# 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:** 98
**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, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1941 "2011-05-21T11:51:38Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > How do you know? > > Really, now? A women’s clinic only performs one medical procedure? I find that rather odd. You wouldn’t happen to have anything other than your own say-so to prove that’s the case, would you now? > > How do you know? > > How do you know? How do you know? How do you know? ummmmmm because ectopic pregnancies are usually terminated in a hospital setting because sometimes the fallopian tube is about to rupture or has ruptured and that requires SURGERY to remove the pregnancy:smack: Here, educate yourself. > **[Ectopic pregnancy: Rare but potentially life-threatening-Ectopic pregnancy -...](https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/ectopic-pregnancy/symptoms-causes/syc-20372088)** > > Ectopic pregnancy occurs outside the uterus, threatening the mother's life. It can't continue normally. But swift treatment can prevent deadly blood loss. ---
**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, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1942 "2011-05-21T11:52:57Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > They are taking responsibility by choosing what to do about it. No. They are taking the easy way out. Killing their own child is not responsible FFS. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1943 "2011-05-21T12:05:26Z")
I think the protesters would do much better to try to stop conceptions in the first place, by seeing to it that every woman of childbearing years woud have easy access to the moring after pill, and good effective birth control. The time and money spent protesting could be better spent on the already born. For some reason the same protesters are also against paying the taxes or giving up some of their luxeries to support the already born, instead of worring about a fertile egg. The law protects a pregnancy once the fertile egg becomes a recognizable human person. We still have separation of church and state and most protesters do so for religious reasons. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1944 "2011-05-21T12:12:59Z")
> [@Beniamino](#): > > Well, that about sums it up, doesn’t it? If we can’t agree on when a human becomes a human, we’re not going to agree about when abortion becomes murder. Day 0? Day 90? Somewhere in between? > > It’s a byzantinely complex issue. Roe v. Wade says “viability”, but soon we’ll be able to “grow” babies from eggs, so what does that mean? Heartbeat? Brain waves? Pain sensation? High school graduation? > > Seems to me, if you have to draw a line, there’s only one line to be drawn – conception. Any other “line” is fictive. > > But until debaters agree when human life becomes human life, further debate is not productive. It is a fact that human life began eons ago, and even if one believes the Bible it began 5 or 6 thousand years ago.Life is in the man’s sperm and woman’s ova,life is a passed on thing. A fertile chicken egg is not a chicken, a pollenated apple blossom is not and apple and biologically it is the same for humans. It is just a religious concept that a person is a person while still in the state of the cells dividing! One cannot prove there is a soul, so life is a whole different thing and death occurs when life leaves the body,if a soul is different, then where did life go? ---
**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, 12:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1945 "2011-05-21T12:26:42Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > This is the pit dear Indeed it is. So are you on summer vacation from middle school yet, troll? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1946 "2011-05-21T12:45:02Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > No. They are taking the easy way out. Killing their own child is not responsible FFS. Except it’s not a child and endless repetition doesn’t make it so. Enough of this circular waste of time. Carry on. ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1947 "2011-05-21T13:53:30Z")
> [@Lynn\_Bodoni](#): > > You are willfully blind… Quite remarkable isn’t it. It’s also interesting that the so called pro-life folks won’t address the issue of their actions at PP can and does prevent/discourage woman/family’s from getting birth control in the first place (among other health services). ---
**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, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1948 "2011-05-21T14:11:58Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > Except it’s not a child and endless repetition doesn’t make it so. Enough of this circular waste of time. Carry on. Yes it is. ---
**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, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1949 "2011-05-21T14:13:00Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Indeed it is. So are you on summer vacation from middle school yet, troll? You done preschool yet retard? ---
**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, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1950 "2011-05-21T14:14:11Z")
> [@monavis](#): > > It is a fact that human life began eons ago, and even if one believes the Bible it began 5 or 6 thousand years ago.Life is in the man’s sperm and woman’s ova,life is a passed on thing. A fertile chicken egg is not a chicken, a pollenated apple blossom is not and apple and biologically it is the same for humans. It is just a religious concept that a person is a person while still in the state of the cells dividing! > > One cannot prove there is a soul, so life is a whole different thing and death occurs when life leaves the body,if a soul is different, then where did life go? One cannot prove there isn’t a soul. ---
**Author:** ![Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omg_a_Black_Conservative)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1951 "2011-05-21T15:08:48Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Okay… yes, slaves should be emancipated regardless of the effect on the overall society. Great. So you realize that if an action is wrong, then the societal consequences of addressing that wrong to be immaterial to addressing that wrong. Which means that, by your own admission, arguing the effects disallowing an action would have while ignoring whether or not that argument is indeed a wrong to be nothing short of a red herring. > [@](#): > > Well, I gather in your personal opinion, abortion is murder. In my personal opinion, it is not. So… murder has been a matter of personal opinion for as least as long as we’ve been chatting in this thread about abortion. Except it isn’t. Murder is defined by the law. People’s personal opinions do not dictate what is and isn’t murder. > [@](#): > > Fine, for the sake of argument, she exists. Lots of women just like her exist. If the question is “Would you tell a woman she can’t have an abortion for any reason?”, my answer is no. I don’t care if her reason is a bad one. Her reason is none of my business. 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? > [@](#): > > Fine, one should be held responsible for the welfare of the lifeform for as long the lifeform exists. Once the lifeform ceases to exist or the responsibility gets transferred to someone else, one’s responsibility ends. I figure this applies to fetuses and lab-created genetically-engineered lifeforms alike. > > In the case of lab-created genetically-engineered lifeforms, I figure the scientist’s responsibilities include liability if the lifeform breaks loose, runs amok, and eats a bunch of teenagers. I’ve seen numerous drive-in documentaries about this very topic. 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. > [@](#): > > How convenient. The law is inept when you disagree with it. 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. > [@](#): > > No, I wouldn’t so argue, because it would (a) make no sense and (b) have no bearing on abortion rights. (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. > [@](#): > > I think that exchange really needed to be quoted in full and kept intact for posterity. Heck, I thought conservatives were _for_ personal responsibility. You’ve just, more or less, declared it moot. Bravo. You’ve embraced communism. …I don’t think you know what communism is. > [@](#): > > No, I don’t have to do that. I’ve already demonstrated that your whole “definition of choice” tangent is nonsense. Here’s a challenge for you; show me where I defined choice. > [@](#): > > It’s not a straw man if I’m quoting your own nonsense back to you to demonstrate that is in indeed nonsense. I’m not exaggerating your position. I’m trying to skim away all the crap you’re slathering on and get to the heart of it, which so far seems little more than “abortion is evil”. 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. > [@](#): > > I have _never_ heard a pro-choicer say this, and it would never have occurred to me that having an abortion and having a baby were qualitatively similar or equal outcomes. As far as I can tell, you just made this up and are doggedly determined to keep on claiming it, to accomplish a goal I can’t understand. 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. > [@](#): > > Anyway, good luck with that. I’m really going to try to make this my last word on your eccentric definition of “choice” and all the flawed conclusions you reach starting from that definition. I think this will be the sixth or seventh time stating this, but who defined choice? > [@](#): > > Heh, can’t resist, but I hope _this_ will be my last word on the “choice” thing. It looks like since the two sides of the debate are broadly labeled “pro-life” and “pro-choice”, you’ve concluded that “life” and “choice” are antonyms. > > They’re not. 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? Or do pro-choicers only get to label the opposition? > [@](#): > > There’s an element you’ve missed (or just ignored), and which I’ve pointed out repeatedly. An abortion ban alone means nothing, of course, especially if it’s a largely toothless ban that makes the occasional token arrest while 99% of violators are ignored. You do realize that an abortion ban will instantly have the effect of reducing the abortion rate because people are more apt to engage in an action when it’s legal than when it’s illegal, correct? > [@](#): > > I’ve make a point of saying the deaths and related problems will be in proportion to how aggressively the ban is enforced. Abortion is now safe because doctors are performing them, but what if doctors start going to jail because an aggressive district attorney is determined to end abortion in his jurisdiction. Isn’t the logical result that abortions will _no longer_ be performed by doctors? That doctors will leave that jurisdiction? No. Most any medical professional today can do an abortion (even though the majority of them refuse to do so), even if they have no formal training in the matter. > [@](#): > > I figure the availability of penicillin alone will keep the death rate from returning to pre-1920 levels. I just don’t get why even a small death rate is acceptable. If in 1957 there were 260 abortion-related deaths, I don’t see why you shouldn’t expect that number (or a higher one, given the greater population) in post-ban 2012. 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. > [@](#): > > And I don’t see why that number should be acceptable as casualties of the war on abortion, an unnecessary war if ever there was. > > So… yes, I value the lives of women considerably more than the lives of fetuses, even at a 4000-to-1 ratio (i.e. a million dead fetuses concerns me less than 250 dead women). 