Guttmacher vs Worldometer on Abortion statistics

_{kairosfocus

January 2, 2021

Defending our Civilization, News Highlights}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Unintended pregnancy and abortion are experiences shared by people around the world. These reproductive health outcomes occur irrespective of country income level, region or the legal status of abortion.
Roughly 121 million unintended pregnancies occurred each year between 2015 and 2019.^*
Of these unintended pregnancies, 61% ended in abortion. This translates to 73 million abortions per year.

Worldometer has flopped over to 2021. A captured image gives abortion numbers per WHO for 2020:

The 30 million spread simply tells us that these statistics are problematic. However the message — an ugly one — is clear. END

Comments

Folks, evil is not a relative matter, especially when innocent life is in the stakes. We need to look at what we are admitting to, and what that implies. KFkairosfocus_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
10:12 PM
10
10
12
PM
PDT}

True, and I consider that a serious mistake. I know a lot of people (and have heard many stories from my friend) about the good IVF brings into the world.Viola Lee_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
06:58 PM
6
06
58
PM
PDT}

Thank you Viola. I should have used the word embryo rather than fetus. My point was simply that there are many close-minded people who view the discarding of non-implanted embryos during IVF as being the equivalent of murder. As such, they advocate for banning IVF.Steve Alten2_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
06:46 PM
6
06
46
PM
PDT}

IVF doesn't abort any fetuses, I don't think: it just discards many embryos with a small number of cells. Sometimes because they have particular genetic defects, some because they aren't healthy (they have ways of scoring them), and some just because others seemed like the most viable ones to try to implant. However, many still don't develop, either failing before even becoming viable in the womb, or through more traditional miscarriages later. For many women seeking IVF, the biology for successfully starting a baby is just less capable than other women. However, it is also true that many fertilized cells through normal intercourse also fail at various stages, often without the women even knowing that a fertilized cell got started. Congratulations on your granddaughters.Viola Lee_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
05:57 PM
5
05
57
PM
PDT}

Thanks Viola. I get mad at people who say that IVF should be banned because, sadly, it involves aborting several fetuses. For anyone who thinks this, feel free to tell my granddaughters this. They are old enough now that they will rip anyone who thinks this a new one. And I will stand back and enjoy the spectacle.Steve Alten2_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
04:26 PM
4
04
26
PM
PDT}

Thumbs up to Steve's post. I've discussed this issue with an IVF doctor a number of times, and the number of fertilized embryos that are flat-out rejected for various reasons vastly outnumbers the successful implantations that carry to term.Viola Lee_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
04:12 PM
4
04
12
PM
PDT}

Abortion simply isn’t a black and white situation. I have two wonderful grandchildren through IVF. My daughter had two ectopic pregnancies that made natural conception impossible. After three rounds of IVF, she gave birth to twin daughters. In total, the IVF process resulted in over 20 fertilized eggs, several of which were not implanted, and many more that aborted early in pregnancy to give the others a small chance to survive. All the pontificating in the world won’t convince me that the loss of fertilized eggs that resulted in these two beautiful girls was anything but a blessing.Steve Alten2_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
12:38 PM
12
12
38
PM
PDT}

ET: Birth control is fine, IMHO, as long as it prevents conception. Abstinence is a form of birth control. True, just not one that many people use! But I do think it's sensible to make other forms of birth control widely available and effective. Who disagrees with what evil is and what are their disagreements? Well, for example: I think some people (here, even) think that homosexual relationships are sinful and evil whereas other disagree. I think some people think that drug use is evil but others think it's just a societal problem that needs more attention. I suspect that some people would say that extra-marital sexual activity is evil whereas others might not see the harm as long as all adults involved consent.JVL_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
09:22 AM
9
09
22
AM
PDT}

Birth control is fine, IMHO, as long as it prevents conception. Abstinence is a form of birth control. Who disagrees with what evil is and what are their disagreements?ET_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
09:16 AM
9
09
16
AM
PDT}

ET: My societal program? Women with unwanted pregnancies, and the men who got them pregnant would be fined, heavily. Ignorance is not an answer. You get an abortion you go to prison for murder. I bet that would change behaviors very quickly. Okay! I'm not agreeing with you but you did answer the question with a definite answer. Thank you for doing that. Would you allow for birth control methods then? I mean that they should be readily available and effective? And we allowed evil. It was our responsibility. Perhaps because there's some disagreement about what is evil?JVL_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
08:57 AM
8
08
57
AM
PDT}

Marfin: Its only your assumption that it was designed that way , so hence its a bad design , thats akin to saying what idiot designed an engine so that when it runs our of engine oil it will seize up. Death inc miscarriages were not part of God`s plan or design it was man`s failure to keep the system God had put in place which is the problem and makes it look like bad design just like failing to put engine oil in your motor would do the same. I can understand that. But . . . Okay . . . so sometimes pious and good people suffer hideously because others haven't kept up their end of the bargain? I guess that's the part that bothers me about your idea: even if I'm good and pure and devote I can get caught up in some kind of systemic failure that I had nothing to do with and I might have been fighting against my whole life. Just doesn't seem fair to me. We all have to walk the talk and if anyone fails we all can fail? Doesn't that mean I have to be constantly monitoring those around me to make sure they are toeing the line? It starts to sound like a police state!JVL_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
08:55 AM
8
08
55
AM
PDT}

SCIENCE says that life starts at conception. So I understand why JVL wouldn't believe it. My societal program? Women with unwanted pregnancies, and the men who got them pregnant would be fined, heavily. Ignorance is not an answer. You get an abortion you go to prison for murder. I bet that would change behaviors very quickly. This is the 21st century. Ignorance is no longer a viable excuse. And we allowed evil. It was our responsibility.ET_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
08:53 AM
8
08
53
AM
PDT}

ET: With respect to God, the Fall from grace allowed evil into the world. Didn't God decide that that event allowed evil into the world? Wasn't it his call?JVL_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
08:48 AM
8
08
48
AM
PDT}

JVL - Its only your assumption that it was designed that way , so hence its a bad design , thats akin to saying what idiot designed an engine so that when it runs our of engine oil it will seize up . Death inc miscarriages were not part of God`s plan or design it was man`s failure to keep the system God had put in place which is the problem and makes it look like bad design, just like failing to put engine oil in your motor would do the same.Marfin_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
08:47 AM
8
08
47
AM
PDT}

ET: If life starts at conception, as science says, then abortion is murder. If life starts at conception . . . what do you think? And, as KF, shows, it is out of control. If society if judged with how we treat our most vulnerable then we have failed, miserably. We are nothing but ignorant savages, blissful in our ignorance. We should know better. We are pathetic for allowing the slaughter of our unborn. But I don’t know what to do about it short of starting an all-out war. Humans don’t seem capable of being reasoned with. At the very least you would have to create huge social programmes to support women pregnant with unwanted babies and after the birth huge support systems for all the extra children not wanted by their mothers. It would take a vast commitment of time and money on the part of society as a whole. Considering you'd probably never get the tax payers to pay for it you'd have to do some serious fund raising. Agree or disagree on the abortion issue I have never seen anyone come up with a viable way of dealing with all the extra children outlawing abortion would allow. I suppose you could just decide as a society that if you have the sex you deal with the consequences. That doesn't deal with rape, in and out of marriage, but I guess it is consistent with some Christian ideals as held by some Christians. Leaving rape and unwanted sexual events out, I don't think you're going to get people to agree that if a woman has a sexual encounter she has to live with the consequences. I think that horse has bolted the stable a long time ago. Plus it puts no responsibility on the 'father'. Perhaps a better approach would be to encourage people, women in particular, to use some kind of highly effective birth control until they're sure they want to have children. That makes the most sense to me: you reduce unwanted pregnancies and you keep the power of the decision in the woman's hands. Discuss.JVL_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
08:43 AM
8
08
43
AM
PDT}

With respect to God, the Fall from grace allowed evil into the world.ET_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
08:34 AM
8
08
34
AM
PDT}

If life starts at conception, as science says, then abortion is murder. And, as KF, shows, it is out of control. If society if judged with how we treat our most vulnerable then we have failed, miserably. We are nothing but ignorant savages, blissful in our ignorance. We should know better. We are pathetic for allowing the slaughter of our unborn. But I don't know what to do about it short of starting an all-out war. Humans don't seem capable of being reasoned with.ET_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
08:30 AM
8
08
30
AM
PDT}

ET: I do not speak for bornagain77. Of course not. But do you, personally, think that genetic entropy and God wanting to allow for some evil in the world are part of the same effort? Just interested in whether or not those two ideas agree with each other.JVL_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
08:29 AM
8
08
29
AM
PDT}

I do not speak for bornagain77. And genetic entropy is what it is- an impetus for us to learn and hopefully be able to correct it.ET_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
08:25 AM
8
08
25
AM
PDT}

I notice, the substantive issue is still on the table, that in 2020 there were likely 42 - 73 million unborn children who were killed. KFkairosfocus_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
08:02 AM
8
08
02
AM
PDT}

ET: I was telling YOU what is to blame for the spontaneous abortions. Genetic entropy is a thing but your strawman isn’t. Okay, given that . . . why wouldn't Bornagain77 answer the question? Does he think there is another explanation? He talked a lot about the presence and reasons for 'evil' in the world. I didn't think that was directly addressing the particular question. Do you, personally, think that genetic entropy, uncorrected, is the designer allowing for 'evil'? Our unhealthy lifestyles, pollution and genetic entropy are the causes of spontaneous abortions and stillbirths. I remember. And I'm sure sometimes bad nutrition or environmental factors like pollution do cause problems. An example no one will disagree with is that severe alcohol or drug consumption frequently leads to birth defects. It's not much of a stretch to guess that such things can lead to miscarriages or still births. In some sense, modern medicine is starting to be able to look at our individual . . . processes and be able to proscribe tailor-made solutions. I heard a really interesting discussion of 'leaky guy syndrome' the other day and eventually the hope is to be able to sample a person's gut biome, analyse it, look at how effective it is at processing certain inputs and then proscribe a diet geared towards that situation. Fascinating stuff.JVL_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
07:51 AM
7
07
51
AM
PDT}

Once again, for the learning impaired- looking at JVL: Our unhealthy lifestyles, pollution and genetic entropy are the causes of spontaneous abortions and stillbirths.ET_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
07:39 AM
7
07
39
AM
PDT}

Wow. JVL must be totally clueless :
I am not calling out any of those things. You just made that up. Besides, if genetic entropy was a ‘thing’ then the number of spontaneous abortions should be growing every year. But it’s not.
I was telling YOU what is to blame for the spontaneous abortions. Genetic entropy is a thing but your strawman isn't.
Why don’t you try and address the point that the number of spontaneous, non-intentional abortions dwarfs the intentional ones and why is no one trying to do something about that.?
I did. You are just too stupid to understand it.ET_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
07:37 AM
7
07
37
AM
PDT}

Bornagain77: Whatever JVL, my arguments at 14, 15 and 20 stand and you have not even touched them in regards to trying to refute them. Because I wasn't trying to refute them? I was asking you a question about your beliefs and views and how they explain or justify a particular phenomena. And you chose not to address that question directly. It's your call. I am, once again, quite satisfied that unbiased observers can easily see that you are playing stupid games instead of making coherent arguments. I'm just asking you a question about your beliefs. I'm not trying to argue you out of anything. You talked about 'evil' in general (your term not mine) but I'd like you to speak to a particular situation instead of discussing a very general case. It is sad that you will not be intellectually honest. ???? I haven't lied or tried to mislead or push the conversation off on a tangent. I asked a question. But alas, I am done wasting my time trying to be reasonable with someone who simply refuses to be reasonable. So, you're not going to address my particular question. Why didn't you just say so in the first place?JVL_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
06:55 AM
6
06
55
AM
PDT}

