Birth control rant - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

05/31/2012 11:38:01 AM · #1376

All "Pro-Choicers" your freedom to choose is being debated by the house House debates abortion ban for sex of fetus.

How dare the government tell me I can't choose the sex of my child. If they're aren't the sex I want, I should be able to abort them.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

05/31/2012 03:07:14 PM · #1377

Originally posted by Nullix:

All "Pro-Choicers" your freedom to choose is being debated by the house House debates abortion ban for sex of fetus. How dare the government tell me I can't choose the sex of my child. If they're aren't the sex I want, I should be able to abort them.

And the bill promptly failed because how dare the government resort to discriminatory profiling of Asian women and "subject doctors to criminal prosecution if they fail to determine the motivations behind a very personal and private decision" when birth statistics show no evidence that such a problem exists in the U.S. outside of unfounded conservative paranoia.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

05/31/2012 03:43:06 PM · #1378

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Nullix:
All "Pro-Choicers" your freedom to choose is being debated by the house House debates abortion ban for sex of fetus. How dare the government tell me I can't choose the sex of my child. If they're aren't the sex I want, I should be able to abort them.

And the bill promptly failed because how dare the government resort to discriminatory profiling of Asian women and "subject doctors to criminal prosecution if they fail to determine the motivations behind a very personal and private decision" when birth statistics show no evidence that such a problem exists in the U.S. outside of unfounded conservative paranoia.

I thought it was conservatives who want the government to butt out of people's private business ...

Kelli

Canon EOS-D60

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

05/31/2012 03:50:06 PM · #1379

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Nullix:
All "Pro-Choicers" your freedom to choose is being debated by the house House debates abortion ban for sex of fetus. How dare the government tell me I can't choose the sex of my child. If they're aren't the sex I want, I should be able to abort them.

And the bill promptly failed because how dare the government resort to discriminatory profiling of Asian women and "subject doctors to criminal prosecution if they fail to determine the motivations behind a very personal and private decision" when birth statistics show no evidence that such a problem exists in the U.S. outside of unfounded conservative paranoia.

I thought it was conservatives who want the government to butt out of people's private business ...

Only when the "people" in question are corporations.

05/31/2012 04:02:19 PM · #1380

The topic seems like a bit of a sticky wicket for abortion supporters. I think most abortion supporters in this country are personally uncomfortable with the idea of abortions performed for the reason of sex selection. However, politics being what they are these days, I think the powers feel compelled to defend abortion under all circumstances and so do a fair amount of verbal dancing in their defence (eg. it's about doctor-patient confidentiality, not about sex selective abortion). As an analogy, I think most gun owners are somewhat uncomfortable with the idea of high-powered assault rifles or hollow point bullets being readily available to the public, but the NRA defends assault rifles as part a "no ground given" strategy to defend gun rights in general. If the fight is being waged over high powererd assault rifles then it ISN'T being waged over handguns. Likewise, if we are fighting about sex-selective abortions, we aren't fighting about more "mundane" abortions.

I do hate it when articles talk about studies but then fail to cite or link them. Hyperlinks are good people! Sex selective abortions clearly occur in this country, but they just as clearly do not occur at the rate they do in Asia. Still, morality would say one is just as wrong as a hundred.

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

05/31/2012 04:13:00 PM · #1381

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Still, morality would say one is just as wrong as a hundred.

... and if morality were at the forefront of governmental decisions, then it could be argued that engaging in wars would come to an abrupt end.

Ray

Judith Polakoff

Nikon D7000

05/31/2012 04:14:49 PM · #1382

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Sex selective abortions clearly occur in this country

How do you know this?

05/31/2012 04:17:45 PM · #1383

Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Sex selective abortions clearly occur in this country

How do you know this?

Oh that... it's in one of those linky things he mentioned that people never attach to support their arguments. :O)

Ray

05/31/2012 04:21:55 PM · #1384

Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Sex selective abortions clearly occur in this country

How do you know this?

You don't think there has ever been a case where a family has two girls and wants a boy and aborts because the third fetus is another girl? Common sense says that happens.

I actually ran across a link in the past talking about this, but I'd have to re-search for it as I have no idea where it was.

Message edited by author 2012-05-31 16:22:46.

05/31/2012 04:24:06 PM · #1385

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

I do hate it when articles talk about studies but then fail to cite or link them. Hyperlinks are good people! Sex selective abortions clearly occur in this country, but they just as clearly do not occur at the rate they do in Asia.

And of course you make that assertion without support or citation. Great big hyperlink: In the U.S., the gender of an unborn baby is rarely a factor in the decision to have an abortion, because [95% of] abortions happen too early in pregnancy to detect the baby's gender.

