Empty Chairs and Empty Tables

In my participation in the Culture War in the U.S., I like to harp on the total number of abortions that have been performed since the Roe vs Wade decision by the United States Supreme Court, which comes to a very heavily rounded 50 million. Some find that number incredulous, and I appreciate that. They doubt my source, of course, but the source is actually Guttmacher.org…a pro-abortion activist website.

Photo by Mark McCammon on Pexels.com

Many folks find the number shocking, and for very good reason. If you regard (as science does) an unborn child as human, and try to picture in any way such a large number of dead, 50M becomes unimaginably horrific. Therefore, rather than illustrate this stain on the soul of our nation with such gruesome imagery, I’ve devised a much homier metaphor that I call “The Dinner Table”. Seated at this table are five or six people representing the current population of the U.S., with one additional…empty…chair representing those who’ve been aborted. Yes, that’s very roughly where 50,000,000 dead fit into the grand scheme of things.

Yesterday, I shared this metaphor, using the 6:1 ratio, in a Tweet with some folks on the subject, in a conversation thread started by Ben Shaprio. I got an interesting argument back from an abortion supporter, who apparently happens to work in the healthcare industry in some capacity. His remark surprised me a little, since pro-choicers very rarely ever come up with any new justifications for the slaughter of the pre-born and prefer to just continue to rehash all the tired old ones, in willful ignorance of the fifty years of progress in our culture and medical technology since 1973. Rob’s point was actually interesting…insignificant, but still interesting…

I had actually already seen those numbers a couple of years ago, so I told him that they were “miniscule” hoping he’d know the numbers already. Apparently he didn’t. Rob no-doubt does already know that the “Dangerous Pregnancies” to which he referred has been rehashed so many times by both sides that it’s not worth wasting my time researching it. Everyone, including Rob, should already know that statistically the lion’s share of abortions are “elective”, meaning that they are performed as a means of birth control and that abortions are not risk-free either. Those stats are straight forward and very easily Goggled by anyone, so I’m not going to waste my time on that silly part of his Tweet. However, the pre-toddler survival angle intrigued me.

You know what, I really don’t blame the pro-abortion folks for wanting to chisel away at that 50 Million number. Frankly, I would too if my position were so indefensibly lop-sided. The fact that he Guttmacher Institute actually brags about it, advocating such a disgustingly high number of human deaths, even further illustrates just how morally bankrupt the pro-abortion lobby, together with its cheer-leaders like Cid and Rob in the Tweet above, actually are.

Photo by Andrea Piacquadio on Pexels.com

My apologies in advance to those who have experienced a child death in their family. Breaking down their heartbreak into cold numbers, and claiming that those numbers are “miniscule”, appears to reflect a cold-heartedness on my part. Every child death is significant…especially to the families of those experiencing them. My family has experienced it too, and nothing in what I’m posting here today is intended in any way to make light of that suffering.

Anyway, I said that I’d provide numbers and sources displaying the hypothetical number of aborted fetuses that “had congenital conditions or defects that would make them not survive long enough to be toddlers” and its impact on the Dinner Table metaphor. So, last night I built a table combining data on abortion numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) with their numbers on infant deaths between 1995 and 2018. I should note that the CDC often reports abortion numbers that are lower than the abortion numbers reported by the Guttmacher Institute on which I base my Dinner Table metaphor. I don’t have an explanation for the difference in those numbers, so I’ll just use the ones reported by the CDC in this comparison. Guttmacher.org doesn’t seem to care enough about infant deaths to provide numbers on that.

I posted a summary on Twitter last night, but the data and sources are too large for Tweets so I told the Twitter thread that I’d blog them. Also, I could not find detailed CDC infant death statistics for the period between 1973 and 1995, but it trends downward fairly smoothly with medical advancements, so you can trend that backwards if you like. The abortion data goes back a little bit further, but I have not included abortion stats for the years that lack the infant death numbers. However, they average more than 1.2M abortions per year for at least part of the period between 1973 and 1995, at least according to the CDC.

I should also note that the Twitter results that I posted last night were wrong, and when I looked at the data with a fresh eye this morning I found the error and corrected it here. In my haste and ignorance of the medical terms I had totaled the “Infant”, “Neonatal”, and “Post Neonatal” columns together, not seeing at the time that “Infant” is actually a sum of the other two.

Here are the simplified, corrected results with sources…

Abortion numbers from year to year vs Infant deathsLive birth and Infant death data source:https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr69/NVSR-69-7-508.pdf
YearAbortionsInfant DeathsLive BirthsAbortion RateInfant Death RateDifferenceAbortion Statistics Data Source
2017621,53122,3413,855,50016.12%0.58%15.54%Trend estimate (missing data)

Sorry, no graphs. I haven’t yet figured out how to copy Google Sheets graphs into anything else. If I figure it out at some later date maybe I’ll add it to this post, but do I really need to? Just go to the metaphorical Dinner Table and use a saw to cut away a four-inch square chunk of wood off of the backrest of the empty chair to account for the aborted fetuses who @robAltman14 in the above Tweet seems to think would have died anyway. Actually, you don’t even need to do that, because the 50 Million abortions that the metaphor is based on is not a 5 with seven zeros behind it…it is very heavily rounded down, way past that measly .65%.

Photo by Anna Shvets on Pexels.com

Again, 50M abortions in 50 years is an embarrassing number, and if abortion advocates have difficulty defending it, then that’s a “them” problem. Thankfully, there’s a lot of good news in this data as well, since medical technology and public awareness of the horrid practice of abortion seem to be sending both infant deaths and prenatal killings spiraling steeply downward. Not so encouraging however is the live birthrate in the U.S., which appears to have peeked in 2007 and since then has been trending down-hill. The Guttmacher Institute says that the reduced pregnancy rate is due to the increased use of contraceptives.

I’ll leave it to you to decide how long a modern technological society such as ours can continue to support itself on a declining birthrate.

~ by Bill Housley on September 4, 2021.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: