# Can the abortion issue ever be finally resolved? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 13, 2004, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853 "2004-07-13T05:28:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2013, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/82 "2013-07-05T21:15:47Z")
> [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > [BULLSHIT](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_o...a_Halappanavar). Bullshit squared. See my post, #74. ---
**Author:** ![aNewLeaf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ac91a4/32.png) [@aNewLeaf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aNewLeaf)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2013, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/83 "2013-07-05T21:22:38Z")
> [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > [BULLSHIT](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_o...a_Halappanavar). I worked in the field(\*), I’ve seen cases where baby was killing mom. It was a race to keep the baby in the womb until it was viable, then they would induce at the last moment when the mom was dying. If that happens too early, it’s a tragic abortion. But it’s self defense, not murder. Baby killing mom = real medical fact (and not all that rare, this isn’t a big city) Plus, old thread, old argument. (\*) newborn intensive care, not abortion. We got the viable ones. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2013, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/84 "2013-07-05T22:59:57Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Not assume but speculate. Culture and values do change over time, in every nation and every religion and ethnicity. For instance, there was a time when most deeply religious-conservative Americans simply avoided politics as a thing of this world and an occasion of sin. In the 1970s they started to get politically engaged. That could always change back. Fundamentalists were politically involved in the past-just look at William Jennings Bryan or before that William Wilberforce in England. In fact considering the strength of the fundamentalists, its safe to say they probably dominated politics in the rural South and Midwest throughout the 19th and 20th Centuries. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2013, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/85 "2013-07-05T23:01:28Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Necessary, but not necessarily [legal](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_chile). And Chile’s not the only country to outlaw abortion with no exceptions whatsoever- see also El Salvador, Nicaragua, the Dominican Republic, and Malta. In other words a handful of Latin American countries (and Malta) that is not even remotely close to the mainstream pro-life movement in the United States. Even the most hardcore pro-lifers such as Richard Mourdock supported abortion if the mother’s life was threatened. ---
**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2013, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/86 "2013-07-08T19:18:03Z")
> [@Drum\_God](#): > > For the time being, the issue of abortion will not be resolved because it serves the purpose for which it is being used. As long as it serves that purpose, or no other issue surfaces that serves that purpose better, it will remain a hot-button issue. Good point. > [@monavis](#): > > Your father’s sperm had no life then you would not be here to write on this board. Every individual got life from it’s parents and they from theirs, life is a passed on thing from generation to generation. Except for the first one, and except for (in the future) artificial life. OK, if you want to use the term “life” that way, fine, but it doesn’t illuminate the subject. It’s still not “human life deserving of the rights of an individual,” which is what we’re talking about here. It is not the deaths of millions of lives (even millions of organisms) when I ejaculate millions of sperm and only one finds an egg to fertilize. Monthly menstruation is not the ethical equivalent of babies dying. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2013, 12:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/87 "2013-07-10T12:16:10Z")
> [@Learjeff](#): > > Good point. > > Except for the first one, and except for (in the future) artificial life. OK, if you want to use the term “life” that way, fine, but it doesn’t illuminate the subject. It’s still not “human life deserving of the rights of an individual,” which is what we’re talking about here. It is not the deaths of millions of lives (even millions of organisms) when I ejaculate millions of sperm and only one finds an egg to fertilize. Monthly menstruation is not the ethical equivalent of babies dying. Because an egg is fertilized it is not yet a human being until it can be recognized as such. life, (which is the pro- birth Argument) started eons ago, and even if one believes the Genesis story it started with an ancestor’s sperm and egg. Of course if one looks at it as human life until it becomes a human being. There is a huge difference in a fertile egg and a person. An acorn is not a tree nor any egg or blossom thought of as it’s fully grown or takes the semblance of it’s mature look. It is true a tree can be called a tree before it reaches it’s mature height, but I don’t know anyone who would say in truth that the acorn is a tree! ---
**Author:** ![Son\_of\_a\_Rich](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/son_of_a_rich/32/5439_2.png) [@Son\_of\_a\_Rich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Son_of_a_Rich)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2013, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/88 "2013-07-11T02:56:02Z")
If you want to test a pro-lifer’s resolve, have him watch an episode of “Here Comes Honey Boo Boo”. ---
**Author:** ![Renee\_RL](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/7c8e57/32.png) [@Renee\_RL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Renee_RL)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/89 "2013-07-15T18:51:05Z")
The issue was resolved and now a bunch if angry white guys are trying to deny women reproductive freedom. ---
**Author:** ![Drum\_God](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drum_god/32/44_2.png) [@Drum\_God](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drum_God)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2013, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/90 "2013-07-16T03:52:39Z")
Interestingly, the sponsor of the abortion bill in Texas that has gotten so much attention, Jodie Laubenberg, insisting on cutting prenatal care for pregnant women from CHIP coverage because [the baby hasn’t been born yet](http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/10/1222535/-Texas-Rep-Jodie-Laubenberg-changes-her-mind-about-fetuses#). In supporting these abortion restrictions, though, she strenuously defends the unborn child – the one who doesn’t deserve health insurance on account of not having been born. We Texans are soooooo proud of her. And, if y’all liked Rick Perry, you ain’t seen nuthin’ yet. Wait 'till y’all meet Greg Abbott. ---
**Author:** ![Bob\_Blaylock](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bob_blaylock/32/3235_2.png) [@Bob\_Blaylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bob_Blaylock)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 10:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/91 "2013-08-04T10:13:26Z")
> [@monavis](#): > > Because an egg is fertilized it is not yet a human being until it can be recognized as such. life, (which is the pro- birth Argument) started eons ago, and even if one believes the Genesis story it started with an ancestor’s sperm and egg. Of course if one looks at it as human life until it becomes a human being. There is a huge difference in a fertile egg and a person. An acorn is not a tree nor any egg or blossom thought of as it’s fully grown or takes the semblance of it’s mature look. It is true a tree can be called a tree before it reaches it’s mature height, but I don’t know anyone who would say in truth that the acorn is a tree! Have you ever dissected an acorn? Inside, you will find an object that very clearly is a plant, in a very immature form. The difference between this and an oak sapling is the same as the difference between that sapling and a fully-grown oak tree—one of size and maturity. It is the same as the difference between a human embryo and an infant, or of an infant and a young child; or between a young child and an adolescent, or an adolescent and a full adult. It is the same form of life, at different stages of its existence. I should do this with an acorn, some time. Nobody ever mentions a peanut plant, and claims that a peanut isn’t a peanut plant, but it’s an easier example. I’m sure nearly everyone has seen the tiny plant inside of a peanut, and I have a picture, taken through my microscope. See [20090612\_233659\_EmbryonicPeanutPlant | An embryonic peanut p… | Flickr](http://www.flickr.com/photos/56759562@N06/9435512010/). What you see in this picture is a peanut plant. It’s very tiny, but if it had been allowed to live, it would have grown much larger, and eventually gone on to produce more peanuts. In this case, its fate had been decided otherwise, long before it came into my possession. It was already dead, had been roasted, and just after I took this picture, I ate it. Those who argue that at acorn isn’t an oak tree do so in ignorance of the fact that the acorn actually contains a tiny oak tree, just as this peanut contained a tiny peanut plant. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 10:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/92 "2013-08-04T10:34:51Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > Even the most hardcore pro-lifers such as Richard Mourdock supported abortion if the mother’s life was threatened. So the sanctity of life is not an absolute, and the life of an unborn child can be taken for a compelling reason (saving the life of the mother). Then the only difference between anti-abortion advocates and pro-choices advocates is, what constitutes a compelling reason to kill babies. The pro-choice position is to allow each woman to make that decision with her doctor, while the anti-abortion position is for government to make that decision for all women. Now, which position is more consistent with personal freedom and the constitution? For that matter, which position is the conservative position? ---