05/31/2012 04:25:26 PM · #1386

How's this?

Gender bias among asian communities in the 2000 census

05/31/2012 04:26:19 PM · #1387

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

You don't think there has ever been a case where a family has two girls and wants a boy and aborts because the third fetus is another girl?

Originally posted by AnonymousDPCer:

Stop painting [abortion] with the example of a few nuts.

05/31/2012 04:28:56 PM · #1388

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
You don't think there has ever been a case where a family has two girls and wants a boy and aborts because the third fetus is another girl?

Originally posted by AnonymousDPCer:
Stop painting [abortion] with the example of a few nuts.

Psst. Your ignorance is showing...

Message edited by author 2012-05-31 16:29:16.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

05/31/2012 04:31:42 PM · #1389

Here's the conclusion from the actual study (thanks NYT for linking)

We document male-biased sex ratios among U.S.-born children of Chinese, Korean, and Asian Indian parents in the 2000 U.S. Census. This male bias is particularly evident for third children: If there was no previous son, sons outnumbered daughters by 50%. By contrast, the sex ratios of eldest and younger children with an older brother were both within the range of the biologically normal, as were White offspring sex ratios (irrespective of the elder siblings' sex). We interpret the found deviation in favor of sons to be evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

05/31/2012 05:11:41 PM · #1390

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

We interpret the found deviation in favor of sons to be evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage.

So it's someone's "interpretation" of statistics, without ever citing a single documented case where it's known to occur.

One kid getting run over is too many, let's ban cars ...

05/31/2012 05:16:38 PM · #1391

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

We interpret the found deviation in favor of sons to be evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage.

I know this is not a court, but even by normal everyday standards this interpretation is speculation at its best.

Ray

05/31/2012 05:20:47 PM · #1392

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
We interpret the found deviation in favor of sons to be evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage.

I know this is not a court, but even by normal everyday standards this interpretation is speculation at its best.

Ray

So what's your alternative hypothesis Mr. Skeptic? What would make a third child 50% more likely to be a boy if there were no boys in the family but 0% more likely if there were? Maybe they utilized the Matthew Brock (of Newsradio) method for having a boy where you "do it upsidedown and backwards"?

Let me just say that if these stats were supporting something you believed you'd be all over it like white on rice.

Message edited by author 2012-05-31 17:21:36.

05/31/2012 05:22:25 PM · #1393

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
We interpret the found deviation in favor of sons to be evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage.

So it's someone's "interpretation" of statistics, without ever citing a single documented case where it's known to occur.

One kid getting run over is too many, let's ban cars ...

Ridiculous. Utterly. Are you honestly saying this study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences is useless because I can't give you the names and addresses of someone in specific? How do you explain the bias in third child sex? Surely you must have a viable alternative explanation!?

Message edited by author 2012-05-31 17:25:44.

05/31/2012 05:26:55 PM · #1394

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Let me just say that if these stats were supporting something you believed you'd be all over it like white on rice.

...and that my dear friend is also mere speculation on your part. I deal with legal issues on a daily basis and can assure you that my personal feelings, views and penchants NEVER cause me to be all over something like white on rice.

I come from a family of seven boys and six girls...got any stats for that. :O)

Ray

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

05/31/2012 05:30:31 PM · #1395

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Let me just say that if these stats were supporting something you believed you'd be all over it like white on rice.

...and that my dear friend is also mere speculation on your part. I deal with legal issues on a daily basis and can assure you that my personal feelings, views and penchants NEVER cause me to be all over something like white on rice.

I come from a family of seven boys and six girls...got any stats for that. :O)

Ray

I didn't see your alternative explanation in all that oh ye of catholic parents...

frisca

Nikon D70

05/31/2012 05:30:59 PM · #1396

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
We interpret the found deviation in favor of sons to be evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage.

So it's someone's "interpretation" of statistics, without ever citing a single documented case where it's known to occur.

One kid getting run over is too many, let's ban cars ...

Ridiculous. Utterly. Are you honestly saying this study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences is useless because I can't give you the names and addresses of someone in specific? How do you explain the bias in third child sex? Surely you must have a viable alternative explanation!?

The study you cited does support your hypothesis, but it could also support other hypothesis, and without further study, you can't confirm that the noted correlation is causation.

05/31/2012 05:37:54 PM · #1397

Originally posted by frisca:

The study you cited does support your hypothesis, but it could also support other hypothesis, and without further study, you can't confirm that the noted correlation is causation.

Maybe. If anybody could name another friggin hypothesis. I've asked three times and nobody is forthcoming with this obvious "other hypothesis". Well, I did mention the doing it backwards and upside down.