Alfred Taubman, a real estate developer and one of the 400 richest Americans, has donated $1.4 million dollars to the Michigan Citizens for Stem Cell Research and Cures.
Taubman whose previous writings in favor of embryonic stem cell research in the Detroit News left one wondering why this rich and successful man would support something he is so ignorant about has some even more outlandish claims today.
"I've known people who I've seen die," Taubman said.
"Had embryonic stem cell research been around, I believe they'd be alive today."
Are pro-choice bloggers really so ignorant about when and how implantation occurs that they think "fertilized eggs" can implant? Or do they just really like to use a dehumanizing term they know is misleading? Is it really that tough to use the term "embryo?"
Jeff Fecke continues to show that some pro-choice bloggers need to learn how to do basic research. He claims the WHO estimate of estimates reports "main finding was simple: where abortion is legal and accessible, it is rare. Where it is illegal, it is more common."
This is such an odd claim considering the report by pro-choice researchers based largely on the estimates of estimates by pro-choice researchers says,
"The abortion ratio (the number of abortions for every 100 livebirths) was about 31 worldwide in 2003 (table 3). Safe and unsafe abortion ratios were similar to each other (16 and 15, respectively). The abortion ratios in developing countries tended to be lower than those in developed countries, even though the rates were comparable or higher in developing countries. Largely because birth rate were higher in developing countries."Fecke continues,
The highest rates were in the developing countries in Latin America and Africa, where contraception is often difficult to come by and abortion is often outlawed.Except for the fact when the reports breaks down abortion rates per region it has Eastern Europe with the highest abortion rate at 44. The next highest are Eastern Africa and Souteastern Asia with 39.
Fecke either 1.) didn't read the study (that'd be my guess) and just read some news stories or pro-choice blogs on it and then came up with his own incredibly inaccurate summary or 2.) read the study and is lying about it to support his pro-choice position.