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? > [@](#): > > I don’t see the value of writing laws that might punish one stupid person while also punishing a million smart (or at least average) people. Simple cost/benefit analysis. 1M dead babies versus 1 dead women and 400K living babies. What kind of cost, benefit analysis are you running where the latter is better than the former? > [@](#): > > I only care that if she chooses to become non-pregnant, she has the opportunity to do so in a way the offers minimal risk, stress and expense. Keeping abortion legal is the best way to ensure this. Making it illegal drives the price up, adds elements of risk, wastes law-enforcement resources… You know an ever better way? It’s called not becoming pregnant. Yeah, startling, I know. > [@](#): > > So I can casually disregard this “15 year” thing, right? You have literally no evidence of any negative result likely to emerge from Canada’s lack of abortion law. There’s no group about to lose their rights because Canadian women can get legal abortions. You were talking pure bullshit and hoping it would pass as an argument. > > Is that about right? No, but I’ll let you believe that. I mean, I do like to make stuff up after all. Allegedly. > [@cosmosdan](#): > > Should someone who is unable to exercise self determination, and feeding off of someone’s body, take precedent over the self determination of the person who can exercise it, and is biologically enslaved to the other individual? 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. 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. > [@](#): > > Sheesh. Yes I know, but that’s still incorrect as I’ve pointed out. You’ve done nothing to support it other than repeat the assertion. 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. > [@](#): > > Surely it couldn’t be your style of posting. The way you make broad inaccurate arguments and take several posts to finally make the specific point you could have made for the start? Couldn’t be that? 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? > [@](#): > > Couldn’t be that a good portion of your arguments assume that your personal view of abortion and the value of an embryo as a person is the correct one? 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 not what I said. Maybe you could respond to what I actually wrote instead of rewriting it to suit your argument. {recognize the style? How’s it feel?} That’s precisely what you said. Again, I ask, if medical technology advances to the point where viability is pushed further back towards the start of pregnancy, then you agree that the limits on abortion would necessarily also become more limited? > [@](#): > > Wow, you respond to something I didn’t say and then accuse me of playing a game. Nice try. {recognize it again? not very productive is it?} Why would I assert you said something you didn’t say? I’m not you. Besides, if you were to re-read my comment, you’d see that I didn’t say you said anything. And as the saying goes, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. So thank you 🙂 > [@](#): > > Are you kidding me? You’re ridiculous. For one thing, we both know that “doing wrong” is pretty subjective, so for that reason alone your request is pretty useless. But just for giggles , let’s say I got really drunk last night and called my ex to tell her what an ignorant cunt she is. Would the law allow that? How about if I said something incredibly cruel and mean to a small child? Would the law allow that? Or, an example I gave before. A businessman decides to sell his business on a whim and puts 100s of people out of work and without benefits. Is there a law against that? Or, how about if my younger brother is ill and completely dependent on me, draining my resources, requiring a transfusion from me on a regular basis? Would the law allow me to refuse to give him a transfusion, and continue to foot his medical bills? None of those actions are wrong and you know it. 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. > [@](#): > > Again, you’re playing the correct on a technicality game, which you could have explained posts ago. Sure proponent can mean just that people want abortions to be safe and legally available. I guess I’m pro root canal, and pro triple bypass as well. Who knew. > > See, the thing is, you began this little game by 1st claiming that Pro-Choice is a misnomer, and pro abortion, the more accurate term. Then you proceeded to make your ridiculous argument for how choice applies. Now that I’ve demonstrated that was nonsense, and why Choice, is actually what we advocate first, and are proponents of, much more than abortion. So, turns out you’re still wrong. It’s becoming quite apparent that you can’t read. 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. > [@](#): > > and pro root canal, and pro triple bypass, which I hope nobody ever has to have. By first and foremost, pro-choice. No, pro-abortion. 🙂 > [@](#): > > nope, I defined them accurately. You can have your little correct on a technicality thing, now that I’ve shown your overall argument was nonsense. You really need to reexamine whatever it is you’re trying to argue. > [@cosmosdan](#): > > A ridiculous comparison and you know it. 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. > [@cosmosdan](#): > > Except it’s not a child and endless repetition doesn’t make it so. Enough of this circular waste of time. Carry on. It’s not? Says who? Hell, even “child en utero” is a quite common phrase, even in the law. > [@enipla](#): > > Quite remarkable isn’t it. It’s also interesting that the so called pro-life folks won’t address the issue of their actions at PP can and does prevent/discourage woman/family’s from getting birth control in the first place (among other health services). Wal-Mart/convenience stores no longer sell condoms? ---
**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, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1952 "2011-05-21T15:31:35Z")
OMG you’re onto something. I totally agree with you 100% they are not pro-choicers they are anti-life. The whole ridiculous “she can do what she wants with her own body” is false. It is not one body we are talking about it is 2 bodies. ---