**Author:** ![Bob\_Blaylock](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bob_blaylock/32/3235_2.png) [@Bob\_Blaylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bob_Blaylock)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 11:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/93 "2013-08-04T11:02:36Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > So the sanctity of life is not an absolute, and the life of an unborn child can be taken for a compelling reason (saving the life of the mother). Then the only difference between anti-abortion advocates and pro-choices advocates is, what constitutes a compelling reason to kill babies. The pro-choice position is to allow each woman to make that decision with her doctor, while the anti-abortion position is for government to make that decision for all women. Now, which position is more consistent with personal freedom and the constitution? For that matter, which position is the conservative position? I think that nearly everyone recognizes that there are certain extreme circumstances under which it is justifiable to take the life of a human being. The vast majority of abortions, however, take place under circumstances that are very far short of the level that would, in any other context, be considered sufficient to justify a homicide. A position that was morally and logically consistent would hold abortion to be exaction comparable to other forms of homicide; hold that it should only be legal under circumstances that are comparable to other circumstances under which it is legally-justifiable to kill a human being; and that anyone who willfully has any part in an abortion which does not involve sufficiently-extreme circumstances should be subject to the same legal consequences as anyone who otherwise takes place in an illegal homicide. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 11:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/94 "2013-08-04T11:35:13Z")
> [@Learjeff](#): > > I disagree. First, a man’s sperm is less of a “life” than a woman’s egg, since the egg contributes considerably more to the embryo than the sperm (more epigenetics, more mitochondrial DNA, plus the machinery to implement the blueprints). > > Second, an egg or a sperm cell contributes only half of the resulting nuclear DNA. Conception is significant because after conception, the nuclear DNA is fixed. (Mitochondrial DNA may take longer to sort out, but usually only in rare cases.) So, before conception, we only have “probable outcomes” regarding the resulting embryo’s DNA. Conception fixes the DNA. > > Of course, there’s a lot more to what makes the characteristics of a human than DNA, even ignoring post-natal environment. > > So by your definition of “a human life”, it has nothing to do with the actual characteristics of a particular life, and furthermore, every menstrual cycle results in the loss of “human life”. > > I am not my ancestors. My life did not begin before my conception. The seeds of my life began before me, of course … those go back billions of years. Where to draw the line? > > And while I say “my life” began with my conception, I don’t hold that my legal personhood should have begun then. It’s just the simple fact that, as an organism, my genetic characteristics were determined at my conception. Had abortion been legal then, I probably wouldn’t be here now. I’m thankful that my biological mother didn’t abort me, but just because I’m happy to be alive, that doesn’t change my opinion that it should have been her right to do it legally. > > Likewise, I adopted my wife’s son. I’m very glad she didn’t have an abortion. It was her legal right, and she’s pro-choice, but chose not to, thank goodness. The fact that I appreciate the outcomes in no way justifies removing the right. > > In any case, I reject the definition of an individual life to include all antecedents of that individual life. That blurs the meaning of “individual” into meaningless: there now is no such thing as an individual, merely a continuum. Yes, the continuum exists, but why call that (and give it the status of) an individual life? By that definition, birth control is murder. Not having sex when one could, would be murder. Having sex, and giving birth to only one of the millions of possible individuals would be murder. Even the Catholic church doesn’t leap into that chasm of absurdity. If it hadn’t been for your ancestors passing on their life you would not be here. Life is a passed on thing, your father’s sperm contained some of your life, the other from your mother. All humans lives were passed on from one generation to another, and as evolution works" Life" was here long before Human’s came along. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/95 "2013-08-04T11:38:33Z")
> [@sciurophobic](#): > > No, because the anti-abortion forces believe that requiring all fetuses to come to term is the ultimate good, despite all the misery and suffering that sometimes results. And so many do not want to help support that same life once it is born. I call that Pro Birth, and pro-choicer’s are also Pro-Life, they want to make sure a child is loved, wanted, and taken care of once it is born. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/96 "2013-08-04T11:42:39Z")
> [@Learjeff](#): > > Good point. > > Except for the first one, and except for (in the future) artificial life. OK, if you want to use the term “life” that way, fine, but it doesn’t illuminate the subject. It’s still not “human life deserving of the rights of an individual,” which is what we’re talking about here. It is not the deaths of millions of lives (even millions of organisms) when I ejaculate millions of sperm and only one finds an egg to fertilize. Monthly menstruation is not the ethical equivalent of babies dying. Human life came through Evolution, same as all life. Just the changes through time. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/97 "2013-08-04T11:46:11Z")
