<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Is there (pro)life after the Obama victory?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://wthrockmorton.com/2008/11/06/is-there-prolife-after-the-obama-victory/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2008/11/06/is-there-prolife-after-the-obama-victory/</link>
	<description>A [retired] college psychology professor&#039;s observations about public policy, mental health, sexual identity, and religious issues</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 05:03:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Lynn David		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2008/11/06/is-there-prolife-after-the-obama-victory/#comment-20365</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lynn David]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 05:03:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=2237#comment-20365</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;b&gt;Brian: &lt;/b&gt;   For what it’s worth, the abortion rate decreased slightly faster under Clinton than it did under Bush&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Interesting how everything the neoCons want actually comes about under Democrats and not Republicans.  Deficit spending was brought under control while Clinton was in office.   It took off under Reagan and GHW Bush and again almost catastrophically under GW Bush.
For &lt;strong&gt;Warren:  &lt;/strong&gt; I find it interesting on a quick read of FOCA that one of its provisions says that the government will not interfere with abortions completed before the time of fetal viability.   So I guess you&#039;re free to limit abortion in the third trimester (as long as you have a provision for the life of the mother).
ProLife will always exist and be expressed.   Under Obama choice will always allow a woman to choose a proLife stance or not to do so.   Are you saying that women don&#039;t have enough wherewithall to make up there own minds without the government getting involved to stop them from getting an abortion?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><b>Brian: </b>   For what it’s worth, the abortion rate decreased slightly faster under Clinton than it did under Bush</p></blockquote>
<p>Interesting how everything the neoCons want actually comes about under Democrats and not Republicans.  Deficit spending was brought under control while Clinton was in office.   It took off under Reagan and GHW Bush and again almost catastrophically under GW Bush.<br />
For <strong>Warren:  </strong> I find it interesting on a quick read of FOCA that one of its provisions says that the government will not interfere with abortions completed before the time of fetal viability.   So I guess you&#8217;re free to limit abortion in the third trimester (as long as you have a provision for the life of the mother).<br />
ProLife will always exist and be expressed.   Under Obama choice will always allow a woman to choose a proLife stance or not to do so.   Are you saying that women don&#8217;t have enough wherewithall to make up there own minds without the government getting involved to stop them from getting an abortion?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Brian		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2008/11/06/is-there-prolife-after-the-obama-victory/#comment-20364</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brian]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 03:45:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=2237#comment-20364</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Jayhuck, I think you&#039;re correct. The statistics I have looked at indicate that the abortion rate has been in a steady decline since at least the early 90&#039;s where abortion rate is defined as the number of abortions per 1000 women. I&#039;m pretty sure the absolute number has also been decreasing over the past 2 decades or so. For what it&#039;s worth, the abortion rate decreased slightly faster under Clinton than it did under Bush, so there&#039;s at least a little cause to hope that a liberal in office may, in fact, help reduce the abortion rate even further.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jayhuck, I think you&#8217;re correct. The statistics I have looked at indicate that the abortion rate has been in a steady decline since at least the early 90&#8217;s where abortion rate is defined as the number of abortions per 1000 women. I&#8217;m pretty sure the absolute number has also been decreasing over the past 2 decades or so. For what it&#8217;s worth, the abortion rate decreased slightly faster under Clinton than it did under Bush, so there&#8217;s at least a little cause to hope that a liberal in office may, in fact, help reduce the abortion rate even further.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: jayhuck		</title>
		<link>https://wthrockmorton.com/2008/11/06/is-there-prolife-after-the-obama-victory/#comment-20363</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jayhuck]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 01:31:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=2237#comment-20363</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[&quot;Today the number of abortions—1.2 million in 2005—is nearly the same as in 1976, according to the Guttmacher Institute.&quot;
If this is true, is the number adjusted for population changes? The fact that abortions have not gone up over the last 30 years when the idea today seems to be so much more palatable should give us a little hope.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Today the number of abortions—1.2 million in 2005—is nearly the same as in 1976, according to the Guttmacher Institute.&#8221;<br />
If this is true, is the number adjusted for population changes? The fact that abortions have not gone up over the last 30 years when the idea today seems to be so much more palatable should give us a little hope.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
