Whenever the topic of baby-ending comes up, I try to put forward a logical argument. One of the premises will always be “the unborn are living and have human DNA”. And for that, I turn to the science of embryology. Basically, I always want to support my case in discussions about social issues with scientific facts. So, in this post, we can add a new study to your quiver for discussing baby-ending.

Here’s the article about the new study, from The Federalist:

In the “largest known study of the abortion pill,” Ethics and Public Policy Center President Ryan Anderson and Director of Data Analysis Jamie Bryan Hall used purchased Medicaid, TRICARE, Medicare, Department of Veterans Affairs, and private medical insurance claim data to determine that 865,727 mifepristone abortion prescriptions for 692,873 women were handed out between 2017 and 2023.

Approximately 10.9 percent of those claims, or 94,605 chemical abortions, involved potentially life-threatening “serious adverse events” such as emergency room visits, hemorrhage, sepsis, infection, and/or follow-up surgeries for the women who had downed the abortion drug within the last 45 days.

That rate, which researchers adjusted to reflect “that some women suffer from adverse events in multiple categories,” is 22 times the FDA’s <0.5 percent estimation printed on the Mifeprex label. The researchers also suggest that the 45-day timeframe they used is “conservative, as some adverse events may present later (and studies relied on by the FDA used a timeframe as long as 72 days).”

Notice how large the study is, this is not like those LGBT parenting studies of like 100 self-selected cases. Also, I like that they use insurance claims, which are hard facts. Some groups who support the pill use much smaller studies to reach opposite conclusions. But their controlled clinical trials are much smaller than this new study.

What’s the point of bringing up this study? Well, people need to be able to calculate the risks of their actions using real numbers. It’s fashionable today to tell young women “follow your heart” and then blame everyone else when that doesn’t “work out” for them. But a much better approach is to let people decide based on facts. It might even cause more women to choose not to have reckless sex at all.

Some women are taking these extreme measures by using telehealth or mail ordering to get this drug. But given these findings, it seems like it would be better for them to see a real healthcare provider to get the facts. And certainly the FDA should be more accurate about the risks.

You might remember that there was a famous case of this in the news recently. Although the secular left tried to blame the death of Amber Nicole Thurman on pro-life laws, she actually died from complications after taking mifepristone and misoprostol to end her pregnancy. What she needed to fix those complications was a non-abortive D&C. The secular left claimed that was illegal in Georgia, but it actually is legal, because it’s not an abortion. Still, these drugs really does affect some women negatively, which is the point.

The Federalist article suggests these fixes to make the situation better:

Changes like reinstating multiple in-person office visits, physician-only prescription, ultrasounds to confirm the gestational stage and rule out ectopic pregnancy, and mandated reporting of complications, the study suggests, could spare suffering women severe and even fatal fallout from the pill.

If you know anyone who is considering this drug, it might be worth pointing them to this study. These days, I see a lot of women having reckless recreational sex with men who have no intention of commiting to them. In fact, many of these women don’t want commitment first. But there are risks to having sex like this. Sometimes, it can cause serious consequences. I think it would be much better if we coached women to choose better men, and to get married first. Then they wouldn’t have to deal with unwanted pregnancies alone – there would be a husband there to help.

Well, I like to follow the policies of other countries, like Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand. It’s important for me to see what the secular left is doing in countries that are a little further along with their socialism. On Monday, Canada is going to go to the polls to vote on their federal government. Will they give the Trudeau Liberal party a fourth term in office?

Here’s the latest poll reported in the Ottawa Sun:

The Liberals were in the lead with all age cohorts except for 35 to 54 year olds, where the Conservatives led by a 44 to 38 margin.

Eight in 10 respondents said their choice was final or they’d already voted at the advance polls.

Forty per cent said that Carney would make the best prime minister of any party leader, giving him a nine-point edge over Poilievre.

Carney beat Poilievre across all age groups, eclipsing him by 20 points among respondents 55 and older.

The current average home price in Canada is about $700,000 CAD, which is about $520,000 USD. Young people can’t afford it, but old people largely don’t care. They just want to keep the good times rolling for themselves, and pass the bill onto other people’s children.
You might be wondering why this happened, and the answer is that Donald Trump had a lot to do with it. The tariffs and talk of “51st state” did a lot to take away the Conservative supermajority that was being predicted by polls prior to his comments.

