Apparently, We can Only Reproduce in a Few States

Kevin Drum featured this chart on "reproductive rights" by state.


Since I am pretty sure most states have an unfettered right to actually reproduce, I presume the issue at hand here is the right not to reproduce using certain tools such as abortion (and certainly this is confirmed when one digs into the criteria behind these rankings).

I would like to congratulate the Left on acknowledging that any right to reproduce must include the right not to reproduce.   In fact, since the scores here are driven entirely by the right not to reproduce, I would infer that Drum and the Left sees the right not to reproduce as absolutely critical to reproductive rights.

Which leads me to the following question:  Would the same folks agree that a right of association implies a right not to associate?  Because recent experience (e.g. with gay rights groups hounding bakers into bankruptcy because they would not make a wedding cake for a gay wedding) sure seems to imply the Left has a different attitude towards association rights.

  • joe

    What about the reproductive rights of the poor soul he advocates terminating via abortion.

  • davesmith001

    I see a huge difference between an F and A student in my classes. Is there really that much difference between LA and OR?

  • Tom Lindmark

    Feel like I just dropped through Alice's rabbit hole after reading your post.

  • mesocyclone

    "Reproductive Rights" tends to mean the "right" to abort a child at any point in a pregnancy. A woman can abort an 8-month gestation because she is mad at her husband.

    That is not a "right." It is murder. But the "reproductive rights" people are absolutists, and if a state doesn't condone murder right up until birth, it is not offering "reproductive rights."

    This is remarkable Newspeak. Reproductive rights do not mean termination the consequences of reproduction. Call it what you want, except "reproductive rights." Personally, I call it state sanctioned murder.

  • Tom Murin

    "Gun Violence" is the new "Reproductive Rights." These terms are used for a reason. Who would be against them? Of course, when you scratch the surface you realize that they mean something different. The San Bernardino terrorists are included in the count as victims of gun violence since they were shot by police. Suicides are included too. Reproductive Rights means that your 16 year old daughter can get an abortion without parental consent - even though it is required for any other medical procedure. People don't support the issues that spawned these anodyne terms when they know what they really mean.

  • Craig Loehle

    Speaking of the cake bakers, would this mean that the New York Times should be forced to accept ads from racists or making fun of their favorite thing?

  • David in Michigan

    The chart is a product of "The Population Institute", an NGO whose mission is to build support for .... policies and programs by educating policymakers, policy administrators, the media, and the general public about:

    1. .......

    2. The adverse impacts of overpopulation on the environment, scarce natural resources, biodiversity, and efforts to eliminate hunger and severe poverty in developing countries;

    3. ......

    So it would seem that their primary reason for being is "population control" (the organization was started in the 70s concurrent with "The Population Bomb" and "Models of Doom"). The rest of the mission statement is just progressive lip service to this single issue.

    Then there is this bit of double talk:

    "In 1980, given the magnitude of the population problem in DEVELOPING NATIONS, the board of directors voted to dedicate the Institute's resources and efforts entirely to the international population issues.

    Today, the Institute strives to educate INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES about the consequences of rapid population growth on global resources and the environment, as well as to increase support and responsive help for regions needing assistance." (Capitols are mine).

    Lobbyists and lawyers doing what they do best .....lobby politicians in first world countries for money to throw at problems in 3rd world countries. You can feel proud without really doing anything constructive.

    So the chart ..... it's a good prop for a lobbyist because it's simple and the "Title" is what is important..... because otherwise you would have to examine the basis of the chart in detail and that's too much work.