# 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:** 7
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/121 "2011-05-06T18:26:07Z")
> [@](#): > > stop treating people like commodities Unless they’re pregnant women, of course, in which case all their uteri are belong to you. ---
**Author:** ![ZPG\_Zealot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/e47c2d/32.png) [@ZPG\_Zealot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZPG_Zealot)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/122 "2011-05-06T18:32:29Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I think we can all agree that _forced_ adoption is evil. But to say all adoption is evil is nonsense. Do you actually think that a woman would go through the dangers and deprivations of gestation and delivery for the joy of losing all legal rights to her own child or that families in poor countries are overjoyed to have a member ripped away from them and sent thousands of miles away because it’s one less mouth to feed? ---
**Author:** ![margin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/65b543/32.png) [@margin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/margin)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/123 "2011-05-06T18:32:39Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > Perhaps those women should not have sex if they are not ready to deal with the consequences. It’s not ok for the baby to pay for it’s mother’s mistakes. Wow, you really fuckin’ hate kids, don’t you? A woman can consent to sex and/or pregnancy but they’re not the same thing. By that token, if you go driving you’re consenting to a car accident since you willingly got in your car, didn’t you? And it’s not a baby. Just how badly _did_ you flunk biology? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/124 "2011-05-06T18:33:18Z")
> [@Beniamino](#): > > That’s not what the Courts say. Courts say “viability”. What you’re positing would actually be earlier than that, as EEG’s detect brain activity before the 12th week. Not _human_ brain wave activity however. That’s just a caretaking system that doesn’t even survive until birth, there’s no way you could “save” it even if it was worth saving. Brainwaves are a crude method of measuring brain function anyway. > [@Beniamino](#): > > Eventually, I think we’ll come around, though, and realize the horrible mistake we’ve made in warping the Constitution the way we’ve done (penumbra!?), and stop treating people like commodities. Please, you are describing yourself. You are the one who wishes to treat women as less than human, as objects, as _your_ property. And a fetus isn’t a person, or even close. ---
**Author:** ![Bambro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/df705f/32.png) [@Bambro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bambro)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/125 "2011-05-06T18:37:09Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > …pro-abortionist… :rolleyes: WTF? Every damn spring we seem to have a run on retarded cunt warts who crawl out of the fuckin woodwork with some stupid shit. ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/126 "2011-05-06T18:38:33Z")
> [@Beniamino](#): > > That’s not what the Courts say. Courts say “viability”. What you’re positing would actually be earlier than that, as EEG’s detect brain activity before the 12th week. If that’s your position, I’ll take it, as it’s better than what we’ve got now. Eventually, I think we’ll come around, though, and realize the horrible mistake we’ve made in warping the Constitution the way we’ve done (penumbra!?), and stop treating people like commodities. As “as a family lawyer who handles child support cases routinely” I assume you only represent parents who need child support. You never, ever, take money from some scofflaw who wants to get out of his or her responsibility. ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/127 "2011-05-06T18:45:19Z")
After reading books on both sides of the fence, I am convinced that if a woman doesn’t want to be a mother and cannot face giving up her child to adoption, forcing these acts upon her is an abomination. There has to be be another way. [This](http://www.deathroe.com/pro-life_answers/) website gives the usually spin for the pro-life side. See if you can follow the illogic of many of the arguments. Hint: Notice they only use the word “Pro-Life” on the first page. Everywhere else it’s “pro-abortion.” ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/128 "2011-05-06T18:47:34Z")
> [@ZPG\_Zealot](#): > > Do you actually think that a woman would go through the dangers and deprivations of gestation and delivery for the joy of losing all legal rights to her own child or that families in poor countries are overjoyed to have a member ripped away from them and sent thousands of miles away because it’s one less mouth to feed? Let’s have a study of women who’ve given up babies for adoption that corroborates this, please. It’s been my experience that the typical mother who gives up a baby for adoption is not devastated by it, and does it by her own choice, and that no “ripping” is involved. Now that we’ve gotten anecdotes out of the way, it’s time for cites. ---