Here’s what the Liberal party did over the last 10 years, courtesy of the Fraser Institute:

After first being elected in 2015, Trudeau promised to balance the budget by 2019—then ran nine consecutive deficits including an astonishing $61.9 billion deficit for the 2023/24 fiscal year, the largest deficit of any year outside of COVID.

From 2020 to 2023, the government racked up the four highest years of total federal debt per person (inflation-adjusted) in Canadian history. Compared to 2014/15 (the last full year under Prime Minister Harper), federal debt per person had increased by $14,127 (as of 2023/24).

Mark Carney, the new Liberal party leader, will be worse than Trudeau – his own budget shows why:

Today, Carney released the Liberal Party’s “fiscal and costing plan.” Carney’s plan projects the debt to increase consistently.
Here is the breakdown of Carney’s annual budget deficits:

• 2025-26: $62 billion
• 2026-27: $60 billion
• 2027-28: $55 billion
• 2028-29: $48 billion

Over the next four years, Carney plans to add an extra $225 billion to the debt. For comparison, the Trudeau government planned on increasing the debt by $131 billion over those years, according to the most recent Fall Economic Statement.

So how are things going up north?

Well, this article from the Toronto Sun, about the most populous province of Ontario, caught my eye. It mentions “OHIP”, the Ontario Health Insurance Plan, which is responsible for Ontario’s system of government-run health care.

It says:

Behold your tax dollars at work. OHIP has been ordered, for the third time, to pay for an out-of-country surgery for an Ontario trans, nonbinary patient who wants to keep the P while she gets the V.

[…]Called penile-preserving vaginoplasty, the procedure creates a fully functional vagina without surgically removing the penis.

According to the decision, K.S., who’s sex assigned at birth was male, is female dominant and “suffered physical, mental, and economic hardships to transition her gender expression to align with her gender identity.”

In May 2022, her doctor submitted the required request for prior funding approval to OHIP for a vaginoplasty — but without the usually accompanying removal of her penis. “(K.S.) identifies as transfeminine but not completely on the ‘feminine’ end of the spectrum and for this reason it’s important for her to have a vagina while maintaining her penis,” the doctor explained.

Since that wasn’t offered anywhere in Ontario, K.S. was asking for OHIP to fund the novel “bottom surgery” at the Crane Center for Transgender Surgery in Austin, Texas.

So, Ontario taxpayers will be footing the bill for an out-of-country transgender surgery, paid for in U.S. Dollars.

The author of the article notes:

“K.S. is pleased with the Court of Appeal’s decision, which is now the third unanimous ruling confirming that her gender affirming surgery is covered under Ontario’s Health Insurance Act and its regulations,” her lawyer John McIntyre wrote in an email to the Toronto Sun.

According to the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, an intervenor in the case, “the Court of Appeal for Ontario is a victory for equitable and non-discriminatory healthcare funding for trans, non-binary and gender diverse people in Ontario.”
OHIP was also ordered to pay K.S.’s legal costs of $23,500 — on top of the $20,000 in costs they had to pay for their appeal to the Divisional Court.

But really, that’s out of our pockets, of course, including the thousands of (American) dollars it will cost for this out-of-country niche and experimental surgery.

The Monday election was a chance to stop the runaway deficits and the DOUBLING of the national debt, under Trudeau. But as you see, as long as there is money to steal, and virtue to signal, Canada is going to continue down the road to serfdom. We should learn from their mistakes.

Statistics show that men are choosing to disengage from dating and marriage. There are many reasons for this. I can name a dozen. One of the reasons is “paternity fraud”. Paternity claims occur when a woman has a child, and then tries to collect child support from a man by claiming that he is the father. Sometimes, the man she identifies as the father is not the actual father. This is “paternity fraud”.

Before I get started on paternity fraud, let me explain how child support works today, from this article in USA Today:

The most well-known case was of a Kansas boy who, at age 13, impregnated his 17-year-old baby-sitter. Under Kansas law, a child under the age of 15 is legally unable to consent to sex. The Kansas Supreme Court in 1993 ruled that he was liable for child support.

California issued a similar state court ruling a few years later in the case of a 15-year-old boy who had sex with a 34-year-old neighbor. In that case, the woman had been convicted of statutory rape.

In both cases, it was the state social-services agency that pursued the case after the mother sought public assistance.

