# Damn abortion protesters **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 4, 2005, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649 "2005-04-04T13:06:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 28
**Author:** ![calm\_kiwi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc348/32.png) [@calm\_kiwi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/calm_kiwi)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/542 "2005-04-15T12:34:08Z")
> [@Malacandra](#): > > I’ll take a driveby at that, **calmkiwi** : because they think that death should be handed out to those who deserve it, which doesn’t include those who’ve done nothing wrong except being conceived inconveniently. Both viewpoints are independently arguable, I’m just saying they are not mutually exclusive. You can wonder also why the exact opposite is true. > > :: drives off :: Yeah I know. Both sides are equally perplexing I’m sure. I think the death penalty is inhumane and support the right to abortion. Here is why. Anyone aborted has lived a few short weeks in water world. They have bugger all cognitive ability. They have NO sense of who they are as a person. Someone recieving the death penalty is fully aware of who they are and what is happening to them. They also (PROBABLY) have family who know them and may even like or love them. The death of that person effects many people…maybe it is a good thing for some. My child is the grandchild of one of the last few people hung in Britain. To date it hasn’t effected him at all (hell grandparents are just old people anyway) but it had a HUGE impact on his father. It is possible and maybe even very possible that only one person knows the zygote was ever even a glimmer in the eye. The only person affected by it’s “death” is the would-be-mother. The zygote was never a person. Maybe I’m unusual for my generation and location but having felt the fallout from both the death penalty and abortion, I honestly believe the death penalty is more destructive. Yes I understand the anger of victims of those who get the death penalty but as I said those deaths affect many. Abortion is is something that is between a woman and her own morality. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/543 "2005-04-15T12:55:39Z")
> [@Muad'Dib](#): > > Does Brian still have a right to life while lying in the coma? Don’t forget that such injuries with such aftermaths have occured. No they have not: what you’re talking about is utter fantasy. There have been situations in which PARTS of a person’s personality have been destroyed by brain injury, but there’s never been a situation in which a person’s entire personality has been destroyed. I do not see the point in entertaining your fantasies in such a serious discussion. > [@](#): > > You can read the above post, but also think of it this way. Say you and the artist were the last people on Earth. You have what is the last, and last possible, canvas and set of paints and brushes on Earth. The artist is about to paint what will be his last and greatest work, a testament to the former, lost glory of man. There is no doubt that this is what his work will accomplish, he has a very good track record. > > However in a fit of unprovoked rage you burn the canvas, piss in the paints, and break the brushes. > > Was something not lost? Again with the fantasies. No, nothing was lost, but you sure did a shitty thing to that artist. > [@](#): > > An insect can experience all of those things. I can build a robot that can experience all of those things. Do those have a right to life? > > Also, if I am correct, then yes, you are advocating infanticide. However I also believe that you don’t believe it, and would never in your right mind advocate it. Therefore you are not a monster. Cite that an insect can _experience_ these things in any meaningful sense? Neurological cites would be helpful–for example, that insects have a nervous system sufficiently similar to an infant’s, or that your robot would. What you believe about my advocacy of infanticide is, at this point, less than meaningless to me. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/544 "2005-04-15T12:58:27Z")
> [@calm kiwi](#): > > Abortion is is something that is between a woman and her own morality. Unfortunately, **cw** , thereby hangs the entire argument. I personally don’t find that “If you don’t believe in abortion, don’t do it; but don’t prevent me from doing it” flies any better than the same sentiment would if you substituted “beating your wife” for “abortion”. But we’re many, many pages into this trainwreck and there is no more sign of either side listening to the other than there usually is, and I’ve not much heart for it in any case. ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/545 "2005-04-15T13:12:02Z")
**malacandra** > [@](#): > > But we’re many, many pages into this trainwreck and there is no more sign of either side listening to the other than there usually is, and I’ve not much heart for it in any case. Oh, please. I listened to **Muad** plenty. I don’t agree with his position. And I think he is a sanctimonous prig to boot. But I did indeed listen, as he advocated to put women in camps etc. I gave him more time and attention than he deserves, frankly. **LeftHand** I don’t want to go find the post, but I would say about the personality being lost etc–that is what happened (among other things) to Terri Schiavo and other PVS sufferers. So I am confused by your " but there’s never been a situation in which a person’s entire personality has been destroyed." But I also don’t want to derail the train wreck! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/546 "2005-04-15T13:18:26Z")
> [@eleanorigby](#): > > **LeftHand** I don’t want to go find the post, but I would say about the personality being lost etc–that is what happened (among other things) to Terri Schiavo and other PVS sufferers. So I am confused by your " > but there’s never been a situation in which a person’s entire personality has been destroyed." His fantasy was about a situation where a person’s entire personality had been destroyed, but “he will wake up and he will be restored to healthfullness and full mental faculty.” It’s the combination of these two that makes it a fantasy. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/547 "2005-04-15T13:19:30Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > His fantasy was about a situation where a person’s entire personality had been destroyed, but “he will wake up and he will be restored to healthfullness and full mental faculty.” It’s the combination of these two that makes it a fantasy. > > Daniel Ah, now it is all clear…sorry to have wasted your time! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![calm\_kiwi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc348/32.png) [@calm\_kiwi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/calm_kiwi)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/548 "2005-04-15T13:23:08Z")
> [@Malacandra](#): > > Unfortunately, **cw** , thereby hangs the entire argument. > > I personally don’t find that “If you don’t believe in abortion, don’t do it; but don’t prevent me from doing it” flies any better than the same sentiment would if you substituted “beating your wife” for “abortion”. But we’re many, many pages into this trainwreck and there is no more sign of either side listening to the other than there usually is, and I’ve not much heart for it in any case. I’m sorry you don’t have the heart for it beause I suddenly got “your” position. My position does sound hypocritical except for the fact that if you beat your wife she is an actual life human being with years of “being”. The aborted “person” has had a few weeks swimming in water world and has no idea of what or who they are. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/549 "2005-04-15T13:33:57Z")
> [@calm kiwi](#): > > I’m sorry you don’t have the heart for it beause I suddenly got “your” position. My position does sound hypocritical except for the fact that if you beat your wife she is an actual life human being with years of “being”. The aborted “person” has had a few weeks swimming in water world and has no idea of what or who they are. Thanks, **calm kiwi** , and in that case I’ll venture one more reply: Another significant difference is that my wife will likely get better if I beat her and, assuming I get my just deserts, can look forward to the remainder of her natural life; whereas the aborted “person” (and thereby hangs a whole 'nother debate) is rubbed out for sure and permanently. We rightly despise wife-beating; I merely point out that privacy is no defence. I do not believe, in the vast majority of cases, that anyone’s better off for being killed before birth. I also don’t believe that the vast majority of abortions are carried out on “people” who are better off for it even by such a definition. ---
**Author:** ![robertliguori](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/46a35a/32.png) [@robertliguori](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robertliguori)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/550 "2005-04-15T13:36:01Z")
> [@Muad'Dib](#): > > I still say that life begins, as well as the right to life, at conception. Among other reasons (that I have already stated) because it is the only non-fuzzy point in the baby’s life. Quickening is fuzzy, the formation of the brainstem is fuzzy, the point where the child can survive outside the womb is fuzzy but the moment of conception is not fuzzy. It is a definite that then the new life began and to get in the way of this developing process is to end that life. As has been said before: Take a fertilized ovum, that has already started to divide. If implanted into a uterus, given a steady stream of nutrition, etc. it will eventually be born as a healthy baby. (Yes, that’s a big etc. Work with me here.) Now, tease one of those newly-divided cells off of the ovum. You now have twins. Re-insert it into the ovum. Back to an only child. You can do a little cha-cha of creation and destruction with the cell if you like. In fact, since each of these cells has the potential to become a person, one could argue that you are morally obligated to remove each dividing cell as it forms, to prevent the other cells from keeping it from reaching its true potential. Of course, this line of thinking would prevent you from having any of these cells develop into an embryo. (Hint: when logic + premises = insanity, and the logic checks out, it’s time to re-examine your premises.) Also, is anyone else rather sadly amused that **Muad’Dib** is openly admitting that his standard of life is what is (to him) clear and unambiguous, rather than what is, you know, actually a good standard, or even admitting that there isn’t one? If nothing else, I think I’ve done a good job of showing why trying to claim that applying human standards of morality to individual cells is silly. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/551 "2005-04-15T13:37:00Z")
> [@calm kiwi](#): > > I’m sorry you don’t have the heart for it beause I suddenly got “your” position. My position does sound hypocritical except for the fact that if you beat your wife she is an actual life human being with years of “being”. The aborted “person” has had a few weeks swimming in water world and has no idea of what or who they are. I agree with prolifers on one point: for me, a tremendous amount hinges on whether a fetus is a moral subject (that is, a being with intrinsic rights). If so, then we have a very delicate balancing act we gotta engage in. An infant is wholly dependant on an adult’s attention for survival: without almost constant effort from this adult (whether mother, father, or other person–I’ll say"parent" from here on), the infant will die. The infant thus restricts the freedom of the parent. Yet we do not, as a society, say that the parent is free to stop paying this attention to the infant, that the parent’s freedom is the only issue. If the parent wants to be rid of the responsibility, then the parent must take certain measures (differing states have differing rules) to transfer the responsibility. At no point may the parent take measures that endanger the health of the infant, and virtually nobody objects to laws preventing the parent from doing so. So what’s the difference between the infant and the fetus? For me, the difference is that the infant has more rights, based on the infant’s nervous system, identity, capacity for pleasure and pain, for desire, etc. The more the infant has of these characteristics, the more interested I am in protecting the infant. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/552 "2005-04-15T14:02:33Z")
Yes, Daniel. I find it hard to be very exercised over the rights of the fertilised ovum. I am much more interested in the creature once it’s reached the point of development where, if born prematurely, it could survive with proper medical care (which puts it way back beyond the 30-week point). Future potential gets weighed in somewhere, but it’s not the whole thing. Unfortunately, we are routinely aborting foeti that are, among other things, fully capable of exploring their limited environment with the limited tools at their disposal, and may even be developing a sense of curiosity. ---
**Author:** ![calm\_kiwi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9fc348/32.png) [@calm\_kiwi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/calm_kiwi)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/553 "2005-04-15T14:09:02Z")
> [@Malacandra](#): > > privacy is no defence. > > I do not believe, in the vast majority of cases, that anyone’s better off for being killed before birth. I also don’t believe that the vast majority of abortions are carried out on “people” who are better off for it even by such a definition. And the mystery that is life means neither of us will ever know. I have admitted this here before and I will again. I have had 2 abortions. I am not proud or ashamed of this fact. In the first I was young, poor and millions of miles from home. Yes I could have carried that would-be-child to term. The chances of me being able to get home EVER would have decreased lots (check the UK-NZ airfares!). I was on the pill. The second was only a couple of years ago. I hear you! Yes I should have known better. Yes I was using protection! Yes I was using more then one kind of protection! No, I don’t know how it happened. Abortion was the obvious, logical and sensible choice. Do I have twinges of regret? Yes. Do I know I did the right thing? Yes! I know this sounds abhorrent to those opposed to abortion but I aborted a collection of cells. Yes it was a collection of cells that would have become a person but it wasn’t a person. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/554 "2005-04-15T14:24:04Z")
> [@robertliguori](#): > > (Hint: when logic + premises = insanity, and the logic checks out, it’s time to re-examine your premises.) I really like this. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/555 "2005-04-15T14:43:45Z")
> [@Malacandra](#): > > I am much more interested in the creature once it’s reached the point of development where, if born prematurely, it could survive with proper medical care (which puts it way back beyond the 30-week point). Future potential gets weighed in somewhere, but it’s not the whole thing. Unfortunately, we are routinely aborting foeti that are, among other things, fully capable of exploring their limited environment with the limited tools at their disposal, and may even be developing a sense of curiosity. First, I’m not sure which way you mean “way back beyond the 30-week point.” You mean earlier, right? Second, I don’t weigh future potential at all, as stated earlier. Third, can you give me a cite on that adverb “routinely”? My impression was that late abortions are exceedingly rare. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/556 "2005-04-15T14:50:42Z")
Hi Daniel, just briefly: 1. Yes, earlier. 2. I think you would, with a suitable thought-experiment not related to abortion, and then we could factor that into the reasoning. 3. I don’t know how common late-term (beyond, say, 22 weeks) abortions are. I accept that they are by no means the majority, but I’m not sure about “exceedingly rare”. I need data… ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/557 "2005-04-15T15:14:42Z")
Okay, makes sense on 1. 2) I weigh **existing people’s** hopes and desires and fears about the future, but only because they exist now. I also weigh the hopes and desires and fears that I have reason to believe **will** exist in the future (not **may** exist, **will** ): if a woman decides to carry a child to term, I can see an argument preventing her from taking thalidomide during her pregnancy, because that is likely to thwart the desires of the child that WILL probably be born. What I don’t consider is desires that WILL NOT ever exist, even when we’re talking about a situation where they’ll not exist because of a decision that someone makes. 3) Okay, so I’ll consider “routinely” retracted, at least temporarily. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/558 "2005-04-15T15:26:04Z")
Not so much retracted as more clearly defined. I do not and did not mean to imply that late-term abortions are the most representative examples, but that though rare they are carried out on a fairly regular basis. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2005, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649/559 "2005-04-15T16:00:20Z")
No, they most assuredly are not. Aside from being illegal in several states that allow abortion, physicians are reluctant to perform abortions past 18 weeks and will turn women away if they feel she has past a point where it’s a danger that the fetus has developed too far into a pregnancy to be aborted. So. Please provide a cite in which they are performed “regularly.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/damn-abortion-protesters/297649.md?page=27)