Chelsea Clinton, the economic prodigy, recently made this impossibly stupid declaration:
The Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which legalized abortion nationwide, has been great for the economy, says Chelsea Clinton.
The number of women entering the workforce has exploded since the early 1970s, she explained this weekend. These women are responsible for adding about $3.5 trillion to the U.S. economy.
Roe v. Wade was also decided in the early 1970s. You do the math.
“Whether you fundamentally care about reproductive rights and access right, because these are not the same thing, if you care about social justice or economic justice, agency – you have to care about this,” Clinton said Saturday at a “Rise Up for Roe” event.
She added, “It is not a disconnected fact … that American women entering the labor force from 1973 to 2009 added three and a half trillion dollars to our economy. Right? The net, new entrance of women – that is not disconnected from the fact that Roe became the law of the land in January of 1973.”
Someone needs to ask her how much killing 6 million Jews added to the German economy.
Adjusting for inflation wages have been flat since. It takes 2 incomes to afford a middle class lifestyle, and schools are now expected to raise kids.
Does it really need to be said? A woman’s personal decision to terminate her own unwanted pregnancy is not the moral equivalent of the State herding captured women and children of unwanted races, religions, and ethnicities into gas chambers.
@Greg: So why can’t parents simply kill a child that is one too many or keeps them from going out and having fun with their friends?
I wonder how productive 60 million people aborted since Roe v. Wade would have been?
Because it already is a child.
That really shouldn’t need to be stated, either, but anti-choice zealots have spent decades telling people that a fetus and a toddler are pretty much the same thing. This premise is quite obviously bullshit.
@Greg: So, the only difference between killing a child and an abortion being declared murder is the arbitrary and self-serving declaration of when life begins? Once again I ask, WHEN is that moment that an abortion becomes murder? Most abortion aficionados consider it OK to execute the child right up to full term. This shows a total disregard of the harm and destruction that is being wrought.
When life begins and when a child begins are obviously two different discussions.
As pointed out, those who would give the State power to command women to continue unwanted pregnancies conflate the two in order to confuse the issue and conceal the implications of their intentions.
@Greg:
Well, no… when LIFE begins is THE CENTRAL discussion as guessing wrong is encouraging murder… unless you want to argue the value of this life over that.
The flip side of continuing a pregnancy is ending it. WHEN it is ended is very important, a matter of life and death, as it were. You liberals feel that decision, made long after it SHOULD have been made, is merely a matter of convenience. In YOUR argument (again depending upon when you would admit LIFE begins) is that one life has rights while another doesn’t. The left simply will not face that question as the answer might restrict their lifestyles. That’s pretty selfish.
No, that isn’t the central issue. A snail has life. The issue is when a person exists.
Anti-choice activists understand this perfectly well. That’s the reason they want a constitutional amendment defining when a person exists.
No, they believe its a matter of individual choice, made in accordance with personal beliefs. Every woman has sovereign authority over her own body. That’s a moral principle. Convenience has nothing to do with it.
There’ve been about 60 million abortions since Roe.
But, it isn’t 60 million different women getting them.
A lot of abortions are done on the same women, multiple times.
Most women who made a dent in the workplace used effective birth prevention, be they pills or devices or other means.
They had No Abortions.
It was the availability of all those things that pulled women out of their homes and into the workplace.
It has been accurate balance sheets that has led many women back into their homes.
Turned out it didn’t gain a family a thing to have both parents working.
Women in the workplace are expensive!
And the children suffer.
AND then we need to import workers because of small families!
@Greg:
Well, as far as I can tell, we haven’t been pondering snail abortions. So, as with the central question, that is a dodge.
Well, now we are back to the central question; when does the LIFE begin? For, there are LOTS of choices that can be made, as in my original hypothetical. A mother, wanting to go out and party with friends, could CHOOSE to go into the bedroom and smother her baby so she doesn’t have to stay home that night. I mean, she has the RIGHT to do whatever she wants with her body and reproductive system and that baby in the crib is putting a damper on her CHOICES. Unless, of course, killing that baby asleep in the crib is somehow morally wrong.
It’s ALL about convenience. It’s all about responsibility. When a woman does not treat her body responsibly, at some point she will have to TAKE responsibility for that decision… CHOICE. What it boils down to is, when does that gob of cells you liberals have so little regard for become a LIFE and, thus, something immoral and criminal to end? If you liberals are going to defend abortions, you are going to HAVE to address that question.
