Baldies' Blog began originally in the UK by a 26 year old journalist with a blood cancer on a mission to inform the world about bone marrow donation.

He has since died, and I took on the cause of making cancer care more transparent for everybody.

Cancer is a disease that will touch everybody through diagnosis or affiliation: 1 in 2 men will be diagnosed and 1 in 3 woman will hear those words, "You Have Cancer."

I invite you to read how I feel along my journey and
how I am continuing to live a full life alongside my Hodgkin's lymphoma, with me controlling my cancer, not my cancer controlling me.

I hope that "Baldies' Blog" will prepare you to handle whatever life sends you, but especially if it's the message, "You Have Cancer."

Get a playlist! Standalone player Get Ringtones

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

X is Losing PART II

How about a round of applause for our current president who understands the theory of preventive measures?!
Yes, Obama knows what I was talking about when I said certain events and behaviors are predictors of future lifestyles and personalities.
I’ll tell you how I know.
First, like usual, I have a contingency plan for Xander. I have one for the whole family actually. The world throws a punch, and I’ve ducked it again.
World 10, Hillary 11. The world should just declare me WINNER now and throw in the towel, because this boxing match can go on FOREVER with life swinging and me ducking.
Well, sometimes I take a hit and fall, but just when I think it has me, I play dirty and sweep its ankles.
I have an old friend helping me out. He’s called himself the “magic maker.” I call him my “super manny.”
I’ll tell you about him later.
For now, let me tell you about Obama, and how I know he understands my theory.
The stimulus package went through rounds and rounds of cuts before it was approved.
The first thing to go was $250,000 to provide free birth control to qualifying woman or families.
Can you understand why this measure would be in a “STIMULUS PACKAGE” in the first place?
Whether you are adamantly pro or con for abortion is not the issue.
The issue is criminal behavior and poverty are strongly linked to the rearing in single parent, young, uneducated, or poor households.
Let me give you an example.
In 1966 Nicolae Ceausescu made abortion illegal in Romania. Previously, Raomania had one of the most liberal policies on this issue in the world.
All contraception and sex education were banned, and if a woman failed to reproduce, she was forced to pay a “celibacy tax.”
Within a year, the Romanian birth rate doubled.
In Dec. 1989, thousands of people, mostly teenagers and college students, went to the streets to protest his corrosive regimen, most were age 13-20 who spread the idea not to fear the government.
If you do the math 1989-1966, the oldest children borne of the abortion ban were 23 years old and younger.
Of all the communist leaders overthrown in the years during the fall of the Soviet union, only Nicolae died a violent death, mostly at the hands of the youth of Romania, who might never have been born without his abortion ban.

I'm not writing a pro-abortion article. I'm talking about choice, personal choice.
If you look at the reverse social cycle, you may think about the sudden decline in crime seen in the 1990s within the United States.
Childhood poverty and a single-parent household are among the strongest predictors of a criminal future in a child.
Another study has shown that maternal education may be the single most important contributing factor to a child’s likelihood of becoming a criminal.
Roe v. Wade, which gave American woman the right to choose, occurred in 1973. In the first year after Roe v. Wade, 750,000 woman had abortions. The number has platued since then at an alarming rate of 1.6 million pregnant woman aborting fetuses yearly.
I suspect this number is grossly underestimated. In the three months while I was visibly pregnant, I had five friends and acquaintances come to me for guidance after realizing an umplanned pregnancy.
Of the five young woman all chose to abort due to factors such as an abusive lover, an unstable economic situation, and a lack of education. All felt haunted by their “ghost baby” and maybe still are.
However, the steep decline in criminal activity also correlates with the timing of Roe v. Wade. The decline started about 1993, 20 years after the ruling, about when the children who may have been born at the most risk would be hitting their criminal prime.
When adjusted for the five states that legalized abortion earlier, in the years before the fall of crime in the other states (1988-1994), these states saw a reduction in crime by 13% compared to other states, and a reduction of 23% in homicides.
Australia and Canada have established a similar link between abortion and crime.
Now, do you understand why people may want access to free birth control in the time of a recession to help stimulate the economy?
However, from an economist’s mind and algorithm, abortion as a mechanism to defend against crime is terribly inefficient when taking into account the possible value of that child’s life and the repercussions the mother (and father) may experience.
However, it is clear that when given the opportunity to choose, mother’s generally make the right decision regarding the possible future of her child in her present circumstances.

Is there a way to stop the abortion cycle?

I do think some free birthcontrol to some key people would ease it up.
For more information regarding this subject, see Freakanomics by Leavitt and Dubner, and Bouza “The Police Mystique. "