-there-battle-the-sexes . Well OK, let’s also add Richard Dawkins, “The Selfish Gene”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene .
"R" Party is Our Party is the GOOD party! The Party of the Sex Pistols and the Sex Postals, with which you may R-Party-ON, and go Sex Postal with your Sex Pistol, and rape or deceive ALL the young babes, your "binders full of young women", whose binders bind them to be womb-slaves, and then MAKE them carry to term, their Sacred Fartilized Egg Smells! All Hail the Every Sperm Which Is Sacred!
Black women in the USA today get abortions at a high rate… “the abortion rate for black women is almost five times that for white women”, from https://www.guttmacher.org/gpr/2008/08/abortion-and-women-color-bigger-picture . (Hispanics are intermediate here FYI). I’ll get back to this momentarily…
Say the following (which I regard to be true) and many conservatives will immediately agree: We can be OUTWARDLY “compassionate” while harming people. Minimum wages and rent controls come to mind! Of COURSE we are compassionate when we mandate higher pay and lower rent! Yet if we do these kinds of things to ANY significant degree, we “dry up” many of both the available low-wage jobs and the available apartments! Now go be jobless and homeless, ye victims of our “compassion”! Because businesses and landlords don’t want to lose money! Plain and simple!
Then WHY can’t conservatives see the similar dynamic when trying to be “compassionate” with other peoples’ wombs? Sure, we all love babies! But what happens to the victims, not just of “Lying Lothario”, but also of birth-control failures, and of genetic and developmental (in-the-womb) defects? “The rich will get richer, and the poor will have children”! More non-wage-earning babies and children in a family is a straight, unadulterated input contributing to poverty! It’s not what most people desire or admire, sure, but abortion is backup birth control. Our new USA move towards outlawing more and more abortions, in more states, will aggravate poverty among the poor, Blacks, and Hispanics, who can’t afford to travel for abortions, as easily as richer Whites can. We’ll be thwarting the “demographic transition” (https://populationeducation.org/what-demographic-transition-model/#:~:text=The%20Demographic%20Transition%20Model%20(DTM,as%20that%20country%20develops%20economically ) for poor residents of the USA! The rich yank the ladder out from the grasp of the could-be-climbing poor, with abortion laws, just as they do with minimum wages, rent controls, and excessive job-licensing laws!
Literally no one reads your shit, sarcasmic.
Wow! That is a lot of splooting.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/animalkind/2022/08/10/splooting-meaning-squirrels-animals/10290964002/
The Earth is cool! So I sploot a lot! Splooting is almost ass good ass looting, ah says!
Now being a right-wing wrong-nut? These nuts are NOT cool! Not NEARLY (or dearly) as COOL as Mamma Earth! NO splooting with the right-wing wrong-nuts, I say! I LOVE nuts, butt not THOSE nuts!
(Nuts really ARE good for yer diet, by the way. MUCH better than a Diet of Worms! https://study.com/learn/lesson/the-diet-of-worms-in-1521-history-summary-significance.html#:~:text=The%20Diet%20of%20Worms%20of%201521%20was%20an%20imperial%20diet,'%20and%20hence%20the%20name). )
Literally no one reads your shit, sarcasmic.
No one agrees on when conception starts, what exceptions should be allowed, when it changes from a fetus to a baby, when it can feel pain, yada yada yada.
Disagree. Though there is contention around conception, that's not the issue, it's the start of human life. There’s a very clear and broadly (no pun intended) accepted line as to the distinction between a human and a clump of (even mostly still living) cells and that line is less than 15 min. wide.
The problem is the same two-fold issue as 1) the progressive secular religionists’ superficially-insane march to ban methods of execution and 2) the refutation of federalism.
Much agreed. +1
It's good they're not killing human beings then and moving clumps of cells.
Fuck off out of a private medical matter.
Just another Raspberry Bidet washout...
If it is just clumps of cells and not babies, why would restricting abortion lead to more babies?
It's always nice when Tony comes around to unintentionally prove the point of the person he believes himself to be refuting.
Every multi celled organism in existence is literally a ‘clump of cells’. And a fetus is still a baby no matter how much you lie and say it isn’t.