@Greg: You mean herding unborn children to death by dismemberment is different?
@DrJohn: Abortion is healthy, they keep saying its all about womens health care.
@Deplorable me:
I’m not going to waste my time responding to such obviously nonsensical blather. Anyone lacking the wits to see it as such won’t be receptive to reason anyway—which appears to be a defining characteristic of the Trump personality cult.
@Greg: It’s not blather. You’ve swallowed a subjective view, supplied to you through culture.
A fertilized egg…to one cell…to more…WILL BECOME a person. Anyone with wits can see that.
How one has to even explain that stopping that process is tantamount to killing a baby is insane.
But I guess that’s a defining characteristic of the left – ignoring science and logic because it doesn’t support your bullshit views.
When is a fetus/baby a PERSON, by the way? How do you know?
Same tired and false argument from the left…
A fertilized egg is no more a person than an acorn is an oak tree, or ink and a pen are a completed novel. Why should this need to be explained?
You are free to believe otherwise, but not to force others to conduct their own lives as if that belief were true.
@Greg: I’m stating a fact. No belief necessary.
Your “beliefs” have been foisted on the populace, and are just beliefs. Your lame attempt at analogy is also fallacious. An egg isn’t a person, true. An fertilized egg, growing now, it becoming a person…will be a person. Killing the egg is the same as killing a person, period.
An oak tree is not a person, isn’t even an animal, you twit. A novel is a product of human work, not a product of millions of years of evolutionary biology.
Funny, that’s all your doing yourself. You pretty much believe the same as me, but you’ve shifted the line so that it fits your delusional worldview. Forcing it on others, as well. When is a fetus a person? Tell me? Any answer you give is subjective, and open to argument. Why not abort a one year old? By your standards, I can say that a one years old isn’t a person yet….because it’s just my “belief”.
So easy to destroy these pathetic arguments…lol.
But yes, tell us more about how the Left isn’t imposing “beliefs” on us all…and it’s the Right that is crazy for saying a pregnancy will yield a child, unless that’s interrupted…and that that interruption is halting a life that would have been lived.
What lunacy you follow…
@Greg:
Of course you won’t. No leftist abortion-worshiper wants to address that little matter of when are you merely scraping out some pesky cells and when you are killing a living thing. That makes this “do what you want with your body” thing just a bit more complicated. You on the left prefer to scurry away from such questions as it might just result in a diminishing of some “rights”. Better to kill first, then ask forgiveness.
This is akin to the left trying to convince us they care about school safety while they totally ignore a radical Islamic camp training children to carry out school shootings and a liberal judge releasing the suspects on, basically, NO bail. Your positions are BULLSHIT. You don’t care about life, you don’t care about rights, you don’t care about safety. You only care about power and control.
About getting it out of the hands of authoritarian right wing loons, to be specific.
You’re the people who want to use government to impose their own beliefs on others; we’re the ones who believe women have a fundamental right to follow the dictates of their own conscience with regard to the most personal areas of their lives.
@Greg: No, You’re the one using the government to impose your irrational beleifs.
Right now the government is imposing YOUR belief, and your don’t understand that. There’s no middle ground, it’s just to the one extreme.
But you show your hand: this is about feminism, to you.
I’ll admit, it’s tragic that women have to solely bear the burden of child birth. It’s not fair. It’s also a large reason that women haven’t had the same opportunities as men…and birth control changed that. Abortion changed that.
However…
I still haven’t heard a good argument on why the child has no rights.That’s why you have to grip to your subjective “belief” in when a fetus becomes a “person”, illogical as that clearly is. So you hide behind women’s rights, and this is finally wearing thin.
We both think that there’s a “bright line” when an proto-human becomes a person.
Mine is based on the belief that every human deserves a chance to be.
Yours hinges on leftest ideology.
This isn’t about what’s morally right to you. It’s about your blind faith to liberal anti-god that is doing the very harm that you think it’s preventing…
And the “Right” won the election *actually, Trump is a Moderate who usurped a party…could have been Dems..doesn’t matter”. The Dems were corrupt, and traded a lot for the outsider and lobbyist funded Obama wins. They were very ready to crumble, and they did.
