Thanks to Leta Finch for this article from The Economist.
Family planning and birth control is one of many areas where America has gotten itself wrapped up in a decades-long hysterical moralistic argument over issues whose solutions ought to be obvious to any mature adult. It’s rather silly that we’re still arguing over problems that were really settled by about 1977, but there you are. Anyway, Andrew Sullivan argued the other day that since abortion has dramatically curtailed the number of adoptions, If the pro-life movement dedicated its every moment not to criminalizing abortion but to expanding adoption opportunities, it would win many more converts.
Megan McArdle sensibly responds that this doesn’t really make any sense. Demand for adoptible American babies vastly exceeds supply precisely because abortion has cut down the supply; there’s no shortage of opportunities for pregnant mothers who want to give up their babies. However, she then sweeps birth control into her argument in a fashion that’s very far wide of the mark.
For full article, visit:
Current World Population
Net Growth During Your Visit