Zell Miller weighs in on abortion...

[Little Raven]

For those of you not familiar with Zell, he's a Democratic senator from a bygone age, when Democrats were the party of the South. While he still wears the Democratic label, he's often at odds with his party of late, going so far as to call them a far-left party out of touch with America today. He added to his maverick creditials by supporting President Bush in 2004 elections over John Kerry.

His thoughts on abortion? It's the evil behind military recruiting shortfalls, the Social Security crisis, and illegal immigration.

“How could this great land of plenty produce too few people in the last 30 years? Here is the brutal truth that no one dares to mention: We’re too few because too many of our babies have been killed,” Miller said.

“Over 45 million since Roe v. Wade in 1973. If those 45 million children had lived, today they would be defending our country, they would be filling our jobs, they would be paying into Social Security,” the former Georgia governor said. “Still, we watch as 3,700 babies are killed every single day in America. It is unbelievable that a nation under God would allow this.”

Leaving the morality of abortion aside, do you think Zell is correct? Is there a social argument to be made against abortion? And if there is, is it strong enough to overcome a woman's right to control her own body?

 

[Masquerouge]

Hasn't legal immigration far outweighed any figures on abortion in the same period?

 

[Shadylookin]

no. if we had an extra 45 million people we wouldn't have any job openings and unemployment would be through the roof. The majority of abortions are by lower class under-educated women most people that have studied it(to my knowledge) have shown that abortion has lowered crime rates and better for society

Zell Miller is also a quack that needs to switch parties

 

[Masquerouge]

no. if we had an extra 45 million people we wouldn't have any job openings and unemployment would be through the roof. The majority of abortions are by lower class under-educated women most people that have studied it(to my knowledge) have shown that abortion has lowered crime rates and better for society

That too, yes. Freakonomics?

 

[JollyRoger]

Maybe making so many immigrants illegal has caused the so-called military shortfall and social security crisis as the typical immigrant makes a good candidate to produce military-enlisting offspring and contributes into the social security system.

Plus, with many of the illegals coming from Catholic Mexico, they are less likely to abort.

 

[Elrohir]

no. if we had an extra 45 million people we wouldn't have any job openings and unemployment would be through the roof. The majority of abortions are by lower class under-educated women most people that have studied it(to my knowledge) have shown that abortion has lowered crime rates and better for society

Zell Miller is also a quack that needs to switch parties

That's a terribly narrow-minded view. More people don't just take slices of our metaphorical "pie", decreasing our share - they bake new pies. With more people, you can have a stronger economy. I would say that the US would be much more powerful economically if we had 350 million people instead of 300 million. Of course not if they were dumped on us all at once, but gradually over time, as would have happened if the US had not had widespread legal abortion, we would be better off.

Honestly, though, this, like the Freakonomics theory, isn't going to change anyone's mind on the issue. If you believe an unborn fetus is a human being, then you're going to be against abortion, regardless of women's rights or a desire to cut back on crime or whatever. And if you don't, then you won't want to restrict a woman's right to choose, regardless of what other benefits may happen from restricting abortion.

So while this is interesting, it's ultimately a rather pointless debate.

 

[.Shane.]

Leaving the morality of abortion aside, do you think Zell is correct? Is there a social argument to be made against abortion? And if there is, is it strong enough to overcome a woman's right to control her own body?

God, what an idiot. Like it or not, overwhelmingly, social policy arguments only serve to justify the existance of abortion.

 

[Shadylookin]

That's a terribly narrow-minded view. More people don't just take slices of our metaphorical "pie", decreasing our share - they bake new pies. With more people, you can have a stronger economy. I would say that the US would be much more powerful economically if we had 350 million people instead of 300 million. Of course not if they were dumped on us all at once, but gradually over time, as would have happened if the US had not had widespread legal abortion, we would be better off.

like i said abortion occurs mostly with the under-privileged the fetuses being aborted are not going to become the next bill gates. 45 million more being born below the poverty line sorry if I don't get all giddy. most americans hate how high there taxes are now imagine if they had to pay welfare for another 45 million

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

I think Zell Miller serves a vital role in the political ecosystem. He is a political antibody.

An antibody recognizes and binds to a cell which isn't supposed to be in the body (a bacterial infection for instance) so that the immune system knows to destroy it.

Similarly, Zell Miller exists to loudly say things which are very stupid. Certain Americans will agree with him or defend him in conversation. The sane portion of America can then know for certain that whatever these people have to say is worthless and they can safely be ignored from now on.

 

[Elrohir]

like i said abortion occurs mostly with the under-privileged the fetuses being aborted are not going to become the next bill gates. 45 million more being born below the poverty line sorry if I don't get all giddy. most americans hate how high there taxes are now imagine if they had to pay welfare for another 45 million

In the US only 21% of women having abortions cited economical reasons for having an abortion. Compared to the 25% who just wanted to have kids later, or the 14% who just didn't feel like it, and so on. I'm not sure poverty is as big of a factor as you're making it.

But regardless, poverty in the US has, in general, been going down for the past generation. I think we could easily use more people here.

 

[ShannonCT]

Leaving the morality of abortion aside, do you think Zell is correct? Is there a social argument to be made against abortion? And if there is, is it strong enough to overcome a woman's right to control her own body?

Is Zell correct about us being worse off without the 45 million aborted children? I think this would require an empirical study along the lines of Levitt and Dubner. We'd want to know about the predicted distributions of educational attainment, IQ, crime propensity, etc for the missing children. They're attributes would probably be worse than the average citizen, but how much worse? And we'd want to compare them to the immigrants that we wouldn't have let in had these children been born.

There could very well be a social argument made against abortion just as there have been arguments made for it. But I don't think you can use economics to answer the question of whether abortion should be legal. The issue of the woman's rights vs. the fetus's rights trumps economics.

 

[Left]

Are there 45 million parents waiting to adopt? Because the parents obviously don't want the child.

 

[Elrohir]

Are there 45 million parents waiting to adopt? Because the parents obviously don't want the child.

So killing them is the answer? Why don't we set up gas chambers in orphanages, then? At least we'd be consistent.

 

[Left]

Not really.

Just wondering what 45 million unwanted babies are going to do to society.

 

[Elrohir]

Not really.

Just wondering what 45 million unwanted babies are going to do to society.

I think the bigger question is what is killing 45 million babies going to do to our society? And do we really want to live in a society that murders tens of millions of it's own young for the sake of convenience?

Like I said, I don't expect this issue (Economics/social change) to actually change anyone's mind on this issue.

 

[El_Machinae]

Only a portion of the society and pregnant women think that babies are being killed, so it's not as morally damaging as it might otherwise be (compare it to the collective guilt the Germans feel for aspects of WWII)

However, the women who abort and who do feel that they killed a baby have heavy emotional issues to deal with.

 

[Left]

I think the bigger question is what is killing 45 million babies going to do to our society?

Probably make it similar to what it is now.

 

[Elrohir]

Probably make it similar to what it is now.

Yep. It makes you wonder what our society would look like if we weren't committing mass murder on a regular basis.

 

[Shadylookin]

In the US only 21% of women having abortions cited economical reasons for having an abortion. Compared to the 25% who just wanted to have kids later, or the 14% who just didn't feel like it, and so on. I'm not sure poverty is as big of a factor as you're making it.

But regardless, poverty in the US has, in general, been going down for the past generation. I think we could easily use more people here.

well it is the second largest factor on the list and poverty in the US has never been below 11% twice as high as most other western nations. currently the number of children living in poverty is around 15%.

also those wanting to postpone childbearing and economic reason are probably in the same category of people that cannot afford children. They are postponing childbirth until they can get a stable job.

 

[Elrohir]

well it is the second largest factor on the list and poverty in the US has never been below 11% twice as high as most other western nations. currently the number of children living in poverty is around 15%.

also those wanting to postpone childbearing and economic reason are probably in the same category of people that cannot afford children. They are postponing childbirth until they can get a stable job.

But the poor in the US almost always have food to eat, clothes to wear and a home to live in. Our lower class is the equivalent of the middle class or above in much of the world.

Not necessarily.