**Author:** ![margin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/65b543/32.png) [@margin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/margin)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/129 "2011-05-06T18:50:00Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > Since he was responding to the suggestion that the aborted baby might be Bin Laden or Hitler, I think this was a fair point to raise. In reality any given baby is unlikely to be either MLK _or_ Hitler. Well, another thought occurred to me: _What about the woman whose life might very well be ruined by a forced pregnancy?_ It’s glaring that these assholes never once consider that the woman or girl they’re trying to force into broodmarehood might be the next MLK, the next Marie Curie, or the all-too-short list of heroines who managed to survive earlier eras of constant pregnancy—and early death from all the risks associated with that. They never once mention the woman’s potential. Or the girl’s. She doesn’t have any future, any hopes, any dreams, any possibilities to them. Ever. The fetus, though-----that fetus is what they have incredible fantasies about. The woman’s just an incubator. Once she’s pregnant, she ceases to exist as a human being with hopes and dreams to them, if they’re even capable of----pardon the expression—conceiving of that. The fetus has all the potential. The woman is nothing to them. ---
**Author:** ![SecretaryofEvil](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@SecretaryofEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SecretaryofEvil)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/130 "2011-05-06T18:52:16Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > This is why I volunteered as a clinic escort when the was an abortion clinic in my town. To be honest, I miss it–there’s not a lot of places anymore where a big guy can do a good deed just by standing around and occasionally flexing and glaring. 😃 > > IMHO, the simplest solution would be to get a few large volunteers to smile, link arms, and stand in front of the camera. > [@apollonia](#): > > I am a clinic escort. So far we haven’t seen this yet (thank goodness), but I’m pretty sure that’s only because the average age of protesters is 105 years old and I don’t think they can figure out how to operate one of them new-fangled video-taker thingums. > > Clearly, all of us escorts will have to start putting our game faces on. And whatever makeup goes best with a fluorescent orange-and-yellow jacket. It’s our big break! You know I’ve always wanted to volunteer to help with something like this. Anybody feel like sending me a PM with a link to some info about how I could go about doing so? ---
**Author:** ![SecretaryofEvil](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@SecretaryofEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SecretaryofEvil)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/131 "2011-05-06T18:54:10Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > And they’re stupid, too. > > Here in Minnesota, they tried to bomb the Planned Parenthood Clinic in the middle of the night. But they got the address wrong, and bombed the Public Library next door (seriously damaging the garbage dumpster & loading dock). It’s a serious situation, but God, there’s some dark humor in that. Are you sure they weren’t targeting the library? We all know there is only one book worth reading. ---
**Author:** ![Anaamika](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Anaamika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anaamika)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/132 "2011-05-06T18:56:48Z")
Feeling like we needed it, I posted an IMHO thread, [Ask me about my abortion](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=607513). If some of you like, you can join me there and discuss. I will not engage nor defend myself here in the Pit. As they say, if you can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen, and I certainly intend to. This is not a place for reasoned discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Beniamino](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@Beniamino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beniamino)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/133 "2011-05-06T19:07:16Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > I get that many pro-life people are opposed to pre-marital sex, and as such would prefer not to take any action that might encourage it. However, that horse has left the barn. The number of people who wait until they’re married before having sex is miniscule, regardless of their access to contraception. (Studies have shown that abstinence-only education doesn’t in any way reduce the percentage of teens having sex, for example.) I’m not so sure. I mean, you say so, and much of the mainstream media says so, but religious newspapers and websites have pointed to other studies showing that limiting access to contraception and abstinence education does reduce teenage sexual activity. Now, the mainstream media tend, by and large, to be a self-selected group of social liberals, and vice versa with the religious media, and each have their own agendas, but it’s by no means a decided question on either end. I’d be more inclined to go with the mainstream media position were it not for my own life experiences. For example, I happen to know, with near 100% certainty, that I would have lost my virginity at 14 rather than 20 (I don’t know any of you, do I?) if I could have easily gotten my hands on a condom. And I may just have waited until marriage if (1) my parents and people I looked up to had encouraged me to do so; (2) I had teachers who explained the benefits of abstinence; and (3) I had not been absorbing for 20 years society’s message that college is for screwing around, sex is mere recreation with no moral, psychological, or ethical consequences, and people can be used as means, rather than as ends in themselves. The third element, society, changes slowly, and your parents and role models are who they are (I love my parents, but they were of the “boys will be boys” mindset), but limiting the ubiquity of contraception (e.g. not freely distributing it in high schools), and ensuring that children be taught that people are not simply playthings to be used for one’s own sexual fulfillment, and that there is real benefit to and exclusive sexual relationship with one’s spouse, can be brought about now. > [@](#): > > And I think it’s pretty undeniable that most (if not all) abortions involve unwanted pregnancies, pretty much by definition. So you’d have to think if you put contraception into the hands of the people who will abort a baby if they get pregnant, many of them would use it. They don’t get pregnant, they don’t have an abortion, so you’ve prevented the murder of an innocent. Doesn’t the good far outweigh the bad, in this case? I suppose it might, if one could be sure that more condoms = fewer abortions. But that isn’t always the case. For example, you would think that more condoms = fewer cases of HIV/AIDS, but that’s not necessarily true either. See, e.g., [this article](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/27/AR2009032702825.html). > [@](#): > > Yes, you’re assisting a population engaging in an activity you don’t morally agree with, but given that not intervening doesn’t in any way reduce their activity, isn’t it better to focus on mitigating the consequences so as to prevent harm to innocents. For example, imagine if an airborne version of AIDS developed among drug addicts that only could be caught by children under five. Wouldn’t you then support a needle exchange program for heroin addicts, even if you were deeply morally opposed to heroin use? Standing by your principles may feel better, but the inevitable and predictable consequence is going to by the deaths of children that you could have prevented if you’d compromised. I’m sure you could construct a hypothetical that would sway me, but moral decisions have to be made on a case-by-case basis, and in this case, while I believe in political Liberalism, a la John Rawls, and I believe that the majority should not legislate its own morality against the minority, I don’t think governments should affirmatively encourage immorality either. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/134 "2011-05-06T19:12:56Z")
> [@margin](#): > > Seems to me if you really are against abortion, you’d be merrily skipping along with a huge basket of condoms like the Condom Fairy and gaily giving them out by the bushel full. Bizarrely, mention of the Condom Fairy immediately brought a particular Doper to mind. I ain’t saying who, only that it was _not_ Hal Briston. ---
**Author:** ![Beniamino](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@Beniamino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beniamino)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/135 "2011-05-06T19:14:12Z")
> [@Bridget\_Burke](#): > > As “as a family lawyer who handles child support cases routinely” I assume you only represent parents who need child support. You never, ever, take money from some scofflaw who wants to get out of his or her responsibility. I would never advise a client to avoid paying child support. I represent both payors and payees. I’ll make sure the respective incomes are determined fairly, and a child support order is entered in accordance with the Guidelines, but I would not help a client to hide income or evade enforcement. ---
**Author:** ![lavenderviolet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/cdc98d/32.png) [@lavenderviolet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lavenderviolet)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/136 "2011-05-06T19:16:11Z")
And, of course,there are pro-lifers who are in favor of contraception. Here’s the obligatory link to All Our Lives, a group that is pro-life and pro-contraception: [http://www.allourlives.org/](http://www.allourlives.org/) Just because it is convenient for both pro-choicers and religious pro-lifers to ignore that there are people out there who support this perfectly logical position doesn’t mean that they don’t exist. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/137 "2011-05-06T19:18:20Z")
> [@Beniamino](#): > > I’m not so sure. I mean, you say so, and much of the mainstream media says so, but religious newspapers and websites have pointed to other studies showing that limiting access to contraception and abstinence education does reduce teenage sexual activity. In other words, a collection of delusional liars make claims that support their prejudices. How _surprising_. > [@Beniamino](#): > > Now, the mainstream media tend, by and large, to be a self-selected group of social liberals, and vice versa with the religious media, and each have their own agendas, but it’s by no means a decided question on either end. No, the mainstream media are a collection of large right wing corporations, not liberals. > [@Beniamino](#): > > \ ensuring that children be taught that people are not simply playthings to be used for one’s own sexual fulfillment, and that there is real benefit to and exclusive sexual relationship with one’s spouse, can be brought about now. Oh, please, that’s hypocritical nonsense. You want women to be treated as slaves, as walking wombs and sex toys. “Plaything” is the _least offensive_ part of how you want woman to be treated. ---
**Author:** ![Giraffe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giraffe/32/129_2.png) [@Giraffe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giraffe)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/138 "2011-05-06T19:25:09Z")
> [@Beniamino](#): > > The third element, society, changes slowly, and your parents and role models are who they are (I love my parents, but they were of the “boys will be boys” mindset), but limiting the ubiquity of contraception (e.g. not freely distributing it in high schools), and ensuring that children be taught that people are not simply playthings to be used for one’s own sexual fulfillment, and that there is real benefit to and exclusive sexual relationship with one’s spouse, can be brought about now. No, it can’t. That is a fantasy. You are discussing massive and far-reaching social changes that go against all empirical evidence and the fundamental drives of human biology. The reality is that people are having sex younger and stupider than ever, and while a lack of contraception may postpone a small fraction of people from having pre-marital sex until they’re older, it comes with a price: a large number of unwanted pregnancies and subsequent abortions. Closing one’s eyes to the fact that today’s horny teenagers will have sex, even in the face of significant negative consequences, is implicitly helping to create a situation in which more abortions take place. You may wish it wasn’t true, but it is. ---
**Author:** ![ENugent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/4af34b/32.png) [@ENugent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ENugent)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/139 "2011-05-06T19:28:08Z")
> [@Giraffe](#): > > And I think it’s pretty undeniable that most (if not all) abortions involve unwanted pregnancies, pretty much by definition. Actually, I think the most tragic abortion stories are those that involve wanted pregnancies that turn out to be nonviable and/or threatening to the life or health of the mother. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2011, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/140 "2011-05-06T19:28:30Z")
> [@Beniamino](#): > > I’d be more inclined to go with the mainstream media position were it not for my own life experiences. For example, I happen to know, with near 100% certainty, that I would have lost my virginity at 14 rather than 20 (I don’t know any of you, do I?) if I could have easily gotten my hands on a condom. And I may just have waited until marriage if (1) my parents and people I looked up to had encouraged me to do so; (2) I had teachers who explained the benefits of abstinence; and (3) I had not been absorbing for 20 years society’s message that college is for screwing around, sex is mere recreation with no moral, psychological, or ethical consequences, and people can be used as means, rather than as ends in themselves. Your experience is atypical. I was brought up in a strict Catholic household where sex was regarded as absolutely verboten. My school taught very little sex ed, and what there was had a lot of abstinence. Condoms were not distributed. And yet, I was having sexual activity (oral and anal) all through high school, and as soon as I could get condoms without it getting back to my parents, I was having all the sex I wanted–and I wanted a lot. I recognized abstinence education and the idea that “sexual exclusivity is superior” as bullshit from an early age, even in the face of total social conditioning otherwise. Hell, I didn’t even see a PG-13 rated movie until I was a senior in high school, and my TV was limited to Star Trek and MASH reruns. My music was gospel and old-school country. What societal programming I had, thus, was the opposite of yours, and yet I had a similar reaction (have sex, safely, early and often). > [@](#): > > ensuring that children be taught that people are not simply playthings to be used for one’s own sexual fulfillment, and that there is real benefit to and exclusive sexual relationship with one’s spouse, can be brought about now. Can you quantify that benefit? Aside from the moral code, I’m not seeing it. > [@](#): > > I suppose it might, if one could be sure that more condoms = fewer abortions. But that isn’t always the case. For example, you would think that more condoms = fewer cases of HIV/AIDS, but that’s not necessarily true either. See, e.g., [this article](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/27/AR2009032702825.html). In other words, condoms don’t work when they’re not used or used inconsistently, and where they are used consistently they work. That’s…not at all surprising. Other possible short versions: “People who make risky decisions involving HIV/AIDS transmission with regard to sex make risky decisions involving condom use, too.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935.md?page=8)