@Nathan Blue:
Actually, it hinges on the concept of pandering to women and not telling them “no” in order to wrangle in yet another interest group. Lives don’t matter, so they run from the question of what is a life and when does it begin. By their argument, there is no reason why a mother that has produced a child could not murder that child if it was getting in the way of her fully enjoying life.
Found it, after scouring the entire web https://babylonbee.com/news/chelsea-clinton-claims-holocaust-added-3-5-trillion-to-german-economy/ and thats before adjusting for inflation!
I am worried about the tell all book mentioned on the sight sure AJ will be turned into a Trump backer =8^0
@kitt: She really is that much of an idiot, you know. When she is involved, what is a satirical article needs to be clearly marked.
@Deplorable me: Lots of funny satire on that site.
@Nathan Blue, #19:
Freedom to choose is not an imposition, since freedom, by definition, cannot exist in the absence of choice.
Denial of choice is the imposition of a restriction, which constitutes a curtailment of freedom.
Your assertion is irrational.
@Greg: But the baby gets no freedom to choose, does it?
@Greg:
That has to be the most ignorant statement I have read. I just have to scroll by comments like this so my intelligence is not insulted. Obviously, I hardly ever comment, but I regularly read FA. I couldn’t just let that obvious contradiction.
Oh, I see I didn’t specify which comment. Well, just assume I mean everyone I have read that you make.
@Jeff, #26:
Really? You must be skipping quite a few of the posts that I’m replying to.
Like it or not, the observation Chelsea Clinton made about access to abortion and women entering the workforce is entirely valid. Unwanted pregnancies do, in fact, have economic consequences. Facts don’t change because people don’t like hearing them spoken.
If that one bothers people, the Donohue-Levitt hypothesis will probably really punch their buttons. It asserts legalized abortion in the 1970s explains a substantial part of the crime decline in the 1990s, and backs the claim up with data. The likely cause that they put forward does seem logical: unwanted pregnancies are far more likely to lead to unwanted and neglected children, who are later far more likely to later engage in criminal behavior.
@Greg:
Wouldn’t it be swell if people would realize this reality BEFORE they get pregnant? However, what does NOT bother supporters of abortion as a solution to bad decisions and bad behavior is the impact to a LIFE that abortion has. As long as you will avoid addressing what life IS and WHEN it is life, you condone murder as a solution to the problems of inconvenience.
Traditional family values are no longer valued, and now demonized, Mom at home , Dad the bread winner, oh the nasty privilege! She is obviously oppressed how could she possibly be happy making meals keeping house and not letting day-cares and schoolteachers raise her kids, getting that cool text your child has taken its first steps, while sitting in a cubicle. Who wouldnt want to drop off the kid into a germ factory? That poor woman only 1 job! But are single mothers with “love children” on welfare as demonized? Up is down, light is dark, reverse is forward. The Liberated woman has a wife. Children are punishments, abortion is healthcare.
@Greg:
If one single cell organism is found on Mars, what would science call it?
@DrJohn: Stop it. Just stop it.
@DrJohn: A fossilized 1 cell organism found to be from Mars was declared as alien life. https://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/snc/nasa1.html
Why is the left so anti science?
mur·der (mûr′dər)
n.
1.
a. The killing of another person without justification or excuse, especially the crime of killing a person with malice aforethought or with recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life.
Unfortunately that isn’t how things are in the world we live it.
There is as yet no “child” or “baby” sufficiently developed to be capable of making any personal choices. There is only a pregnancy, which could eventually give rise to one.
@Greg:
So how old before it is old enough to make its own choices, I tell my 3 year old grandson what he is having for lunch, naptime ect where does he fit into your weird logic? What if I want to go shopping and dont want him along it must then be ok to shread him to pieces riiight?
@Greg:
So, murder is the solution?
Is a 6 month old capable of making any personal choices? That would all change if any liberal was willing to answer that question I keep asking, wouldn’t it? Based on the liberal theory of abortion, mothers should be able to kill off their children whenever they become an impediment to their careers or social lives.
@Greg: This idiot is still trying to debate this?
A fetus could miscarry, a baby could die in childbirth, or of SIDs. It’s not guaranteed to become a person. Once an egg is fertilized, it could become a person, which means ending its chances by force is immoral, and essential taking a life, even if that life isn’t guaranteed to happen. There’s still a chance, and that chance is sovereign.
You are free to believe otherwise, but not to force others to conduct their own lives as if that belief were true. Oh wait, you have been for a few decades…guess it’s time to find a new solution to this issue that isn’t on the far, far left of things.
@Nathan Blue: No, he’s not trying to debate anything. He wants to AVOID debate, as that will lead to that nasty question about living things and murder. His view is the fetus is a life as soon as it becomes convenient for the mother.
Who told you this? Did God whisper this in your ear? Because it’s nowhere in the Bible. Nor does it follow by way of logic. You’re making an assumption. I could as easily assume that the termination of a pregnancy is God’s will, as it otherwise wouldn’t have happened. One assumption is no more logical than the other.
This is why the matter is best left to the individual conscience of the party closest to the situation, rather than consulting neighbors and being bound by their opinions. It’s not some busy-body neighbor’s moral decision to make. They no doubt would wish to be free to make such moral decisions about their own lives; if they want that, they must accept that the same freedom belongs equally to others.
@Greg: Those ASSUMPTIONS are precisely what you liberals are making in defending abortion. They are assumptions based on willful ignorance because you are deathly afraid to know the facts.
@Greg: Atheists shouldnt attempt to be experts on the Bible
Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb.
Psalms 139:13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb
Luke 1:15 and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even before he is born.
Luke 1:44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.
There are books not included in the bible that have more, In the Book of Enoch :Book Two, the evil Kasdeja taught the smitings of the embryo in the womb, that it may pass away.
Jesus accepted Enoch as scripture.
@Greg:
Ooops, wrong, Greggie Goebbels. God also gave us free will to lead our lives according to His law. There is one prerequisite for the creation of a baby, and that is a free will act. Abortion is also a free will act, usurping God’s natural law.
Only people like you approve of the willful taking of a human life with your attempt to equate a human baby with an acorn. Yes, a baby is a stage of human life just as an acorn is a stage in a oak tree’s life, yet I can cut down an oak tree and I will not commit a crime if that oak tree belongs to me. You approve of the willful taking of a human life in its earliest form.
If I were you, I would not try to blame God for what evil humans like you support. You will be held responsible for that eventually.
it is quite obvious that the idiot child has never hear of the Hitler’s Final Solution on January 30, 1939. but than again, being an idiot child by the clintons is no excuse for stupidity. Final Solution-one needs to read about it
@Greg:
Who told you the sky was blue? Did God?
Or did you look up?
And morality is a human construct based on belief, faith, and freewill.
You and I are not intellectual, or spiritual, equals. Let me know if you’d like to learn some things that will help you grow into an adult.
@kitt: #34
I wish I could find the link, but there was a survey of college students where a significant number felt that a mother should be allowed to kill a child up to the time that it was able to take care of itself. It wasn’t a trick question, it was clearly about post-birth infants and children too young to survive on their own.
@Petercat: I would like to see the questionaire and if they were lead into the demonic possessed answer they gave.
Each one should be required to volunteer in a clinic for a week and witness a real live murder.
Well, basically that is the liberal position on abortion. When a life poses an imposition on a liberal lifestyle, that life can be terminated. Chronology of the life is of little concern; all that matters is the pleasure and happiness of the liberal in control. If you will extrapolate just a little bit, that is their view of the 1st Amendment and political thought as well. If someone is saying or thinking something liberals do not like, something which may cause some “inconvenience”, those people can be terminated as well.
@Deplorable me: #46 Georgia Guide Stones, Agenda 2030, NWO They are not theories they are goals.
@kitt: Agree–would say as well, all meat eaters should spend a full day in a factory farm slaughter house and see where their meal is coming from. slaughter of any SENTIENT being is wrong.
if AFTER witnessing the truth one still supports the slaughter===so be it.
@Richard Wheeler: Those that hunt for food not sport already know. Have hung and skinned out our own meat as much as that may repel you, sport hunting repels me.
Without the license fees there would be very little conservation, over population of our deer herd has led to CWD a brain parasite, a very painful and slow death. The herds must be properly managed. We dont feed the deer on our land to prevent the spread. If you dont count throwing apples after gun season around the property no piles.