http://www.prb.org/Content/NavigationMenu/PT_articles/April-June_2000/Alan_F__Guttmacher,_Peoples_Physician.htm

The same people work both organizations.

There is nothing justifiable about folks who try to make pre-born child killing respectable.

They are nothing more than punk mouth pro-abort baby murderers, just like planned parenthood who spawned them.

This is from their website:

The Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI) is a nonprofit organization focused on sexual and reproductive health research, policy analysis and public education. AGI publishes Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, International Family Planning Perspectives, The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy and special reports on topics pertaining to sexual and reproductive health and rights. The Institute’s mission is to protect the reproductive choices of all women and men in the United States and throughout the world. It is to support their ability to obtain the information and services needed to achieve their full human rights, safeguard their health and exercise their individual responsibilities in regard to sexual behavior and relationships, reproduction and family formation.

1. If I’m correct, the Alan Guttmacher Institute is simply an arm of Planned Parenthood — not exactly the most unbiased source of information — and many of the statistical “evidence” that Institute puts forth has been shown to be inaccurate.

2. Even if any given set of numbers is accurate, again, what’s the point? That a certain segment of abortions come in the first 12 weeks of pregancy? That women who have them come from all walks of life? And that they give varied (but seemingly objectively poor) reasons for having them? Abortion is, what it is, no matter what figures are trotted out to paint it as something other than it is — which is the killing of a child. I find the graphic pictures, referenced in the article we’re both commenting on, to be demonstrable evidence of that.

3. I have a personal comment about the reasons given for havig abortions. As to “other responsibilities,” everybody ALWAYS has SOME responsibilities. Most all of us have work, school, family & other commitments. Few of us can’t simpy juggle those if we have to, for our children. That’s what most Americans do: They balance, juggle, whatever you call it. Not wanting to juggle, or refusing to, is a bad reason for killing a baby. As to those who say they “can’t afford it,” the more pointed question usually is, “can you afford a baby without curtailing a particular standard of material living you want/have grown accustomed to?” Usually, I suspect that’s the bigger reason. No one ever has as much moey as they would like, unless you pitch for the Yankees. As to the last reason given — spousal problems, anyone whose ever been married (and had children!) knows that no relationship is ever perfect, but again the reasons stated are not really acceptable reasons for snuffing out a life. As to any truly failing relationship, killing a blameless child is not an acceptable way of dealing with that relationship.

Troy, Keep up the Good Work!

Frank from NJ

“Evidence from around the world shows that placing restrictions on abortion to make it harder to obtain has much more to do with making it less safe than making it rarer, ” says Susan Cohen, director of government affairs at the Guttmacher Institute. “Yet in the United States, abortion opponents take credit for the mounting state and federal restrictions on abortion, rather than working to reduce unintended pregnancy to begin with.”

88% of abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.
A broad cross section of U.S. women have abortions.
56% of women having abortions are in their 20s;
61% have one or more children;
67% have never married;
57% are economically disadvantaged;
88% live in a metropolitan area; and
78% report a religious affiliation.

A substantial proportion of the 11% decline in abortion rates between 1994 and 2000 resulted from women’s use of emergency contraception (EC), according to a new analysis of contraceptive use among more than 10,000 U.S. women having abortions in 2000-2001. Forty-six percent of women surveyed were not using a contraceptive method in the month in which they became pregnant, whereas 54% were using a method. The analysis, conducted by The Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), estimates that 51,000 abortions were prevented by EC use in 2000–47,000 more than in 1994, when only 4,000 abortions were averted through EC. Overall, 110,000 fewer abortions occurred in 2000 than in 1994; increased use of EC may account for up to 43% of the total decline.

On average, women give at least 3 reasons for choosing abortion: 3/4 say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or other responsibilities; about 2/3 say they cannot afford a child; and 1/2 say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner.