Pro-abortion laws act as an incentive for more abortions AND more OOW births!
Theme: Risk Assessment
Author’s Note: Coauthored by Red Pill Apostle and Jack.
Length: 1,000 words
Reading Time: 3.5 minutes; linked article is 4 minutes.
Authorizing Risk leads to Snowballing Risk
Here’s a good article explaining the secondary and tertiary effects of altering God’s intended design for sex.
Town Hall (John R. Lott): Roe v. Wade Harmed Even Many Children Born After the Court’s Decision (2021-12-02)
If you look at Lott’s degrees and where he has been a professor, we’re in good company regarding our logic on intersexual dynamics.
While the main topic is focused on a Supreme Court case over an abortion law, it is noted that introducing this mechanism to address the negative consequences of unplanned, out-of-wedlock pregnancies changed the incentives.
“Roe did substantially increase abortions, more than doubling the rate per live birth in the five years from 1972 to 1977.”
Lott cites data that says abortion was at least one of the factors for men and women adopting riskier sexual behavior.
“Liberalizing abortion rules ignited vast long-term social changes in America. The 1970s saw major changes, but few realize that research has shown the role that Roe had in help creating them. Nor do people understand the harm done to the children born after Roe as well as many of their mothers. But before we get to those harms, let’s discuss the changes:
- A sharp increase in pre-marital sex.
- A sharp rise in out-of-wedlock births.
- A drop in the number of children placed for adoption.
- A decline in marriages that occur after the woman is pregnant.
“With abortion seen as a backup, women as well as men became less careful in using contraceptives as well as more likely to have premarital sex.”
And not surprisingly, as a result,
“There were more unplanned pregnancies.”
Just as the Manosphere has concluded, once a few women are willing to adopt the behavior in order to gain a hypergamous advantage, it incentivizes many women into the horizontal tango arms race to avoid losing the man they want. Lott even references this idea in the article.
“But legal abortion did not mean every unplanned pregnancy led to an abortion. After all, just because abortion is legal does not mean that the decision is an easy one. Some women now had premarital sex after the changes in laws even though they knew they could never have an abortion simply because other women were doing so. If many women were willing to have premarital sex or have an abortion after these legal changes, the women who didn’t want to have premarital sex, because they knew they were unwilling to have abortions, felt pressured to do so. Guys might drop them and date other women who were willing to have sex.”
In the insurance industry, we call this a moral hazard, which is where people adopt additional risk in their behavior because they know they have a third party to cover the financial consequences if the risk fails. Basically, the mechanism to mitigate the effects of risk creates the incentive that alters behavior.
Sex, marriage, and procreation is like a big ball of yarn. It’s quite useful for knitting the fabric of our lives, but once you start unraveling it, it can become a tangled mess.
The Link to Single Motherhood
Lott goes further to iterate several noteworthy statistics related to the rise in unplanned births and single motherhood.
In the United States from the early 1970s, when abortion was liberalized, through the late 1980s, there was a tremendous increase in the rate of out-of-wedlock births, rising from an average of 5 percent of all births from 1965 to 1969 to more than 16 percent two decades later (1985 to 1989).
For blacks, the numbers soared from 35 percent to 62 percent. While not all of this rise can be attributed to liberalized abortion rules, it was a key contributing factor, nevertheless.”
So legalizing abortion not only incentivized more promiscuity, but it also promoted the rise in single mommyhood. Whodathunk the single mother epidemic was an indirect result of legalizing abortion?
Lott explains how this works.
“With legalization and a woman not forced to go through with an unplanned pregnancy, a man might well expect his partner to have an abortion if a sexual encounter were to result in an unplanned pregnancy.
But what happens if the woman refuses — say, she is morally opposed or, perhaps, she thought she could have an abortion but upon becoming pregnant decides she can’t go through with it?”
There is another, more politically incorrect possibility — what if she actually wants to have Chad’s b@stard spawn!
“Many men, feeling tricked into unwanted fatherhood, likely will wash their hands of the affair altogether, thinking, “I never wanted a baby. It’s her choice, so let her raise the baby herself.”
What is expected of men in this position has changed dramatically in the last four decades. Evidence shows that the greater availability of abortion largely ended “shotgun” marriages, where men felt obligated to marrying the women.”
Come to think of it, I haven’t known of a shotgun marriage in decades. So apparently, a decrease in marriage is yet another downstream result of legalizing abortion!
“What has happened to these babies of reluctant fathers?
The mothers often raise the children on their own. Even as abortion has led to more out-of-wedlock births it has dramatically reduced adoptions of children born in America by two-parent families.”
Here’s another non-PC possibility — Single mothers want to keep their out-of-wedlock chidren as leverage to garner welfare from Uncle Sam and child support from the father.
All in all, legalizing abortion is another brick in Big Brother’s wall — one that has opened a pandora’s box of disasterous results.
- Σ Frame: Abortion and Birth Control (Page)