This article caught my eye on BBC:
"A rising proportion of abortions worldwide are putting women's health at risk, researchers say.
The World Health Organization study suggests global abortion rates are steady, at 28 per 1,000 women a year.
However, the proportion of the total carried out without trained clinical help rose from 44% in 1995 to 49% in 2008."
How many children is that worldwide?
I could have been apart of those statistics.
I particularly mean in the "aborted baby" column, but if not for the grace of God, perhaps I could have been one of those 28 out of 1,000 women globally who have chosen to have an abortion. Out of 7 billion people (how many are women?) -- that's a lot.
Interesting (can't remember the correct name,) "tag line," isn't it? A rising proportion of abortions worldwide are putting women's health at risk, researchers say.
But the point of their argument, "However, the proportion of the total carried out without trained clinical help rose from 44% in 1995 to 49% in 2008."
Meaning, if the number of abortions are rising globally, we must give them the opportunity to have better access to safer abortions.
(Why is the "however" used there? What message/tone does that imply? "Hooray for the rise in abortions, but so sad that almost half are being carried out without trained clinical help"?)
But is that the actual problem?
No.
Where is the real problem? -- the poison of sin, of course. But specifically?
Where are the men who have gotten these ladies (girls? -- particularly in the developing countries,) pregnant? Are they the ones (perhaps) forcibly taking these women to get an abortion? Are they pressuring them to get abortions, quickly and cheaply? Are the demands of society and their professions putting this pressure on them?
Where are the articles written on these issues? (I know they are out there.)
The article further explained that the percentage of abortions have declined in the States (western world??) and have risen in the developing countries (India in particular??).
This article is presented in an interesting angle.
They seem to be concerned for the lives of these women, but are they searching to find the root of the issue? Are they widely publicizing those articles? (Again, I know they are out there. I just find this to be an interesting angle. One way to promote abortions: pity the poor, developing countries who don't have access to clinically trained doctors.)
Go directly to the article on the BBC.