religious wrong site says abortions down under W; left is lying

[bobbieinok]

http://www.religionjournal.com/showarticle.asp?id=2534

Abortion Rates Down Under Bush Administration

(LifeSiteNews.com) The Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI) has published a new report which demonstrates that, contrary to several claims made in the last year, abortion rates in the United States have continued their decline under the Bush administration.

The AGI was founded in honor of a former Planned Parenthood president and therefore has no personal interest in proving Bush's pro-life policies to be successful.

Pro-abortion or anti-Bush politicians and activists have made a practice over the last several years of criticizing Bush's pro-life stance by 'demonstrating' that his pro-life policies have backfired. They claim that rather than continuing the downward trend of the last two decades, Bush's policies have caused the abortion rates to increase.

In the most audacious incident yet of this tactic, Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean, in an appearance a few days ago on NBC's Meet the Press, said "You know that abortions have gone up 25 percent since George Bush was President?" John Kerry and Hilary Clinton, among others, have stated figures to the same effect.

Were it true, anything even approaching a 25% increase would be a catastrophic blow to Bush's policies, especially taking into account the steady downward trend in abortion rates since 1980. However, the AGI's analysis of the abortion data available for the 43 most reliable states proves that this statistic is thoroughly, even maliciously, false.

more....

[ET Awful]

1. So an institute which no one has ever heard of creates a report

which contradicts information from numerous sources, and we're expected to believe them?

Excuse me while I laugh loudly :rofl:

[Gormy Cuss]

8. Alan Guttmacher Institute is well known by researchers

Although the study results are being used selectively by a rightwing journal, AGI is not a right wing pseudo think tank. As others have posted, the study's authors are very clear of the potential for the findings to be wrong because the methodology was so different for the estimation in Bush years.

Methodology reports are the first section to check when reviewing study findings that are unexpected. Good researchers are honest about the limitations of the data. The easiest way to identify an intentionally biased study is the lack of a methodology disclosure.

[ET Awful]

9. I understand and stand corrected. n/t

[Wickerman]

2. As usual the GOP's wholly owned subsidiary, Religion Journal, is whacked

The original source, sans interpretation by whackos, is a much better read:

http://www.agi-usa.org/media/nr/2005/05/19/index.html

--snip--

“It takes time for political decisions to be reflected in the statistical data, so it is too soon to tell what the impact of Bush administration policies will be on U.S. abortion rates,” says Sharon Camp, president and CEO of the Guttmacher Institute. “We will be keeping a watchful eye on what our policymakers do both to help and to hinder women’s efforts to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and how that affects abortion rates going forward.”

Changes in the abortion rate are difficult to interpret without a broader context. Abortion may decline because fewer women are faced with unintended pregnancies, or because fewer women who accidentally become pregnant end their pregnancies by abortion. The most recent estimates of unintended pregnancy rates are for the year 1994; the Guttmacher Institute is currently updating these estimates to 2002, which will shed some light on the immediate causes of abortion declines.

Because these abortion estimates are not based on a comprehensive census, they are subject to some limitations and should be considered provisional.

note: this summary links ot the full report.

[NMDemDist2]

6. thanks for the clarification n/t

[FreedomAngel82]

7. How can it be too soon?

Oh good grief, he's been in office now for half of his fifth year! According to plannedparenthood.com the number two reason why women have abortion's is because lack of income and the economy. If Bush is sending jobs over seas and people are losing their jobs everyday and having to resort to McDonalds or WalMart I doubt that's enough money to take care of a baby. Especially if you are a single person who gets pregnant. This is the most ridiculous and desperate thing I've read lately.

[Wickerman]

10. Reading the report it says that they need to make updates to census

estimates. I don't believe 2004 estimates are available in the breakdowns they requie yet.

Going to the original source is much more revealing than reading it through the prism of the RW hacks.

[fasttense]

3. Yeah, right, and if the facts don't fit what repukes want to believe

they create their own lies, I mean "reality".

[NMDemDist2]

4. the last line says it all, is not more recent data available?

Between 2001 and 2002 the AGI estimates a decrease of .9% in the abortion rate.

[Wickerman]

5. see my post #2

The original source data is much better and the article itself is pretty well done. The authors encourage this study to be seen as provisional until the more reliable census numbers become available.