To Progressives, human life is a pestilence on
MotherBirthing Person Earth. Until COVID-19 comes along and threatens their personal human life by an incremental amount.* Birthing Planet
The other key pro-abortion argument is how the imposition on the mother is cruel and unfair punishment, that might ruin her life forever. But IMO this is special pleading to negate a "contract" or at least a willing decision to have 15 minutes of fun that might end badly. Like getting drunk and betting your life savings at a casino, and then demanding that your losses be returned.
What the hell is the issue with depopulation?
We're already hurdling this world towards extinction and you think we don't have enough people? C'mon.
Inceljeffy aka shitberrydinners, depopulation is a really big issue that's going to bite us in the ass over the next century. Fewer kids being born means there are fewer working-age people to support an ever-growing geriatric population that's retired and on pensions/social security/401(k)s and not working.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate
For example, it is estimated that the population of China will be about 770 millions, down from 1.4 billion, by 2100. And the population of South Korea will fall from 52 million to 24 million in the same time frame. What this means is that the systems that currently support the higher populations will fail.
Glad I am not the only one that remembers that jeffy claimed that his handle was spoofed just the other day over a raspberrydinners-worthy shitpost. Then he stopped protesting as soon as I pointed out the posting history.
His disingenuousness has so many layers.
As long as I have something to do with it, he's not living it down, and not hiding from it.
I had long suspected it was a Tony sock, but that makes sense too.
Leftists are so homogeneously dishonest. Our resident lefties are proof of this.
The human race will die OUT because we are MURDERING non-viable clumps of cancer cells!
Oklahoma now vying with Idaho for most fanatical!
https://news.yahoo.com/woman-cancerous-pregnancy-told-wait-215500885.html
Woman with Cancerous Pregnancy Was Told to Wait in Parking Lot Until She Was 'Crashing'
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/molar-pregnancy/symptoms-causes/syc-20375175
From there, we see that MOLAR PREGNANCIES ARE NEVER VIABLE!!! Yet fascist assholes like YOU want to endanger women in the Sacred Name of Unique Human DNA, which is present in a womb-slave!
From the listed source…
There are two types of molar pregnancy — complete molar pregnancy and partial molar pregnancy. In a complete molar pregnancy, the placental tissue swells and appears to form fluid-filled cysts. There is no fetus.
In a partial molar pregnancy, the placenta might have both regular and irregular tissue. There may be a fetus, but the fetus can’t survive. The fetus usually is miscarried early in the pregnancy.
A spry tune on Tim's magic flute will solve everything!
Tim’s magic flute will make EXCELLENT accompaniment to the following:
'Twas on the good ship Venus,
*By gad! You should have seen us,
*The figure-head was a whore in bed,
*And the mast a rampant penis.
They called the Captain Slugger,
He was a dirty bugger,
He wasn't fit to shovel shit,
On any bugger's lugger.
His given name was Cooper,
By god he was a trooper,
He jerked and jerked until he worked
Himself into a stupor.
The Captain's daughter Mabel,
Whenever she was able,
She gave the crew their daily screw
Upon the mess-room table.
His daughter wasn't fussy,
She was a brazen hussy,
She'd spread her legs on the brandy kegs,
And show the men her pussy.
His wife was baptized Charlotte,
Who was born and bred a harlot
Her legs at night were lily-white,
But in the morning they were scarlet.
While crossing the equator,
The crew did elevate her,
She bared her ass on the topmost mast,
And dared the crew to mate her.
The first mate's name was Paul
He only had one ball,
But with that cracker he rolled tobacco,
Around the cabin wall.
The second mate's name was Lester,
A virgin hymen tester.
Through hymens thick he shoved his prick
And left it there to fester.
That third mate known as Morgan,
The homosexual Gorgon.
A dozen crows, sat in a row,
Could pose upon his organ.
The lookout's name was Andy,
His legs were long and bandy,
They filled his arse with molten brass,
For pissing in the brandy.
The Captain's randy daughter,
Was swimming in the water,
Delighted squeals came as the eels,
Entered her sexual quarter.
The engineer, McTavish,
The women he did ravish,
His missing tool's at Istambul
He was a trifle lavish.
The cabin boy, the cabin boy,
A dirty little nipper,
He filled his bum with bubble gum,
And vulcanized the skipper.