> [@Bob\_Blaylock](#): > > Have you ever dissected an acorn? Inside, you will find an object that very clearly is a plant, in a very immature form. The difference between this and an oak sapling is the same as the difference between that sapling and a fully-grown oak tree—one of size and maturity. > > It is the same as the difference between a human embryo and an infant, or of an infant and a young child; or between a young child and an adolescent, or an adolescent and a full adult. It is the same form of life, at different stages of its existence. > > I should do this with an acorn, some time. Nobody ever mentions a peanut plant, and claims that a peanut isn’t a peanut plant, but it’s an easier example. I’m sure nearly everyone has seen the tiny plant inside of a peanut, and I have a picture, taken through my microscope. See [20090612\_233659\_EmbryonicPeanutPlant | An embryonic peanut p… | Flickr](http://www.flickr.com/photos/56759562@N06/9435512010/). What you see in this picture is a peanut plant. It’s very tiny, but if it had been allowed to live, it would have grown much larger, and eventually gone on to produce more peanuts. In this case, its fate had been decided otherwise, long before it came into my possession. It was already dead, had been roasted, and just after I took this picture, I ate it. > > Those who argue that at acorn isn’t an oak tree do so in ignorance of the fact that the acorn actually contains a tiny oak tree, just as this peanut contained a tiny peanut plant. So, I could sell you an acorn, and you would buy it for the price of an acorn tree, or a fertile egg, if you wanted Chicken! ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/98 "2013-08-04T11:52:31Z")
I find it strange, that people who are anti abortion think nothing of killing innocent people, and yes some still in the womb in a war, which causes many innocent deaths on both sides but a mother who is risking her life, that she knows will spend a life of suffering,or cause her other children to maybe starve to death, as it does in third world countries. And the poverty in some countries where their very existence is one of a life long suffering? ---
**Author:** ![gracer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8e7dd6/32.png) [@gracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gracer)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/99 "2013-08-04T11:56:29Z")
> [@Bob\_Blaylock](#): > > I think that nearly everyone recognizes that there are certain extreme circumstances under which it is justifiable to take the life of a human being. > > The vast majority of abortions, however, take place under circumstances that are very far short of the level that would, in any other context, be considered sufficient to justify a homicide. > > A position that was morally and logically consistent would hold abortion to be exaction comparable to other forms of homicide; hold that it should only be legal under circumstances that are comparable to other circumstances under which it is legally-justifiable to kill a human being; and that anyone who willfully has any part in an abortion which does not involve sufficiently-extreme circumstances should be subject to the same legal consequences as anyone who otherwise takes place in an illegal homicide. Oh don’t worry, I treat everyone equally. If you crawled into my vagina to live in my uterus I would politely serve you an eviction notice. If you were to die upon being evicted that is entirely your problem. I’m sure all manner of Castle Doctrines and Stand Your Ground Laws apply to people wanting to live in my body. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/100 "2013-08-04T11:58:38Z")
> [@Bob\_Blaylock](#): > > I think that nearly everyone recognizes that there are certain extreme circumstances under which it is justifiable to take the life of a human being. > > The vast majority of abortions, however, take place under circumstances that are very far short of the level that would, in any other context, be considered sufficient to justify a homicide. > > A position that was morally and logically consistent would hold abortion to be exaction comparable to other forms of homicide; hold that it should only be legal under circumstances that are comparable to other circumstances under which it is legally-justifiable to kill a human being; and that anyone who willfully has any part in an abortion which does not involve sufficiently-extreme circumstances should be subject to the same legal consequences as anyone who otherwise takes place in an illegal homicide. I know I am repeating my self from other posts, but If a person is in a room where there are many frozen embryos , and one living and born human being, would they(or you) save the embryo’s or the person already born? What if the person is one of your own already born children. or someone you love? ---
**Author:** ![JackieLikesVariety](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackielikesvariety/32/296_2.png) [@JackieLikesVariety](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JackieLikesVariety)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2013, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853/101 "2013-08-18T16:18:31Z")
anyone who thinks an acorn is an oak tree wouldn’t mind paying for a house and getting just a set of blueprints. it’s exactly the same thing, after all. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-the-abortion-issue-ever-be-finally-resolved/254853.md?page=6)