I may not be 100% correct. Please correct me if I am wrong.
I think most social-economic impact of birth is like the economic impact of immigration. Birth is just immigration from a different border.
1. Eugenic is like vetted immigration. Most hate the former but support the latter.
2. Free reproductive right is like unvetted immigration. I may settle for this. Free market is awesome. Let the market decide. But I know most people don’t like unvetted immigration but like free reproductive right. That confuses me.
3. Criminalization of abortion is like actively going to Mexico, forcing those least economically viable to come to US and give them citizenship. They don’t want to come. Their mom don’t let them. Left to free market they won’t come. Yet you force them to come and then latter you bitch when those people, obviously, increase welfare, healthcare, tax, and crime. Of course, the conservative are the one that wouldn’t do this the most but is also the one wanting to criminalize abortion the most.
4. Monogamy, high alimony, welfare, and high child support costs against the rich is like actively encouraging the poorest dumbest mexican to come in and preventing the smart and productive ones from coming in. That’s anti eugenic.
You can support one and not the other but if the 2 is equivalent, why? Is there a difference I failed to see? Most immigrants, whether they are legal or not, are most likely contributing positively to typical American voters.
The one that drains your tax is your fellow citizens’ children. Maybe the motive is racist. Fellow americans are the same race anyway. The thing is America is racially diverse. Even in China, for example, people won’t just be happy if governments money go to to other Chinese. That’s why They have 2 child policies to prevent people from having too many children.