# Does Abortion Contradict the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 27, 2009, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961 "2009-08-27T22:28:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**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:** [August 28, 2009, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/61 "2009-08-28T01:41:50Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > And what does it mean to say “A fetus is not a person”? It means that it doesn’t have a brain capable of supporting personhood. A fetus isn’t a person and can be aborted for the same reason a brain dead person can be declared dead and his organs salvaged. It’s our minds that make up people; the anti-abortionists want to redefine humanity down to the level of meat that isn’t dead yet. They are contemptuous of everything that actually makes human life valuable in the first place. > [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > Do you mean at the very end of prenatal development? What about after 40 weeks of gestation? To be _ **very** _ conservative, 6 months would be the earliest it might start to qualify, since that’s when its brainwaves start to take on normal characteristics. It’s more likely close to or even after birth, but our technology and knowledge of the brain isn’t good enough to say when. ---
**Author:** ![Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blut_Aus_Nord)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/62 "2009-08-28T01:44:04Z")
This has no real moral or scientific basis, but it’s still an interesting thought: Consider the Sorites paradox: Premise 1: 1,000,000 grains of sand is a heap. Premise 2: A heap of sand minus one grain is still a heap. Based on these two premises, the heap will remain a heap if one grain is removed at a time, thereby eliminating any differentiation between a grain and a heap. And now find a correlation to people: Premise 1: A human being will exist 1,000,000 minutes after conception (694 days), assuming survival. Premise 2: A human being will still exist if one minute of existence was removed. I’ve now eliminated the line between conception and the embodiment of a human being. You heaps of sand. ---
**Author:** ![Rubystreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Rubystreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubystreak)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/63 "2009-08-28T01:46:26Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > You need to read up on birth control because you are inconsistent here (and elsewhere in this thread with this). > > Barrier methods (e.g. condom) prevent conception (assuming they do not break). > > The pill does not prevent conception (it can inhibit the chances of it but not outright prevent it). The pill prevents implantation. Basically the woman has her period with no clue she was ever pregnant assuming conception occurred. This is incorrect. The Pill suppresses ovulation by tricking your ovary into thinking it released an egg when it didn’t. Without ovulation, you cannot conceive. Thus, women on the Pill do not, unbeknownst to them, expel fertilized eggs, because no egg is released to be fertilized. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/64 "2009-08-28T01:47:29Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > \<90-95% > > So you refuse to take personal responsibility? You have all the sex you want but refuse to accept the consequences? Getting an abortion IS taking responsibility. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/65 "2009-08-28T01:47:57Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > To be _ **very** _ conservative, 6 months would be the earliest it might start to qualify, since that’s when its brainwaves start to take on normal characteristics. It’s more likely close to or even after birth, but our technology and knowledge of the brain isn’t good enough to say when. I think viability outside the womb is a good marker and currently 6 months gestation seems to be a fairly hard limit (with I think a very few outliers a bit earlier but very, very few that survived). Before that up to the woman. If she cannot make up her mind by then she has defacto accepted the responsibilities of bearing the child. Plenty of time before that to choose otherwise. After 6 months then life of the mother should be the only criteria to abort. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/66 "2009-08-28T01:50:18Z")
> [@Rubystreak](#): > > This is incorrect. The Pill suppresses ovulation by tricking your ovary into thinking it released an egg when it didn’t. Without ovulation, you cannot conceive. Thus, women on the Pill do not, unbeknownst to them, expel fertilized eggs, because no egg is released to be fertilized. The pill works two ways. It suppresses ovulation. But it doesn’t do that 100%. IF you do ovulate, the pill also makes the uterus an unwelcome spot for a fertilized egg. It isn’t 100% on that either. But both of these things together makes for a pretty darn good method of birth control - but it is true that you can conceive on the pill but the pill will prevent implantation - thus it isn’t necessarily a contraceptive. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/67 "2009-08-28T01:53:45Z")
> [@Rubystreak](#): > > This is incorrect. The Pill suppresses ovulation by tricking your ovary into thinking it released an egg when it didn’t. Without ovulation, you cannot conceive. Thus, women on the Pill do not, unbeknownst to them, expel fertilized eggs, because no egg is released to be fertilized. Depends on the pill. I think many are combination pills these days and try to work on a variety of levels. One being suppressing ovulation. That said suppressing ovulation is not a 100% thing. Conception _can_ occur while using the Pill. It may be unlikely but not a foregone conclusion. If you are opposed to abortion…really opposed as in life begins at conception then you must have the baby…then to be logically consistent you must oppose the Pill as birth control because the possibility exists for a defacto abortion to occur. ---
**Author:** ![Rubystreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Rubystreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubystreak)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/68 "2009-08-28T02:02:39Z")
Yes, the Minipill apparently works by preventing implantation, but the combo pill prevents ovulation. I could offer cites but I think it’s pretty clear. Bottom line is, the only way to avoid conception 100% is to abstain from sex entirely, since even the best form of birth control (the hormonal IUD, IIRC) is not fool proof. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/69 "2009-08-28T02:04:22Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > Then take the Pill or abstain from sex. What about rape victims? Say some woman who is abstaining from sex (at least with men) get’s raped; she was being responsible and did not willingly have sex. Or does being “responsible” to you mean she should being taken birth control _in case she got raped_? Would you allow her an abortion or force her to go through pregnancy and childbirth? ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/70 "2009-08-28T02:07:20Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > I think fetuses have the right to live and they’re no mindless lumps of flesh, they will be human beings. I marvel at how you could say this considering YOU were once a fetus. Fine. You’re entitled to your belief. If you get pregnant, you decide what to do based on anything you want to believe and I will not oppose it. But if I get pregnant, it’s none of your fucking business. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/71 "2009-08-28T02:27:32Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > There are plenty of differing opinions floating around here, so just to be clear: > > **When do you think a person becomes a person? Upon taking the first breath? When brain waves become active?** When it’s born works for me. Certainly not before the 3rd trimester. > [@](#): > > My opinion is that just based on the fact that an embryo has direction and design in growth, a “person” if formed upon conception. Comparing the embryo to a newborn baby is almost like comparing a newborn baby to an adult; the latter is much further developed, more intelligent, and more closely resembles our idea of a human being in whole, but that does not redefine the former. I don’t know what you mean by “direction” and “design.” I don’t think an embryo has either. I think a more accurate comparison than baby-adult would be between an acorn and an oak tree or an emu egg and an emu. > [@](#): > > And what does it mean to say “A fetus is not a person”? It means that it has not yet turned into a person, the way a watermelon seed has not turned into a watermelon. > [@](#): > > Do you mean at the very end of prenatal development? What about after 40 weeks of gestation? Define fetus. A newborn is almost no more developed than it was a day before, in the womb. As can be seen by premature births (i.e., being born before developing to the ideal point), a fetus is a person, regardless of whether they’re floating is a sack of fluid or being slapped by hordes of nurses. Nobody gets abortions during the third trimester, so that’s an irrelevant issue. At what point does a child become an adult? Is it the moment they turn 18? Is there a difference between a person who is one second younger than 18 years and one second older? Does that therefore mean there is no distinction between a child and an adult? You have to draw a line somewhere. A zygote sure as hell isn’t a person. One good definition of a person is an entity that doesn’t have to live in someone else’s body. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/72 "2009-08-28T02:40:26Z")
> [@Rubystreak](#): > > Yes, the Minipill apparently works by preventing implantation, but the combo pill prevents ovulation. I could offer cites but I think it’s pretty clear. > > Bottom line is, the only way to avoid conception 100% is to abstain from sex entirely, since even the best form of birth control (the hormonal IUD, IIRC) is not fool proof. The point is the Pill is not 100% effective at preventing ovulation so it is _possible_, however unlikely, that fertilization can occur. If you are a diehard pro-life person you really have to oppose the Pill as birth control because some fertilization will occur out of millions of women and the fertilized egg will then run an excellent chance of being expelled (via the other mechanism of the Pill) which brings you to a defacto abortion (albeit the woman never knows). A barrier method is ok however because it absolutely prevents fertilization unless it breaks. If it breaks and the woman gets pregnant then a pro-life person would say bad luck for her, have the baby. In short they can be logically consistent with use of a condom as birth control but not the Pill. ---
**Author:** ![Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blut_Aus_Nord)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/73 "2009-08-28T02:58:05Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > When it’s born works for me. Certainly not before the 3rd trimester. > > I don’t know what you mean by “direction” and “design.” I don’t think an embryo has either. I think a more accurate comparison than baby-adult would be between an acorn and an oak tree or an emu egg and an emu. > > It means that it has not yet turned into a person, the way a watermelon seed has not turned into a watermelon. > > Nobody gets abortions during the third trimester, so that’s an irrelevant issue. > > At what point does a child become an adult? Is it the moment they turn 18? Is there a difference between a person who is one second younger than 18 years and one second older? Does that therefore mean there is no distinction between a child and an adult? You have to draw a line somewhere. A zygote sure as hell isn’t a person. > > One good definition of a person is an entity that doesn’t have to live in someone else’s body. By direction/design I mean there must be a strict adherence to the natural, self-propagated growth cycles in order to develop into a mature entity. The same idea can be applied to a seed. But again, referring to the Sorites paradox, when does the seed become a tree? When it can perform photosynthetic actions or what? The line is too abstract to be tread upon. But as you said, there has to be a line somewhere. I’m for the idea of a fetus being a person when brain waves resemble that of a human being; my stance for humanity upon conception is only based on the idea that more often than not, abortion is a cop-out for younger people who treat sex as a play toy. It’s a bias from a younger person’s POV. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/74 "2009-08-28T03:08:32Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > 1. Were it true an animal would probably be a human suffering for sins in a past life therefore they’d deserve to be killed and eaten. That’s illogical. Were it true, the person would already be suffering from the punishment of being an animal. They’ve already been punished; simply saying that someone is a sinner doesn’t make any and all punishment reasonable. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/75 "2009-08-28T03:43:26Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > But as you said, there has to be a line somewhere. I’m for the idea of a fetus being a person when brain waves resemble that of a human being; my stance for humanity upon conception is only based on the idea that more often than not, abortion is a cop-out for younger people who treat sex as a play toy. It’s a bias from a younger person’s POV. I am not sure but willing to bet a baby’s brain wave patterns are different than an adult’s. A retarded person’s brain waves are probably different than a “normal” person’s. Not sure the brain wave thing is useful. Viability outside the womb seems a good marker which can just be managed these days around six months. As for abortion as a “cop-out” that is bullshit. I worked (many, many moons ago) at Planned Parenthood. I can say with some authority that women seeking abortion were rarely casual about it. Sure some were cavalier but they were the exception overall. Women seeking second or third abortions (or more) were relatively rare. Most found it a big deal, most were not viewing it as birth control so they could go have sex willy-nilly without a care in the world. ---
**Author:** ![Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blut_Aus_Nord)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/76 "2009-08-28T04:14:55Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > … > As for abortion as a “cop-out” that is bullshit. I worked (many, many moons ago) at Planned Parenthood. I can say with some authority that women seeking abortion were rarely casual about it. Sure some were cavalier but they were the exception overall. Women seeking second or third abortions (or more) were relatively rare. Most found it a big deal, most were not viewing it as birth control so they could go have sex willy-nilly without a care in the world. That’s not exactly the point. The point is that the immature psychology of a teen (let’s say) presents abortion as a simple plan B to a successful contraception, not understanding the real implications of an abortion. Only once they are faced with the reality of the situation would they be able to fully comprehend their choice. Kids cannot understand realities vicariously through others, not nearly as well as we think. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/77 "2009-08-28T04:19:21Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > That’s not exactly the point. The point is that the immature psychology of a teen (let’s say) presents abortion as a simple plan B to a successful contraception, not understanding the real implications of an abortion. Only once they are faced with the reality of the situation would they be able to fully comprehend their choice. Kids cannot understand realities vicariously through others, not nearly as well as we think. Hence the extensive sex education we attempted to impart that very knowledge which was all too often blocked by pro-lifers. If the teens are not understanding the implications it is because the adults are failing in educating them. That leaves the young women little recourse except abortion. ---
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/78 "2009-08-28T04:19:37Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > That’s not exactly the point. The point is that the immature psychology of a teen (let’s say) presents abortion as a simple plan B to a successful contraception, not understanding the real implications of an abortion. Only once they are faced with the reality of the situation would they be able to fully comprehend their choice. Kids cannot understand realities vicariously through others, not nearly as well as we think. Are you suggesting that we ban abortion simply to teach and punish kids who put themselves in dangerous situations? Because that’s despicable. ---
**Author:** ![Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blut_Aus_Nord)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/79 "2009-08-28T04:23:49Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > Are you suggesting that we ban abortion simply to teach and punish kids who put themselves in dangerous situations? > > Because that’s despicable. No, I’m saying there should be some age considerations in abortion. I don’t know exactly how it would work, but there should be something to address it. Some 14-year old dweeb is in a different situation than an experienced, married, middle-aged woman. ---
**Author:** ![Nicest\_of\_the\_Damned](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/8baadc/32.png) [@Nicest\_of\_the\_Damned](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nicest_of_the_Damned)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/80 "2009-08-28T04:24:11Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > That’s not exactly the point. The point is that the immature psychology of a teen (let’s say) presents abortion as a simple plan B to a successful contraception, not understanding the real implications of an abortion. What are the “real implications of abortion”? Are they different for a 16 year old vs. a 35 year old? ETA: I see you sort of answered this above. But I still don’t understand what this has to do with the “personhood” of the fetus you mentioned in post #73. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961.md?page=5)