One sailor's name was Higgins,
And Higgins had a big 'un,
Once round the deck, twice up the mast,
And the rest was used for rigging.
The helmsman's name was Sam,
He liked to roger rams,
It trapped his bollocks during his frolics,
And turned his yard-arm into spam.
The cook whose name was Freeman,
A dirty bloody demon,
He fed the crew on menstrual stew
*And foreskins fried in semen.
Another cook was O Malley,
He didn't dilly-dally.
He shot his bolt with a hell of a jolt,
And whitewashed half the galley.
The ship's dog's name was Rover,
The whole crew did him over.
They ground and ground that faithful hound
From Singapore to Dover.
The Fifth Mate's name was Slater,
He was a masturbator.
He'd pump and pump his massive stump,
And clean the mess up later.
There was Able Seaman Jenkin,
By buggering demented,
He stuffed cement up his fundament,
And relationships cemented.
They saw a Spanish Galleon,
Its figurehead a stallion,
And when they saw it was full of whores,
There wasn't any dallyin'.
On every foot of rigging,
There were sailors frigging,
In the lookout's nest, they'd take a rest,
From their poking and their digging.
'Twas in the Adriatic,
Where the water's almost static,
The rise and fall of cock and ball,
Was almost automatic.
We sailed to the Canaries,
To screw the local fairies;
We got the syph in Tenerife
And the clap in Buenos Aires.
We sailed to the Bahamas,
Where the girls all wear pyjamas;
They wouldn't screw our motley crew -
They much preferred bananas.
While sailing on the ocean,
We'd often get a notion,
In cold and heat to beat our meat,
With a peculiar motion.
Each sailor lad's a brother,
To each and one another,
We'd take great pains at our daisy chains,
Whilst writing home to mother.
Then in search of new sensation,
In the forms of recreation,
The ship was sunk in a wave of gunk
From mutual masturbation.
So now we end this serial,
Through sheer lack of material,
I wish you luck and freedom from,
Diseases venereal.
Literally no one reads your shit, sarcasmic.
That's because he eats it before anyone would have the chance.
Ah, I see; you gave The Population Bomb a 5 star review on Amazon didn't you.
The "world" won't go extinct. What is at risk are the relative gains to freedom and prosperity over the last 200 years due to the left's intolerance of these things.
You should go extinct now, and beat the rush. And take Al Gore, Greta, Old Man Ehrlich, and all the retards gluing themselves to shit with you.
We could just glue all the retards together in one unwieldy lump, and dump them in shark infested waters.
Alternate headline: Texas law helps ensure future solvency of Social Security.
Well, if saves one life...and it seems to have saved 10,000.
The quotes from this study are fascinating as they are apparently avoiding forms of the word "woman" in favor of clunky constructions like "birthing person". The ideological Left bound and determined to erase women as a concept.
"Saving even one child's life" has been used by the Left for all manner of proposed bans on things the Right wants. So now saving 10,000 children doesn't even count as saving one child's life?
For sound economic perspective go to https://honesteconomics.substack.com/
buena! bamo bebes!
“If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament” – Gloria Steinem
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/oct/17/gloria-steinem-activist-interview-memoir-my-life-on-the-road
Well, it turns out men *can* get pregnant! After all, it’s not women who have children, it’s “birthing people.” That includes men!
When my (now ex) wife got pregnant in the late 90s, it was very much De Rigueur to say "We're pregnant".
As Dave Chapelle said, "your body, your choice? My money, my choice. And if you disagree with that, maybe we're both wrong."
This was not controversial until Pro-Choice advocates tried using The Science! (tm) suggest that abortion didn't really have the effect that it clearly does. It was a way of having their cake and eating it too- "These laws are mean, and they don't even do what you want them to do, either!". Nevertheless, even a basic statistician can look at the eras of abortion restriction and see unmistakable correlation between abortion legalization and the number of babies killed.
Ok forced-birth folks- time to adopt all these kids!
What? You don’t want to? You don't want more social safety nets either? Oh, I guess that’s why we call you forced-birth and not pro-life. Fuckheads.
Deep Thoughts with Jack Handey.
*applause*
If we can fuck the slutty women you are "defending", we can talk. Otherwise, women are more than capable of self-control and responsibility.