**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, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1953 "2011-05-21T15:54:42Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > If pregnancy could cripple her then why was she dumb enough not to get sterilized. I can’t believe I have to explain this to you (oh, wait a minute–yes, I can)… It is impossible to predict what a pregnancy will do to some women. A friend’s DIL just gave birth, about a month early, to a girl who was lucky to survive the gestation. Her mother had a close call as well. She was a young, slender thing in quite good shape and was not anticipating any problems…but there they were anyway: gestational diabetes, cord wrapped around baby’s neck, bed rest, a severely restricted diet which got even more strict after the discovery that mom’s gallbladder was in bad shape too; they had to induce labor and ended up doing a C-section. Absolutely none of this was expected by anyone, including the OB-GYN. Mom and daughter are just lucky that they made it out alive. This is only one of many examples. * * * Check out post #1710, BTW. ---
**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, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1954 "2011-05-21T16:02:57Z")
> [@vivalostwages](#): > > I can’t believe I have to explain this to you (oh, wait a minute–yes, I can)… > > It is impossible to predict what a pregnancy will do to some women. A friend’s DIL just gave birth, about a month early, to a girl who was lucky to survive the gestation. Her mother had a close call as well. She was a young, slender thing in quite good shape and was not anticipating any problems…but there they were anyway: gestational diabetes, cord wrapped around baby’s neck, bed rest, a severely restricted diet which got even more strict after the discovery that mom’s gallbladder was in bad shape too; they had to induce labor and ended up doing a C-section. Absolutely none of this was expected by anyone, including the OB-GYN. Mom and daughter are just lucky that they made it out alive. > > This is only one of many examples. > > * * * > > Check out post #1710, BTW. Abortions also have a chance of killing the woman as well as causing other complications. What the hell is your point? ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1955 "2011-05-21T16:06:45Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > Yes it is. Is not ! ---
**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, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1956 "2011-05-21T16:07:38Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Is not ! Is too. ---
**Author:** ![irishgirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/8edcca/32.png) [@irishgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/irishgirl)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1957 "2011-05-21T16:41:56Z")
A safe, clean first or second trimester abortion is safer for the woman than continuing a pregnancy to term in the developed world. It is safer by several orders of magnitude than continuing a pregnancy to term in the developing world. Women continue to choose risky abortion over risky childbirth and over **500,000 women worldwide die annually because of pregnancy and childbirth related causes**. 13% of these deaths are due to unsafe abortion. [cite](http://www.who.int/making_pregnancy_safer/topics/maternal_mortality/en/index.html). [cite](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21255186/ns/health-womens_health/t/abortion-rates-same-whether-legal-or-not/) Pro-Life protesters would save more lives by investing funds training traditional birth attendants, campaigning against FGM and child marriage and for education of girls and providing free birth control in the developing world than by shouting slogans outside clinics in suburban America. Fact. ---
**Author:** ![IvoryTowerDenizen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ivorytowerdenizen/32/17937_2.png) [@IvoryTowerDenizen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IvoryTowerDenizen)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1958 "2011-05-21T16:51:45Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > OMG you’re onto something. I totally agree with you 100% they are not pro-choicers they are anti-life. > The whole ridiculous “she can do what she wants with her own body” is false. It is not one body we are talking about it is 2 bodies. Did my post mean nothing to you? Are you incapable of treating people who differ with you (not individuals who may gave been rude, but entire swaths if people) with anything resembling respect? I explained why that rhetoric is cruel and you do it anyway. Shame on you. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Bird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Little\_Bird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Bird)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2011, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1959 "2011-05-21T17:44:27Z")
> [@classyladyhp](#): > > One cannot prove there isn’t a soul. One cannot prove there isn’t an invisible dragon in my garage either, that doesn’t make it at all likely. What’s your point? ---
**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, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935/1960 "2011-05-21T18:40:10Z")
> [@Little\_Bird](#): > > One cannot prove there isn’t an invisible dragon in my garage either, that doesn’t make it at all likely. What’s your point? I don’t respond to losers like you. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935.md?page=97) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/abortion-clinic-picketers/580935.md?page=99)