# Abortion-clinic picketers. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 6, 2011, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935 "2011-05-06T05:57:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 100
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1981 "2011-05-21T21:55:22Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > Abortions also have a chance of killing the woman as well as causing other complications. What the hell is your point? Nice dodge. :rolleyes: The glaringly obvious POINT is that nobody, including you, can predict how dangerous or even deadly a pregnancy can become for the mother. That’s why many abortions are performed. The second lingering point, which others have made in this thread many times, is that this whole thing is not simple. It certainly isn’t as simple as you insist that it is. And you still have addressed nothing in regard to post #1710, which has a list of not-so-simple scenarios that should be considered. ---
**Author:** ![classyladyhp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b5ac83/32.png) [@classyladyhp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/classyladyhp)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1982 "2011-05-21T22:22:49Z")
> [@irishgirl](#): > > But, **CLHP** the doctor doesn’t decide. The doctor uses their experience and skills to make a judgement about risk and to present that in a non directive way to the woman, unless she specifically asks for their opinion on what she should do. > The woman then uses that information to make a choice, hopefully after discussing the situation with friends, family and spiritual advisers. > > There are women who will choose to continue pregnancies that have a 90% of causing them death or disability. > There are women who will choose to end pregnancies where that risk is much lower. > > I would support them in whichever choice they feel is right for them. > > In my ideal world there would be no abortion- all pregnancies would be planned and wanted, all foetuses and women would be healthy. > > We will never live in that world. > > For that reason I support abortion rights- because safe, legal abortion saves the lives of women. > I support charities which work to reduce child marriage and FGM- because both involve grevious violations of the human rights of young girls and lead to the deaths of young girls and women and their children. > I support charities which encourage the education of girls in developing countries- because a child with an educated mother has double the chance of reaching their 5th birthday. > I support charities which provide family planning in developing nations- because women die from unsafe abortions and childbirth and motherless children are more likely to die before the age of 5. > > I am pro-choice, but I am definitely not anti-life. I understand what you are saying. I am saying pro-choicers are anti-life to prove a point. How do you feel when I call them anti-life? Probably the same way I feel when I am labeled anti-choice. I am pro-life or anti-abortion. You’re pretty much the only pro-choicer on this thread that I have any respect for. At least you are able to make an argument and support your opinions. I can’t say that for any of the others though. It was not my intent to offend you. Take care. ---
**Author:** ![classyladyhp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b5ac83/32.png) [@classyladyhp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/classyladyhp)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1983 "2011-05-21T22:25:38Z")
> [@Baker](#): > > Stamping your teeny tiny feet again classy? You really ought to watch that blood pressure. But puberty does that to young men, so I guess we’ll have to wait for you to grow up. > > Have you shaved yet?😛 We’ll buy you a razor. Why don’t you go and bake some cookies? I wear a size 8 shoe. Sometimes I wear a 9. My blood pressure is fine now but I did have pre-eclampsia with my first pregnancy. I bet you’re sad that I made it through that ok. You’re a mean, vicious person. I hope stalking me repeatedly has made you feel better about your poor pathetic existence. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1984 "2011-05-21T23:04:42Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > My blood pressure is fine now but I did have pre-eclampsia with my first pregnancy. I bet you’re sad that I made it through that ok. It’s possible you didn’t - postpartum mental illness is suggested by your posts. Generously assuming, of course, you’re not a 16 year-old boy who just grabbed the first result after googling “pregnancy complications”. ---
**Author:** ![classyladyhp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b5ac83/32.png) [@classyladyhp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/classyladyhp)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1985 "2011-05-21T23:29:53Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > It’s possible you didn’t - postpartum mental illness is suggested by your posts. > > Generously assuming, of course, you’re not a 16 year-old boy who just grabbed the first result after googling “pregnancy complications”. Nice. No I actually had pre-eclampsia. I had a high risk pregnancy. I had to get weekly ultrasounds, biophysical profiles, non-stress tests etc. I don’t give a flying shit that you don’t believe me though. Man there are some real whackos on these boards. ---
**Author:** ![classyladyhp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b5ac83/32.png) [@classyladyhp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/classyladyhp)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1986 "2011-05-21T23:30:53Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > It’s possible you didn’t - postpartum mental illness is suggested by your posts. > > Generously assuming, of course, you’re not a 16 year-old boy who just grabbed the first result after googling “pregnancy complications”. General mental illness is suggested by your posts. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1987 "2011-05-21T23:39:28Z")
I’m sure this advice will mean nothing to you, but I’ll give it a shot anyway - right now, your posts are indistinguishable from those of a trolling 16 year-old. If you want to be taken seriously at all, you’re going to have to write some that a 16 year-old boy wouldn’t - possibly something insightful, well-considered… you know (or maybe you don’t)… adult. ---
**Author:** ![miss\_elizabeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/838e76/32.png) [@miss\_elizabeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/miss_elizabeth)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1988 "2011-05-21T23:41:54Z")
I donated to Planned Parenthood in the name of **classyladyhp**. ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1989 "2011-05-21T23:51:15Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > Nice. No I actually had pre-eclampsia. I had a high risk pregnancy. I had to get weekly ultrasounds, biophysical profiles, non-stress tests etc. I don’t give a flying shit that you don’t believe me though. > Man there are some real whackos on these boards. Yeah…and they all have your name. ---
**Author:** ![Baker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bb73d2/32.png) [@Baker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baker)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2011, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1990 "2011-05-22T00:48:34Z")
You know, I think classy is showing some capacity to learn. Amazing for a kid like him. I’ve (figuratively speaking) poked him with a stick a couple of times and he’s not responding, or rising to the bait. Maybe I’m blocked or on “ignore” but at least it shows he’s grown a couple of brain cells. Of course it doesn’t mean he’s smart yet, but the potential may be there. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2011, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1991 "2011-05-22T01:06:09Z")
I see Bryan has already given a particularly good response, but I’ll ad my 2 cents just for fun. > [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > Except it isn’t. Murder is defined by the law. People’s personal opinions do not dictate what is and isn’t murder. I echo Bryan’s observations on this. Ultimately people’s personal opinions do matter, since our law is shaped, enforced and changed by people. The law and the execution of it is imperfect being influenced by people and all their foibles. > [@](#): > > And the inevitable question is, “Why not?”. Exactly, at what point, does what that woman wants to do with her child “stop being your business” and becomes “your business”? If a woman you’ve never met has a child that you’ve never seen and she wants to kill him/her, shouldn’t that also be none of your business as it doesn’t affect you what she does? I would say at birth as well. I think the numbers concerning abortion indicate women are generally making responsible decisions. {by my standard} > [@](#): > > That still doesn’t answer my question. Why shouldn’t one be held responsible for that which only exists as a result of his/her actions? It’s not, in any way, a hard question. They should. Who gets to decide what responsible behavior is, and how it’s encouraged or enforced? > [@](#): > > No, the law is inept when it doesn’t create a set of rules or guidelines by which everyone conforms to. A law which essentially let’s people do whatever they want according to their own wills isn’t much of a law, and it’s a waste of the paper its written on. I don’t know what law you might be talking about. Most laws sure don’t get full conformity. We can look into history and see laws that simply aren’t realistically enforceable. Prohibition is a good example, and the laws against safe legal abortion seem to be another. People didn’t lobby against them because they served us so well. > [@](#): > > (A) No, it wouldn’t make sense and (B) it has plenty of bearing on abortion rights, since that’s precisely what you argue. That is, as long as the woman is okay with her actions, then it’s okay. That completely ignores the effects her actions have on another, in this case the unborn. You keep saying that and it still isn’t true. It’s a unique situation that has to weigh the rights of women, whom we acknowledge as citizens with full rights, and the unborn, whom we do not acknowledge as citizens with full rights. In the weighing, the women win. Even if we acknowledged the unborn as persons, in what other situation would the law enslave someone physically to another person, even if their life is in the balance? > [@](#): > > Here’s a challenge for you; show me where I defined choice. I already have a post that gives you a collection of your statements about choice. I’m not going to now argue the definition of definition. You attempted to defend your statement that Choice is a misnomer and you failed miserably. > [@](#): > > Because I’ve said or implied that “abortion is evil”. You know, I’ve said this once before, but among the two sides here, only one side is taking the extreme, and that happens to be the pro-choicers. You mean the anti life baby killers are taking the extreme stand? That’s quite an imagination you got there. > [@](#): > > Oh, so _ **now** _ you want to take into account the unborn, whereas this thread is littered with pro-choicers completely discounting the outcomes of abortion, rather focusing on the woman herself, wants she wants or her “right to bodily autonomy/integrity”? Sometimes, I feel like I’m either the only one who reads the threads, or that some of you pro-choicers don’t like to read what other pro-choicers are arguing. I do my reading based on time and interest so I don’t read every post. No matter. You insistence that pro choicers are completely discounting the unborn is imaginary. More of your non existent mind reading powers. The fact that we simply don’t agree with you on the weighing of rights, or that pro choice supporters have varied opinions and feelings about the unborn, doesn’t support your argument that the unborn are not considered. > [@](#): > > Ummm, no. I’ve concluded that if pro-choicers can call pro-lifers ‘anti-choice’, then pro-lifers can call pro-choices ‘anti-life’. Makes sense, yes? Not even a little. > [@](#): > > Or do pro-choicers only get to label the opposition? Nobody can stop you from throwing labels around no matter how inaccurate they are. Words have meanings and meanings matter. Maybe not to you, but to most people. > [@](#): > > And this is your problem. You perceive some individuals to be worth more than another. Exactly who decided that? If you can claim that individual X has a greater worth than individual Y, then what’s to stop you from asserting that individual Z has greater worth than individual Y? Or anyone else for that matter? Personally I think it’s pretty normal for people to think some individuals are worth more than others, regardless of what moral absolutes they like to give lip service to. Would we value Einstein more than Ted Bundy? In this issue , it’s not even that. For some people, an embryo is not an individual, and even if it was , what obligates another individual to be it’s unwilling biological slave for 9 months, and endure the other variables that come with that. In what other weighing of individual worth would we mandate that? > [@](#): > > You know an ever better way? It’s called not becoming pregnant. Yeah, startling, I know. and if only the world was perfect we wouldn’t even need to discuss this. Dang reality anyway. > [@](#): > > So, then, a woman should be allowed to throw a newborn into the Hudson, yes? If you’re going to argue that an entity who is unable to exercise self-determination, on account of not having the capacity to recognize it, doesn’t have any right to self-determination then the following action is perfectly acceptable. But I never argued that. I wish you would respond to what I actually wrote instead of the meaning you prefer to argue against. {I can understand why you enjoy this kind of unproductive response. It can be fun} > [@](#): > > If you’re going to argue that the latter action isn’t okay because the newborn isn’t located inside of the woman’s body, then self-determination really isn’t important as you say. How important did I say it was? Are you trying that mind reading again? Doesn’t work ya know. > [@](#): > > Oh, yeah. I forgot. My argument is untrue because you found some instances in which it’s untrue, even though I explicitly said that my assertion is always 100% true, but that rather it is in general. You got me. Really. You did. Oh I know I did but thanks for finally admitting it anyway. > [@](#): > > Nope. My style of posting is quite effective. It has to do with the fact that at least half of the pro-choicers in this one thread argue one way, and the other half another way, so much so to the point where they contradict one another. How many examples of this would you like? Effective for what? Yanking people’s chains and entertaining yourself? People vary in attitudes, opinions, and degree of knowledge. Personally, I enter these discussions to try and understand the opposition better, be exposed to new information, and clarify my own position by writing it out. The fact that some pro lifers have little to say that’s interesting doesn’t make \*\*Bricker’s \*\* less interesting. IOW, the failings of some individuals arguments don’t mean crap about the overall discussion. > [@](#): > > Now what the hell have you been reading? I’ve made no such assumption, and the only times I’ve mentioned personhood is to ask why anyone should accept the definition of personhood a pro-choicer can come up with over the definition that either I or someone like Peter Singer can come up with. A question, mind you, I’ve gotten spurious answers to. That’s the beauty of choice. Since we don’t have a clear definition of personhood, we don’t ask you to accept ours. We just ask that your personal opinion about it , isn’t forced on others. > [@](#): > > That’s precisely what you said. Nope, but feel free to give me page and post number and try to show otherwise. You won’t be able to but go ahead and try. > [@](#): > > Why would I assert you said something you didn’t say? There could be a number of reasons, but rather than guess I’ll just ask that you cut it out. > [@](#): > > None of those actions are wrong and you know it. They aren’t? Depends on who you ask doesn’t it? Your argument is nonsense because “wrong” is so subjective and situational. As a race and society there are some general guidelines we’ve agreed on but there are a shitload of grey areas and personal perspectives. > [@](#): > > This is precisely where that “absolute moral wrong” argument thing that you’re still ignoring comes in to play. I can’t rape some poor woman just because it might be okay with me. I can’t beat you to an inch of your life just because it might be okay with me. I can’t rob you just because it might be okay with me. I can’t kill you just because it might be okay with me. And so on and so forth. To say that “doing wrong is pretty subjective” is, well, quite untrue. Listing things we have agreed upon as a society doesn’t make wrong less subjective. I can’t smoke grass just because it might be okay with me, but a whole lot of people don’t think it’s wrong. Stop wasting time with this semantic nonsense. > [@](#): > > It’s becoming quite apparent that you can’t read. It’s becoming apparent you’re not mature enough to admit it when you’re wrong. > [@](#): > > I’d like point out that I said that pro- is short for proponent way back on page [1688](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=13816968&postcount=1688), which occurred about two and a half days ago, way before you started on your crusade to “prove me wrong”. I’ve said this many times before, but if you’re not going to read what I write out, then don’t bother. It doesn’t matter when you typed it. It was wrong then and it’s wrong now, and I spelled it out pretty clearly. > [@](#): > > And yet, it isn’t. Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean it’s ridiculous. Once you figure this out, you’ll be able to argue a lot more effectively than you are. This seems to be a old standby of yours when you can no longer engage the actual argument. You’re correct though, that’s not why it’s ridiculous. There are much better reasons which I’ve spelled out. > [@](#): > > It’s not? Says who? Hell, even “child en utero” is a quite common phrase, even in the law. Really, Gee whiz. Tell me , does the law differentiate between the two? I think it does. If a policeman pulls over a pregnant woman does he list the “child” as a passenger in his report? I really can’t tell if you actually believe all these word games of yours or it’s just entertainment for you. Doesn’t matter. I think I’ve seen all you have to offer. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2011, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1992 "2011-05-22T01:35:02Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > Nice. No I actually had pre-eclampsia. I had a high risk pregnancy. I had to get weekly ultrasounds, biophysical profiles, non-stress tests etc. I don’t give a flying shit that you don’t believe me though. > Man there are some real whackos on these boards. Uh-huh… assuming this is true, you realize that an abortion ban could very easily have killed you, right? OB/GYNs leaving the specialty because they don’t want to deal with the abortion police, or possibly performing abortions illegally because they recognize the need and getting arrested… then you come along with your high-risk pregnancy and find you can’t get any medical appointments or prenatal care because the OB/GYNs have been driven out of your state… But I figure you’re lying, anyway, so it’s academic. ---
**Author:** ![tumbleddown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@tumbleddown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tumbleddown)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2011, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1993 "2011-05-22T01:52:26Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > So then you MUST be pro-infanticide. Newborns don’t have self-determination. They determine when they’re hungry, when they’re cold, when they’re in pain, when they’re sleepy, when they need a fresh diaper. And they let you know about it, quite vociferously. And more importantly, anyone can fulfill the needs of a newborn. You can literally take a newborn a second from birth and hand them to a complete stranger and their needs will be met. A fetus cannot be given over to another person to be gestated. > [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > So, hypothetically speaking, of course, if I wanted to get my arms replaced with machine guns, no one can stop me because that would be a private, medical decision/procedure? If you were able to legally own the guns, no, you probably couldn’t be stopped if you could find someone capable of performing such a surgery. There would, of course, be penalties if you used your machine gun arms against others. And you know, there are people now who have functioning limbs amputated for personal “body modification” reasons. It may not be a healthy choice, but who has the authority to tell a person that they have to keep an arm that they don’t want to keep? > [@](#): > > I don’t. Another easy question to answer. Oh, but you do. Because you do believe that women should be forced to continue pregnancies against their will. That means that every mother _won’t_ be a willing mother, and de facto means that every child born won’t be a wanted child. (Don’t talk to me about adoption. There are more than 400,000 children waiting, in our foster system, whose biological parents’ rights have been terminated and who are legally free for adoption. When they all have permanent homes, then you can tell me that every baby born to women who cannot terminate unwanted pregnancies will be “wanted.”) > [@classyladyhp](#): > > They had unprotected sex, got pregnant and don’t want to take responsibilty for their actions. The majority of women (more than 60%) who terminate pregnancies in the US were using contraceptives in the month when they conceived. Contraceptives fail. They fail by nature of the vagaries of human design, they fail by virtue of humans’ innate imperfection. Even with 100% contraceptive use there will be unintended pregnancies; with the limited access to contraceptives (and information about proper use) we currently have and will continue to have in this nation (because of our broken healthcare system and lack of proper sexual education in schools) at least **one-half** of all pregnancies in the U.S. are unintended. It is only because abortion is so difficult to access as it is that our rate is as low as it is. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2011, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1994 "2011-05-22T02:15:49Z")
> [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > Well, if, as pro-choicers like to assert, there were 1M+ illegal abortion in the U.S. prior to Roe v. Wade, even if abortion were made illegal tomorrow and 1M+ illegal abortions were to occur, you’d expect the death rate to be lower because medicine and technology have advanced just a take over the last 54 years. Of course, even if that number is inaccurate, you wouldn’t expect the death rate to sky rocket because of advancements in medicine and technology, both of which made abortions “safe” rather than making them legal. I think there’s a couple of problems with that. One might be whether those advancements are actually applicable. I mean, if those advancements are things like ventilators or otherwise large or complicated equipment, it isn’t necessarily so that they would likely also be used in cases of illegal abortions. It’s not like doctors are going to have an easy time smuggling such things out of hospitals (or that people within those hospitals are inattentive enough to notice such things are in use/missing). Even when it comes to superior drugs, these are things which would have to be stolen. It’s not so simple to be able to point to advances in technology, because some advances are those connected with an equipped and supplied hospital, with trained medical personnel. What makes abortion more safe nowadays doesn’t necessarily imply that illegal abortion would likewise be more safe. I do have an issue with your figures (though you’re getting them from your opposition); by the point Roe v. Wade came about, public opinion was already changing. Doctors would be more willing to take risks to perform them. If potential future anti-abortion legistlation were strict enough (as I believe some would prefer), then you’d actually have a much bigger rise in number of problems than would be indicated by the pre-RvW numbers. And hey, if nothing else, there’s a larger population, too. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2011, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1995 "2011-05-22T02:21:43Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I’m sure this advice will mean nothing to you, but I’ll give it a shot anyway - right now, your posts are indistinguishable from those of a trolling 16 year-old. If you want to be taken seriously at all, you’re going to have to write some that a 16 year-old boy wouldn’t - possibly something insightful, well-considered… you know (or maybe you don’t)… adult. Pretty sure this is the case. I’ve seen her in threads other than this one and in every single one she’s stupid and needlessly inflammatory. ---
**Author:** ![LurkMeister](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3da27b/32.png) [@LurkMeister](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LurkMeister)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2011, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1996 "2011-05-22T03:13:25Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > I doubt that the Dr. could ever say it would end her life 100%. Nothing in medecine is 100%. If the Dr. feels that the pregnancy needs to be ended to save the life of the mother then I don’t have a problem with it. > It is the Dr.'s job to weigh the risk. > I really cannot elaborate any further than this. So if the doctor feels that the pregnancy needs to be ended to save the life of the mother then you don’t have a problem with it. How do you reconcile this with your repeated statements that human life begins with conception and that ending that life is murder? It sounds to me like you’re saying that under certain circumstances abortion is acceptable. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2011, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1997 "2011-05-22T03:48:49Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > If potential future anti-abortion legistlation were strict enough (as I believe some would prefer), then you’d actually have a much bigger rise in number of problems than would be indicated by the pre-RvW numbers. And hey, if nothing else, there’s a larger population, too. Yeah, I’ve seen this in previous threads - users who want abortion banned and yet refuse to recognize the consequences, elaborate on how many law-enforcement resources to dedicate to the perceived problem, what (if anything) to do with women who take day trips to Canada… It’s like they think an abortion ban will be enforced by magical pro-life elves. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2011, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1998 "2011-05-22T04:16:43Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Yeah, I’ve seen this in previous threads - users who want abortion banned and yet refuse to recognize the consequences, elaborate on how many law-enforcement resources to dedicate to the perceived problem, what (if anything) to do with women who take day trips to Canada… > It’s like they think an abortion ban will be enforced by magical pro-life elves. Haven’t you heard about the moral absolutes and how real world results and consequences don’t matter as long as self righteousness is intact? It’s all the rage for the morally superior crowd. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2011, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1999 "2011-05-22T05:44:46Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Yeah, I’ve seen this in previous threads - users who want abortion banned and yet refuse to recognize the consequences, elaborate on how many law-enforcement resources to dedicate to the perceived problem, what (if anything) to do with women who take day trips to Canada… > It’s like they think an abortion ban will be enforced by magical pro-life elves. Which shows the unsustainable nature of the beliefs of the subset of anti-abortion rights people who loudly and repeatedly proclaim that abortion is murder. Because when pushed they don’t want it treated as murder - they don’t tend to want life sentences or capital punishment for the 18 year old girl who was raped who has an abortion, or for the doctor who performs the procedure. Or her parents who drive her to the clinic. Or for a volunteer at a charity who answers a phone and gives the girl the phone number of a clinic in a different country that can safely do the procedure. Yes, they want to punish those involved, but at a tariff significantly lower than that which attaches to murder. ---
**Author:** ![classyladyhp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b5ac83/32.png) [@classyladyhp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/classyladyhp)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2011, 11:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/2000 "2011-05-22T11:11:39Z")
> [@LurkMeister](#): > > So if the doctor feels that the pregnancy needs to be ended to save the life of the mother then you don’t have a problem with it. How do you reconcile this with your repeated statements that human life begins with conception and that ending that life is murder? It sounds to me like you’re saying that under certain circumstances abortion is acceptable. Yes genius. I’ve already said that it is ok in ectopic pregnancies or if the Dr. says the mother will die if the pregnancy continues:rolleyes: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935.md?page=99) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935.md?page=101)