Don't you cognitive dissonance? Women are simultaneously fiercely strong and independent and more capable that all other genders, and extremely vulnerable and in need of protected status.
I see this retarded argument all the time, and it shows that you spend too much time on the internet.
I have multiple friends of mine who have adopted, tried to adopt or are currently waiting to adopt. They wait for years to get a baby, and some never get one because they aren't available. They're all pro-life, and they're all trying to adopt domestically. There just aren't enough kids to fulfil the demand. Unplug from the internet, and talk to some real people.
Baloney. There are huge numbers of kids over the age of 5 waiting to be adopted and are being passed over because couples want “AYAP’s” (As Young As Possible), preferably babies, preferably of the same race. You prove my point by saying your friends want "a baby".
Doing a little goalpost shifting there. We're talking abortion and births, so we're talking about babies. So I'm talking about babies. It's true, Most people want infants. Older kids, less so.
When my wife and I looked into it for ourselves we made some interesting discoveries. For older kids it gets a lot messier and changes from state to state. A kid may be waiting to get adopted, but when you look into it you see that it's not just a clean adoption. The mother gets visitation, or the father will once he's out of jail. The DCFS is going to be up in your business and you're going to get regular meetings with a social worker. By the way, the social worker will be scrutinizing your parenting of your own kids, and not just the adopted one. I don't blame people for not wanting to adopt under those conditions.
Fostering has the goal of reunifying these kids with their parents, with the foster parents and their relationship with the kids as secondary. Word on the street is not to foster if you're looking to adopt older kids, you have to foster for its own sake. Adopting your own foster kids isn't easy.
The people I know who want to adopt older often get put off by the domestic process once they look into it, and tend to go overseas, where there can be a clean adoption.
I'll throw out my caveat that it was five or six years ago that the Mrs. and I started looking into this, and could be that everything I found was wrong. The end results do speak for themselves though. The people we know who adopted older wanted to adopt domestic, but gave up on domestic adoptions and picked up their kids from orphanages in Haiti and Ukraine.
Fostering has the goal of reunifying these kids with their parents, with the foster parents and their relationship with the kids as secondary. Word on the street is not to foster if you’re looking to adopt older kids, you have to foster for its own sake. Adopting your own foster kids isn’t easy.
And, even then, adoption still frequently butts *right* up against foster care. A family a couple blocks over had a son and complications prevented further pregnancies. They've tried to adopt a "close sibling" to their son's age for almost 16 yrs. now and from the outside looking in, as indicated, it's still been more of a foster care situation than anything that would resemble an actual adoption.
I don't have all the details as it was a situation that they, understandably, didn't and couldn't speak freely about but; several years ago, they had a kid living with them for less than a year when a/the biological parent with visitation rights moved out of the area. Essentially, it was allow the court to do what it would or pay to litigate separating the kid from the parent... leaving the court to do what it would. No slights to anyone, but it made me glad I am/was fertile.
And a lot of 5 year olds get aborted? If the adoption system were less Byzantine, infants would pretty much always get adopted right away. I feel bad for older kids without parents because it is much harder to get adopted. But it's very understandable why most people strongly prefer to adopt a baby.
Absolutely! Adopt a 5-year-old who has been abused? Risk him or her killing your pets, setting your house on fire, etc.? Hell no! Sad, but too often true! And the state will HIDE his or her past from you, while you are at it!
Is that what happened?
"Baloney. There are huge numbers of kids over the age of 5 waiting to be adopted"
Except there aren't, Shrike, you lying fuck. There's shitloads of kids taken out of abusive households needing foster parents, but they're not up for adoption.
And they're OVER five, you ghoulish fuck. How many trimesters is that?
In Shrike's world, just enough to start transitioning.
Not many parents aborting 5-year-olds, thankfully.
Yes, most would-be adoptive parents want a child as young as possible, so they can make a positive impact on the child's life while the child's values and personality and mind are forming.
I guess that's something you have in common with them, shreek, judging by the time you got your Sarah Palin's Buttplug account banned for posting dark web links to hardcore child pornography.
And if well meaning pro-life right wing families do manage to adopt, fanatical Left wingers look at them suspiciously.
We only adopt when it is fashionable. - The Tsk Tsk leftist model.
