The US population is still growing but on a downward trajectory and in 2020 grew by a mere 0.4%...less than 1% growth and falling. This obviously makes the case for immigrants coming into the US in order to bolster population growth and that eventually converts to the work force. So, that an economist would be interested in anything that subverts population growth should not be an issue.
Abortion itself is nothing new. The safety and efficacy have changed dramatically over time and what once was a deadly act by desperate would be mothers has become a clinical, hygienic readily available procedure. The question at hand under consideration by SCOTUS is not the morality of abortion but rather whether or not it is a Constitutional Right. Of course Roe vs Wade is a very hot topic and by proponents of Choice sacrosanct. The two camps Pro Life and Pro Choice may not be as at odds if the local States are left with the decision to allow or disallow based upon the voters in their respective states. States whose population favors free and available abortion can pass laws governing it in that way. And likewise, those States whose voters favor to disallow abortion can do so. Rights not secured and enumerated in the Constitution and Bill of Rights are left to the States and the People. So his in my view makes abortion a State issue. That the SCOTUS took up the subject in Roe vs Wade could be looked upon as an error in this light. Perhaps the current case will correct that in some reasoned way. I suspect that will be the case, but not without a lot of noise.
I am not versed in all the factors, but a quick study tells me that white country populations are not growing or not growing as fast as non-white countries. The so called sophisticated countries or developed nations have much higher rates than others with the US averaging 28 per 1000 woman. Not the highest (Russia) but still up there. Certainly there are situations where many would approve of an abortion and the Viability of the Fetus standard is commonly applied. Can the Fetus survive if removed from the womb? Medically, the number of weeks to Viability has changed coming down to what is now known to be about 22 weeks and Pro Lifer say 15 weeks, and hard core Pro Lifers say it doesn't matter because Life begins at inception. On a purely cellular level it does begin to grow at inception but it has not yet achieved the status of being a human being with Rights. A beating heart is another standard applied as is the ability to feel pain. I can't judge but I can have an opinion. I am Pro Life. So, in my State I can voice that opinion as a voter and perhaps influence my State to officially adopt that position in Law.
A country that makes one life less valuable than others is on a slippery slope. Margaret Sanger who is largely credited as the originator of Planned Parenthood and involved in Eugenics and Racism pertaining to birth rates etc., is a controversial figure. To understand the current abortion lobby one must study its history and that has been demonstrated to be tied to a racist view of population growth. It strikes me and others odd that the majority of Planned Parenthood facilities are found within a short walks of predominantly Black neighborhoods.
See https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2021/02/systemic-racism-at-planned-parenthood for some info if interested.
I can't say that this is proof positive that the black and Hispanic populations are being targeted for abortions due to racist reasons, but it can have that appearance. The US has a highly charged racist history with Slavery and it seems more likely than not that aborting babies of color would survive in the US as a quiet, seemingly sympathetic control. The Nazis were supporters of Eugenics. That is a known fact and it not only went to improving the Master Race but eliminating inferiors. It's pretty ugly stuff and killed millions in application. Are we doing similar? I doubt we have gone that way yet but left unchecked, there are those that would take it to extremes and devaluing any life and allowing it to be eliminated is a first step.
We need population growth for economic growth. I realize that there are arguments against a growing population due to environmental and resource concerns. But taking the telescopic long range viewpoint, we'll be exporting to other planets some day so we need to have people. Plus in that growth will be those one in a million minds who find and create incredibly smart solutions to all manner of problems. Abortion is not a single source for slowing or decreasing population growth but it can come with a mindset that fits the bill for social controls of population and its racial makeup.
I favor letting the States and their populations make the choice and set it in their laws. I would be surprised if these laws would be draconian and not accommodate some special circumstances, plus abortion travel to States allowing it would be reasonably available and likely be supported by groups in that camp. I say let the population grow, adopt a social contract with the unborn that their life is no less valuable than the 20, 30, 40, 50 year old folks who are enjoying their lives. Another middle ground is to strike a deal that for every baby aborted, one living abortion supporter be eliminated. Now that's obviously not a good idea, but you get my point I'm sure.
I hope the SCOTUS gets it right and returns this hot subject to the States and the People where it rightfully resides.
Best,
Donn Marier
DM-Your Own CFO