"And, 1.37 million abortions per year sounds like a fertile and lucrative area of revenue producing business, wouldn't you say so?"
If you were a big drug company, would you rather supply to those as 1.37 million that were NOT terminated ?
I'm sure that each live birth uses up many times more in the way of drugs and supplies then an abortion - and when some of them will grow up and get AIDS, they hit the jackpot.
By your own arguement, the companies would be better off against abortions, but if people are going to do it - hey, lets take what we can get -
Big drug companies look at the fact that 1.37 million babies will be aborted on average each year regardless of what they want to happen, and they want to be the ones making money off of that fact. When the drug companies add up the numbers of population increases in the U.S. and the rest of the world, 1.37 million abortions is insignificant in their calculations for doing business - IN OTHER WORDS THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THOSE 1.37 MILLION AMERICAN LIVES SNUFFED OUT EACH YEAR. They know they will make tons of money despite those deaths, and in supplying the means of terminating those pregnancies they further fatten their wallets on those deaths. Their bottom line is hurt not in the least with those deaths (given that those deaths are going to happen anyway).
By the way, how many people in this country die each year from other means? Death is a money making feature of life for drug companies. What with all the medications they pump out for people who are destined to die despite all those meds, the drug companies are making a "killing" so to speak.