Just consider them undocumented border crossers and let the compassionate left deal with them.
I don't even need to look into the "data" and "science" to know that this is complete bullshit.
"Study Finds Texas' 6-Week Abortion Ban Resulted in 10,000 Additional Babies"
This should be good for staffing Koch factories, right?
9 or 10 years from now, maybe.
Look at the child labor crusader here.
What's amazing is that the same people will tell you that 99.99999999998799999% of abortions occur within the first week, and that third trimester abortions literally don't even exist. And yet a ban well within the window that they tell us the vast majority of abortions take place resulted in 10,000 more babies being born in a state where only about 50,000 women per year by the most generous estimates were obtaining abortions before the law was passed.
Now we have a real world test of the Freakonomics crime hypothesis. We just have to wait 15 or so years.
Good point! Thanks!
Scratch a progressive and find a eugenicist.
Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer... Being smugly compassionate with the wombs of OTHER people, from now till infinity!
The last time you saw a pussy was when you were fogging up the bedroom window watching the Mormon cop from Idaho plow your wife, sarcasmic.
You have to stop that. You know damn well that Sarc was never married or has children. These are just drunken delusions have raves about from his piss soaked alley, or online through a public library computer.
He’s basically Oscar the Grouch with a severe alcohol dependency. Please don’t reinforce his delusions.
Isn't this implying that there are nearly 10,000 more unwanted babies? If these births really were abortion candidates, that doesn't demonstrate that these women had a desire to be a parent. Is this just the first data of the coming increase of child abuse statistics in the state?
Not relevant but thank you for your usual valuable input.
Hey shreek, you know how you obsessively talk about Freakonomics and Warren Buffett on your main Sarah Palin's Buttplug 2 handle? (your original Sarah Palin's Buttplug handle having been banned for posting dark web links to hardcore child pornography). This would be one of those "tells" when you obsessively talk about the exact same issues using the exact same verbiage on your socks. Hope that helps, you autistic fucking pedophile.
"Study Finds Texas' 6-Week Abortion Ban Resulted in 10,000 Additional Babies"
Nice!
Seriously. Unless you're a misanthropic fuck of the highest order, how the hell is that supposed to be a bad thing.
People find a way,
BrianKerk 2 hours ago
Flag Comment Mute User
So 10,000 additional children – most of whom will be resented by their parents for existing, most of whom were born into poverty and will make their families poorer and will eventually suck on the government teat themselves. Don’t mess with Texas!
"to create a "synthetic Texas" that didn't adopt S.B. 8"
So just like synthetic Connecticut found with gun licenses that it works until it doesn't at which time they collect a few more years of data and when it doesn't agree with the narrative they only publish the portion that does as "proof" that horseshit is real without realizing that it's most often the case that the study itself is the horseshit.
Nope, the study is incorrect. Having sex resulted in those babies.
Nope - English is flexible enough that one need not get into the philosophy of causation. "Heavy rain resulted in the match being postponed" - normal enough but apparently wrong according to you, because the match was postponed as people didn't want to play in the rain, or because the people who wrote the rules said that heavy rain may require the umpire to postpone - so it's either due to the people or the umpire, etc etc.
"so it’s either due to the people or the umpire"
Since we're attempting that level of sophistry, redirection and pettifogging, we could observe that the umpire is also people.
Unless the umpire is a fetus.
On the bright side, I guess it's good to know that there's children young enough for shreek to desire to kill instead of fuck.
Nice try - but context matters, and in this case "people" either refers to those who didn't want to play in the rain or those who wrote the rules.
So 10,000 additional children - most of whom will be resented by their parents for existing, most of whom were born into poverty and will make their families poorer and will eventually suck on the government teat themselves. Don’t mess with Texas!
Meanwhile, rich parents with teenaged daughters knocked up by poor but smooth-talking poor young men from the wrong side of the tracks, WILL cough up the money (no matter WHAT their "principles" say) to have her travel out of state, and discreetly abort, to preserve her future. THANKS for NOTHING, right-wing wrong-nuts!
Two wrongs make a right.
