According to the Heritage Foundation's (LOL) "digital-first, multimedia news platform," The Daily Signal, if the Supreme Court crams gay-marriage down our throats, as it is totally gonna do in June, that will make even more women do abortions. FACT. Gene Schaerr, a lawyer and former law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia, has all the numbers and charts, and also the Netherlands, to prove it:
In a nutshell: A reduction in the opposite-sex marriage rate means an increase in the percentage of women who are unmarried and who, according to all available data, have much higher abortion rates than married women. And based on past experience, institutionalizing same-sex marriage poses an enormous risk of reduced opposite-sex marriage rates.
Whoa, our heads are spinning from that deductive reasoning. But Schaerr has looked at this stuff, lawyer style, and when you look at it the way he does (drunk, we think?), it is just so obvious. See, in the Netherlands, and in Spain (there is a graph, you cannot argue with a graph), fewer women got married after those nations adopted "genderless marriage."
It is a terrific graph, in that it demonstrates that "3.2" is like 10 percent of "5," and also "random numbers." So, clearly, once women were allowed the right to marry a man or a woman, they decided not to marry anyone and instead get knocked up and then kill their babies, because women are fickle like that.
Is there a graph that shows the correlation between the rise of lesbian marriages leading to the rise of fewer marriages leading to the rise of abortion rates? No. But in the United States, "married women do not abort children at the same rates as cohabitating women or women living singly." And look! Math!
Calculating the total number of abortions over an unmarried woman’s childbearing years by averaging this rate over her assumed 30-year fertility period, unmarried women would average 0.87 abortions over their lifetimes, while married women would average 0.18 abortions.
It's math, don't you see? MATH! And dividing leaves by applesauce gives you 5.2.
Accordingly, with 1.275 million additional women never getting married, nearly 900,000 more children of the next generation would be aborted as a result of their mothers never marrying. This is equal to the entire population of the cities of Sacramento and Atlanta combined.
Don't you see? The Venn Diagram of women who would be able to exercise their constitutional right to marry each other, and women who fuck men and end up with unwanted pregnancies, is actually a perfect circle. And that is why the Supreme Court must not permit gaysexuals to do that.
In short, forcing states to convert the traditional gendered marriage institution into a genderless institution will very likely reduce man-woman marriages by undermining some of the norms that encourage heterosexual couples to marry, which will in turn increase the number of unmarried women and, hence, the number of children aborted.
Hence! Thereon! Ergo! WORDS! It is indisputable! More marriage means less marriage, and that causes straight women to murder their unborned children. Don't even try to argue with that infallible logic. So please, pretty please, Supreme Court, don't do that to America. Don't "subject a states’ citizens to that risk, against their will." Save the straight marriages from single-lady abortions, or the babies from the gay weddings, or the gay whales, we are not sure what this gentleman is on about really. Before it's too late.