Whatever JVL, my arguments at 14, 15 and 20 stand and you have not even touched them in regards to trying to refute them. I am, once again, quite satisfied that unbiased observers can easily see that you are playing stupid games instead of making coherent arguments. It is sad that you will not be intellectually honest. But alas, I am done wasting my time trying to be reasonable with someone who simply refuses to be reasonable. I have much better things to do today! Good bye!bornagain77_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
06:32 AM
6
06
32
AM
PDT}

Bornagain77: JVL, you want to argue the Theology instead of the science? I'm not trying to argue about theology; I'm just asking you how your beliefs square up with a designed system that seems very wasteful and painful. So you honestly admit that the science itself, i.e. the overwhelming rate of detrimental mutations, refutes Darwinism? And that you therefore have no further case to make for Darwinism being true as far as the science itself is concerned? No, I'm asking you a question about your worldview and beliefs and how they 'explain' a particular phenomena. And that you therefore now want to ‘honestly’ explore the Theological reasoning for exactly why God would allow evil to exist in this world? To put it mildly, I find this VERY hard to believe. That's right, I'm not giving up my views. I'm asking you about yours. I think the truth is that, since you simply have no science to support Darwinism, you instead are very reluctant to give up your theologically based ‘argument from evil’. You simply have run out of ‘scientific’ bullets to use and thus you are very much stuck with the old fallacious ‘argument from evil’ (a argument which Charles Darwin himself used in his book ‘Origin of Species’). Sigh, why don't you just answer the question? Well, regardless of whatever ulterior motives you may have, God has very good ‘Theological’ reasons for allowing evil to exist in this world,,, Okay. Please note: I did not use the word evil, you did. So, you're kind-a, sort-of answering my question. First off, how would it be possible for God to defeat death, in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, if God did not first allow death to exist in this world the first place? Umm, that's not really answering my question. I'm not asking why there is death but why there are literally thousands if not millions of miscarriages and stillbirths every year. Why won't you address that particular question? Secondly, and in conjunction with the first point, by allowing evil to exist God is allowing his children to grow spiritually, i.e. the “Beatific Vision” But that still hasn't answered my specific question. I guess you're not going to. And JVL, if you are still upset that God allows evil to exist in this world, and if you still insist that God should immediately remove all evil from this world, it might interest you to know that we ourselves, in our present unredeemed state, are considered evil before the infinite goodness that is found in God. You keep answering questions I didn't ask and putting words in my mouth. I'm not upset about anything. I'm asking you a specific question about why there are so many miscarriages and stillbirths every year; far more than there are intentional abortions. But no one seems upset about that. Which I find curious, especially if you think the whole system was designed.JVL_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
06:23 AM
6
06
23
AM
PDT}