Servants and serpents of the Evil One think this way, yes! Therefor... Be ye COMPASSIONATE with the wombs of OTHER people, using the force and POWER of Government Almighty PUNISHMENTS!!! Always more PUNISHMENTS (only on the WRONG people; never on MEEEE) will fix it ALL for us!!! So say the Perfect Power Pigs, that is.
Literally no one reads your shit, sarcasmic.
For the billionth time, it sucks to be poor. For some people, that is enough motivation to become un-poor.
Some people in Canada choose MAIDS to become un-poor.
Or they could just spend 50 bucks on some Plan B at any pharmacy within the first month a half after she fucked Pedro the swarthy maintenance technician, sarcasmic.
And it's way cheaper than that on Amazon.
"So 10,000 additional children – most of whom will be resented by their parents for existing will make their families poorer and will eventually suck on the government teat"
What a great reason to kill someone! You've changed my mind.
Mammary-Necrophilia-Fuhrer will adopt and PERFECTLY love ALL 10,000 of them, for sure!
The Mormon cop who's fucking your wife and now has custody of your kids will probably adopt a few, sarcasmic. They're usually very loving and compassionate people that way. That's why she's fucking him and has a restraining order against you along with full custody.
You're right Shillsy, if they're not going to be "PERFECTLY loved" then they must die.
Yeah, I'm a pretty heartless bastard who thinks that there is and probably always will be a practical need for the state/community/society to kill someone and even I'm of the mind that it should be a *very* narrow set of circumstances that involves enacted plots to kill one or more people. If the state were executing 10,000 people a every couple years, even I'd have to admit that we were probably liquidating unacceptable numbers of innocent lives.
Further, again cold, heartless bastard that I am, the alternative is to generally let them run feral off the government teat rather than offer up free shit as a lure to execute the undesirables.
I don't know. I've seen another example, more than once: irresponsible, low-income couple has an (unplanned) baby, and the parents mature somewhat, stop doing drugs all day, and work harder to stay gainfully employed.
This kind of talk sounds more ghoulish than it did a year ago for some reason. I’ve gone from being mostly ambivalent on this topic to being repulsed by the sick justifications for abortion coming from the butthurt left.
Keep it up brian, you’re doing great! Winning hearts and minds, and all that….. haha.
But if 10,000 people had immigrated to Texas in that time, Reason would be quick to explain how they had helped the Texas economy and lowered the average crime rate.
As cytotoxic (currently dba chemjeff radical lardass) will helpfully explain, that's because illiterate brown bodies from South America are morally superior to honky bodies from North America and therefore deserve to be given welfare benefits, while the honkies should have theirs taken away for being immorally lazy.
(Yes, that lardass pedophile has actually said this)
Seems like a reasonable solution to the worrisome population decline in the US.
If a woman was really determined to get an abortion, all she had to do was visit a different state for the procedure.
The data from before and after the Supemes adopted the 1972 LP plank in its 1973 Roe decision shows that forcing women to reproduce as breeder slaves literally causes more women to die from childbirth than letting them exercise individual rights. Simple facts: (https://bit.ly/3HqbdFJ)
If Texas actually stopped 10,000 abortions, that wouldn’t mean the ban “resulted in 10,000 additional babies” – the babies already existed, they simply lived until birth when they otherwise would not have.
Also, is adoption not a thing anymore? Since I hear a lot of assumptions that the mothers will have no choice but to raise the child against their will.
A common refrain from feticiders is if you oppose feticide you should adopt a child. There are many more people who want to adopt than children availble for adoption.
https://adoptionnetwork.com/adoption-myths-facts/domestic-us-statistics/
Oh, did someone reply? Sorry, muted.
Observe that the masked puppets ignore the fact of reality: enslaving coercion kills actual female persons. The chimera they pursue is an imaginary constitutional recognition of personhood outside Constitutional jurisdiction. The US can no more invade nuclear-capable Canada and murder people to please mystical bigots than it can invade the insides of a constitutional person to force that person into harm's way on behalf of a potentially brainwashable non-constitutional person. Canada followed the Libertarian lead and is today a refuge for women with individual rights. We'll have to revive the ERA to make 13A enforceable.
Sad. Leftist women are more likely to opt for feytcide, so there are about 10000 more children that will probably grow up leftist.
Feticide...dammit
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,600 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,600 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link————————————————>>> http://Www.OnlineCash1.Com