[…]In Arizona, the Department of Economic Security oversees child–support enforcement. Its written policy is not to exempt situations like Olivas’ from child-support responsibilities, unless the parent seeking child support has been found guilty of sexual assault with a minor or sexual assault.

[…]The state has more routes than the courts to acquire money from a parent. It can garnishee wages up to 50 percent of disposable income. It can take a tax refund. It can put a lien on a home or a vehicle. It can suspend driver’s licenses or revoke passports. And it can seize money out of bank accounts.

And another one from Fox 2 Detroit:

A Metro Detroit man cleared his name after Friend of the Court sent him a letter saying he had a baby with a woman he never met.

[…]Late last year, DeAngelo received a letter from Friend of the Court in Berrien County saying that he was the father of a baby girl.

“Said she’s a stripper from Detroit, we had a one-night stand at some hotel, and this is the story that was told to me,” DeAngelo said.

His wife first spotted the letter in the mail from Friend of the Court.

“Let’s just set the record, I trust my husband,” Tyahvia Smith said. “I know his character, man of integrity.”

While waiting for the child’s mother to take the baby for a DNA test, DeAngelo said the school where he teaches received an inquiry for possible garnishment in case the child was his.

“It made it something that is not being alleged, but now it’s something that’s being taken into action and no paternity has been established,” he said.

Finally, the woman had the DNA test done, and DeAngelo has since gotten a letter confirming he was not the father.

The request for money comes to the man’s employer first, the DNA test comes later, and only if the man fights the system to get it.

I show these cases, so that people will understand what men are facing from social services agencies and courts. Basically, in cases where a woman statutory rapes a man, she is still entitled to child support from the victim of the rape. One can imagine the uproar if the sexes were reversed. The laws are anti-male in many ways, this is just one example. Anti-male laws deter men from dating and marrying women.

Now let’s look at paternity fraud, another example of anti-male bias in the legal system.

Here’s a story about it from CBS News Detroit:

A Detroit man has been ordered to pay $30,000 in back child support for his ex-girlfriend’s child — even though he’s not the father.

Carnell Alexander brought his case to Wayne County Circuit Court with hopes for a fix. Instead, Judge Kathleen McCarthy told him Tuesday he waited too long to challenge the situation and “failed to take this matter seriously.”

Alexander said the paternity case started in the 1980s when the woman gave his name to a case worker so she could get assistance for her baby, who was born in 1987.

The woman agrees that Alexander wasn’t the father and a DNA test taken in 2013 backs that up. But that wasn’t enough to sway McCarthy, who ruled that despite the case being decades old, Alexander still has to pay.

Here’s another story of paternity fraud from NBC News Miami:

A man in North Florida is fighting the state after he was told to pay child support despite DNA tests proving that he was not the father.

Joseph Sinawa told NBC affiliate WTLV-TV that he signed the birth certificate because he did truly believe he was the father – adding that the mother of the child doesn’t want him to have to pay, but the state is forcing the issue.

“She told the judge she just wants this to be done and over with, and so do I,” he said from his home in St. Augustine.

Sinawa found out he was not the father after the DNA test was administered by a St. Johns County court following a custody question – but the state’s Department of Revenue appealed the decision because they say Sinawa has not properly attempted to disestablish paternity.

“At the time it had been taking $83 out of my paycheck, more than 1/3 of my pay,” he says. “When I thought I was the father I didn’t have a problem with it.”

Sinawa is currently representing himself in court cases due to financial issues and has filed the necessary paperwork, but no time table has been set and it is unknown if he will be refunded any of the money spent.

According to this study in  the peer-reviewed journal Epidemiology & Community Health, the median rate of paternity fraud across various studies is 3.7%:

Paternal discrepancy (PD) occurs when a child is identified as being biologically fathered by someone other than the man who believes he is the father. This paper examines published evidence on levels of PD and its public health consequences. Rates vary between studies from 0.8% to 30% (median 3.7%, n = 17).

Even men who are not at risk for paternity fraud understand the lesson of paternity fraud. The courts are anti-male, and men need to stay well clear of those courts. And that means minimizing exposure to those courts. And that means keeping to themselves, and tending to their own problems and pursuing their own goals.

Men are getting smarter now. Men understand that society does not have their interests at heart. Now men want to be left alone.