JVL, you want to argue the Theology instead of the science? So you honestly admit that the science itself, i.e. the overwhelming rate of detrimental mutations, refutes Darwinism? And that you therefore have no further case to make for Darwinism being true as far as the science itself is concerned? And that you therefore now want to 'honestly' explore the Theological reasoning for exactly why God would allow evil to exist in this world? To put it mildly, I find this VERY hard to believe. I think the truth is that, since you simply have no science to support Darwinism, you instead are very reluctant to give up your theologically based 'argument from evil'. You simply have run out of 'scientific' bullets to use and thus you are very much stuck with the old fallacious theological 'argument from evil' (a theological argument which Charles Darwin himself used in his book 'Origin of Species'). Well, regardless of whatever ulterior motives you may have, God has very good 'Theological' reasons for allowing evil to exist in this world,,, First off, how would it be possible for God to defeat death, in the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, if God did not first allow death to exist in this world the first place?
Philippians 2:8-11 “And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” “He did not conquer in spite of the dark mystery of evil. He conquered through it.” ~James Stewart~ ——————————— “It is a glorious phrase of the New Testament, that ‘he led captivity captive.’ The very triumphs of His foes, it means, he used for their defeat. He compelled their dark achievements to sub-serve his end, not theirs. They nailed him to the tree, not knowing that by that very act they were bringing the world to his feet. They gave him a cross, not guessing that he would make it a throne. They flung him outside the gates to die, not knowing that in that very moment they were lifting up all the gates of the universe, to let the King of Glory come in. They thought to root out his doctrines, not understanding that they were implanting imperishably in the hearts of men the very name they intended to destroy. They thought they had defeated God with His back (to) the wall, pinned and helpless and defeated: they did not know that it was God Himself who had tracked them down. He did not conquer in spite of the dark mystery of evil. He conquered through it.” James Stewart (1896–1990) was a minister of the Church of Scotland
Secondly, and in conjunction with the first point, by allowing evil to exist God is allowing his children to grow spiritually, i.e. the "Beatific Vision"
This Theologian Has An Answer To Atheists’ Claims That Evil Disproves God - Jan, 2018 Excerpt: In “The Last Superstition: A Refutation Of The New Atheism,” Feser, echoing Thomas Aquinas, notes that the first premise of the problem of evil is “simply false, or at least unjustifiable.” According to Feser, there is no reason to believe that the Christian God, being all-good and all-powerful, would prevent suffering on this earth if out of suffering he could bring about a good that is far greater than any that would have existed otherwise. If God is infinite in power, knowledge, goodness, etc., then of course he could bring about such a good. Feser demonstrates his reasoning with an analogy. A parent may allow his child a small amount of suffering in frustration, sacrifice of time, and minor pain when learning to play the violin, in order to bring about the good of establishing proficiency. This is not to say that such minimal suffering is in any way comparable to the horrors that have gone on in this world. But the joy of establishing proficiency with a violin is not in any way comparable to the good that God promises to bring to the world. In Christian theology, this good is referred to as the Beatific Vision: the ultimate, direct self-communication of God to the individual. In other words, perfect salvation or Heaven. Feser describes the Beatific Vision as a joy so great that even the most terrible horror imaginable “pales in insignificance before the beatific vision.” As Saint Paul once said, “the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us.” http://thefederalist.com/2018/01/03/theologian-answer-new-atheists-claims-existence-evil-disproves-gods/
Verse,
Romans 12:21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
Of course, I'm no theologian, and indeed many people can, and have, spent their entire lifetimes studying Christian theology, but anyways, that is the 'short' theological answer to the theological, (not scientific), question as to why God would personally allow evil to exist in this world. And JVL, if you are still upset that God allows evil to exist in this world, and if you still insist that God should immediately remove all evil from this world, it might interest you to know that we ourselves, in our present unredeemed state, are considered evil before the infinite goodness and holiness that is found in God.
Isaiah:6:5-7 “Woe to me!” I cried. “I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty.” Then one of the seraphim flew to me with a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with tongs from the altar. With it he touched my mouth and said, “See, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away and your sin atoned for.”
bornagain77_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
06:10 AM
6
06
10
AM
PDT}

Bornagain77: JVL, I am quite satisfied that unbiased readers can easily see that you have not refuted my arguments in the least, but that you have only reinforced the validity of my arguments that I made at posts 14 and 15. I'm not trying to refute your arguments; I'm trying to get you to answer a question about the implications of your beliefs. Which you flatly refuse to do. Your call but don't you think you should be able to say why a designed system generates so much waste and pain?JVL_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
05:17 AM
5
05
17
AM
PDT}

JVL, I am quite satisfied that unbiased readers can easily see that you have not refuted my arguments in the least, but that you have only reinforced the validity of my arguments that I made at posts 14 and 15. Nice own goal!bornagain77_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
04:50 AM
4
04
50
AM
PDT}

Bornagain77: You spend a lot of time bending my question into a theological statement which you then assert is atheistic and self-refuting. But you never answered the underlying questions: Who would design such a system and why? Why cause so much pain and agony and waste? What is the purpose for it? I don't believe human beings were designed by an intelligent agent. You do. So, logically, there must be some reason for the number of miscarriages and stillbirths to dwarf the number of intentional abortions. I'm not attacking your beliefs, I'm asking you to explain how your beliefs explains a situation. Can you do that?JVL_{January 4, 2021
January
01
Jan
4
04
2021
04:45 AM
4
04
45
AM
PDT}

Prev 1 2 3 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply