# 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:** 6
**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, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/101 "2009-08-28T05:24:54Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > I hope you realize this is the point of my whole argument. 🙂 I know you think it is, but you’re mistaken in your assumptions. ---
**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, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/102 "2009-08-28T05:28:04Z")
I’m noticing that I was misinterpreted to have implied that pregnancy and childbirth are not traumatic. Obviously they are, but I’m saying there should be additional consideration and counseling for the choices a younger, less emotionally intelligent or mature person. I’m not advocating adoption or childbirth over abortion, I’m making a suggestion that emotions should be considered, not just physical well-being. ---
**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, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/103 "2009-08-28T05:34:21Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > I don’t know what happens before the abortion, so I will take two roads: > > If nothing is explained and all that happens is a form is signed and the fetus is bumped off, then there should be careful explanation as to the procedure and ultrasounds of the fetus before the final decision. The procedure is explained. There is no reason to show an ultrasound. The state has no compelling interest in trying to talk a woman out of exercising her Constittional rights. > [@](#): > > If this is already done normally, then I just think tests should be done to confirm DNA of the father Why? Just so you know, there is no way to do a paternity test on an embryo, and no easy way to do it later in pregnancy except for an uncomfrtble and invasive procedure which pierces the amniotic sac. The identity of the sperm donor is legally irrelevant. The right to terminate belongs to the woman. > [@](#): > > and/or that there was no rape. Finding DNA of a relative or evidence of rape would make counseling a high priority, instead of just never speaking of the matter again once the patient leaves the building. How is DNA going to show evidence of rape? Testing for incest is an invasion of privacy, impossible early in pregnancy (when termination is the easiest and least traumatic) and legally irrelevant to a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy. > [@](#): > > I kind of ran myself into a wall there, but I still assert that there should be careful emotional consideration based on age. That’s all I was ever saying. Careful consideration by who? ---
**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:** [August 28, 2009, 5:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/104 "2009-08-28T05:37:19Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > \<90-95% [is the effectiveness of birth control pills] If every woman of childbearing years was on the pill in a country the size of the United States, this would mean thousands, if not tens of thosands of unwanted pregnancies, simply by random chance. > [@](#): > > So you refuse to take personal responsibility? You have all the sex you want but refuse to accept the consequences? I don’t understand how getting an abortion is evading responsibility or failing to face the consquences. The woman conveyed herself to a clinic, underwent the procudure, paid for it… problem solved. Evading the responsibility would be living in denial about the pregnancy, delivering the baby in a bathroom stall and leaving it in a dumpster, which is also not unheard of in a country the size of the United States. ---
**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, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/105 "2009-08-28T05:38:56Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > I don’t know what happens before the abortion, so I will take two roads: > > If nothing is explained and all that happens is a form is signed and the fetus is bumped off, then there should be careful explanation as to the procedure and ultrasounds of the fetus before the final decision. > > If this is already done normally, then I just think tests should be done to confirm DNA of the father and/or that there was no rape. Finding DNA of a relative or evidence of rape would make counseling a high priority, instead of just never speaking of the matter again once the patient leaves the building. > > I kind of ran myself into a wall there, but I still assert that there should be careful emotional consideration based on age. That’s all I was ever saying. It’s standard procedure to give the girl/woman some counseling. That’s true if she is 14 or 40. There was an ultrasound law in Oklahoma that just got struck down: [http://www.feministing.com/archives/017319.html](http://www.feministing.com/archives/017319.html) Requiring DNA testing seems equally intrusive. Counseling should be available if the girl wants it but evidence of rape might be gone by the time she is going for an abortion. Statutory rape would be impossible to prove with any kind of physical exam anyway. ---
**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, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/106 "2009-08-28T05:40:39Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Abortion may be traumatic to some, but not as traumatic as keeping a kid or having a kid and giving it away. Why don’t we let the woman decide which is the least traumatic option? I cannot speak for all abortion providers (although I would be surprised if they were very different) but Planned Parenthood at least counseled all women seeking an abortion. There was no walk in, get an abortion and walk out stuff. There were procedures in place that assessed the women by talking with them and fully counseling them about ALL their options (of which abortion was only one). The information was straight forward, honest and no pressure was put on the woman to choose one option over another. They were strongly encouraged to talk to their parent(s) (if they were a minor) and if she would not do that then encouraged to seek guidance of an adult they did trust (other relative first, teacher, family friend and what have you). If they felt the woman was under undue pressure or not in her right mind (e.g. retarded, psychotic, on drugs or being unduly pressured by family or what have you) she’d see our staff psychiatrist for further assessment to be sure she was capable of making the decision for herself. Depending on the deal there were staff attorneys to step in if necessary (that was very rare where I was but they were there). In short, the whole thing was very caring of the woman and ensuring she was doing what she wanted once she knew all her options and was strongly encouraged to seek outside moral support from someone she trusted. There is no data I have seen to suggest the trauma **Blut Aus Nord** seems to be assuming. Doubtless there is some woman somewhere who after an abortion fell apart and never recovered but nearly all cope and move on and are in no way permanently damaged for doing it. Were it otherwise, with all the abortions performed, I think we’d have no trouble spotting “abortions ruin young women” were that the case. ---
**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, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/107 "2009-08-28T05:45:29Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The procedure is explained. There is no reason to show an ultrasound. The state has no compelling interest in trying to talk a woman out of exercising her Constittional rights. > > Why? > > Just so you know, there is no way to do a paternity test on an embryo, and no easy way to do it later in pregnancy except for an uncomfrtble and invasive procedure which pierces the amniotic sac. > > The identity of the sperm donor is legally irrelevant. The right to terminate belongs to the woman. > > How is DNA going to show evidence of rape? > > Testing for incest is an invasion of privacy, impossible early in pregnancy (when termination is the easiest and least traumatic) and legally irrelevant to a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy. > > Careful consideration by who? First part I’ll assume is true on your word, so I’ve nothing there. Not DNA evidence, I mean physical damage to the uterine wall and emotional evidence. The damage can remain for a pretty long time sometimes. And if you assert that a woman should have her privacy, then I can’t say anything otherwise. Her choice will be unquestionable and final. Abortion will remain a completely emotionally-detached, physical procedure. I just thought psychological consideration and counseling from, let’s say… a counselor, would be in order. Assuming measures were taken to prevent pregnancy and they failed, we’re clear that the choice is now entirely in the hands of the mother. As you say, they should not be interfered with or should not have their rights violated. But does this mean they’re not entitled to anything further? What if there are no friends or family to discuss the matter with? The emotional aspect is a tricky one, and should be addressed professionally. This does not imply invasion of privacy. ---
**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, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/108 "2009-08-28T05:48:58Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I cannot speak for all abortion providers (although I would be surprised if they were very different) but Planned Parenthood at least counseled all women seeking an abortion. There was no walk in, get an abortion and walk out stuff. There were procedures in place that assessed the women by talking with them and fully counseling them about ALL their options (of which abortion was only one). The information was straight forward, honest and no pressure was put on the woman to choose one option over another. They were strongly encouraged to talk to their parent(s) (if they were a minor) and if she would not do that then encouraged to seek guidance of an adult they did trust (other relative first, teacher, family friend and what have you). If they felt the woman was under undue pressure or not in her right mind (e.g. retarded, psychotic, on drugs or being unduly pressured by family or what have you) she’d see our staff psychiatrist for further assessment to be sure she was capable of making the decision for herself. Depending on the deal there were staff attorneys to step in if necessary (that was very rare where I was but they were there). See, **right there**. This has just answered my every question, and apparently my idea to address the emotional issues professionally already exists. So I guess I might as well have been arguing to legalize the color blue. ---
**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, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/109 "2009-08-28T05:49:06Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > Not DNA evidence, I mean physical damage to the uterine wall… Why are we looking for damage to the uterus? ---
**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:** [August 28, 2009, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/110 "2009-08-28T05:49:14Z")
I’m curious how “rape-exception-only” arguers will deal with a woman who claims the following: “Six weeks ago, I went out clubbing. I must have drank a lot, or possibly somebody slipped me something because the next morning I had little or no memory of the night before. I only began to suspect I was pregnant when I missed my cycle four weeks later . I gave it an extra two to be sure and took a home pregnancy test. I suspect I may have been raped, but I have no way of proving it or identifying the rapist. I just want to put the matter behind me as quickly as possible and get on with my life.” I suspect if more restrictive abortion laws were put in place, with a rape exception, any woman who wanted an abortion need only claim some variation of the above text. Heck, there could easily be websites advising women on what to say to their doctors in order to get a rape-exception pass, and there is no way to tell if she is lying or not, unless the people who passed the law intend to expend preposterous amounts of money investigating each case. So, how _do_ you prove if the above statement is true or not, and what penalties do you have in mind if it is a lie? Does the woman have to make the statement under oath and be subject to perjury charges? is a doctor obliged to report a woman who has made the claim several times in order to procure abortions on different occasions? What feasible enforcement mechanisms, if any, are contemplated? ---
**Author:** ![LEGTHEIII](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/db5fbb/32.png) [@LEGTHEIII](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LEGTHEIII)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/111 "2009-08-28T05:53:23Z")
This whole entire debate is utterly useless. Everyone knows that a human becomes a human when his/her sexual organ is rubbed against a honeycomb and fanned dry with palm trees. ---
**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, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/112 "2009-08-28T05:55:11Z")
> [@Nicest\_of\_the\_Damned](#): > > Why are we looking for damage to the uterus? Rape is “forced entry”, which usually results in greater damage than usual. I actually just meant the vagina, uterine wall is farther up. Derp derp on me. ---
**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, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/113 "2009-08-28T05:55:18Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > I’m guessing ageism would be against me if I told you my age, but I’m 16. Hey! Always nice to see a peer around here. Anyway, I’m not sure what you are arguing. If you’re saying that a 14 year old is less mature, and more likely to be traumatized by a pregnancy (however it ends) than a 40 year old, I completely agree. But that has little to do with abortion. If you are suggesting that 14 year-olds be legally barred from stopping their pregnancy, because they’re less well-equipped to handle it…well, I don’t follow your logic. Abortion is the end of a process, a highly traumatizing event, perhaps, but just one event. Meanwhile, a full pregnancy is nine months, and a child takes 18 _years_ to raise. It seems to me that if there’s a pregnant female unable to deal with her pregnancy, abortion would be significantly less tramautizing than not aborting. Now, would it have been better for her to not get pregnant at all? Of course. But the looming prospect of kids has always been a consequence of sex for humans, and it’s never been a significant deterrent. To pretend that preventing abortion would deter teen sex is ignorant. ---
**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, 5:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/114 "2009-08-28T05:57:06Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > I’m noticing that I was misinterpreted to have implied that pregnancy and childbirth are not traumatic. Obviously they are, but I’m saying there should be additional consideration and counseling for the choices a younger, less emotionally intelligent or mature person. I’m not advocating adoption or childbirth over abortion, I’m making a suggestion that emotions should be considered, not just physical well-being. Missed this one. Yes, that’s a perfectly reasonable and agreeable position. ---
**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, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/115 "2009-08-28T05:59:38Z")
> [@LEGTHEIII](#): > > This whole entire debate is utterly useless. > Everyone knows that a human becomes a human when his/her sexual organ is rubbed against a honeycomb and fanned dry with palm trees. The logical fallacies here are astounding. The artichoke that hangs on my window tells me secrets that imply human vestigial organs only rebuke anally incestuous bear cubs on cold winter nights. ---
**Author:** ![LEGTHEIII](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/db5fbb/32.png) [@LEGTHEIII](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LEGTHEIII)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/116 "2009-08-28T06:02:26Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > The logical fallacies here are astounding. The artichoke that hangs on my window tells me secrets that imply human vestigial organs only rebuke anally incestuous bear cubs on cold winter nights. You’re missing the entire point of what I previously stated. I was implying that simply BECAUSE a giraffe vomits on a local raccoon, it does not make him a sex offender in coastal regions. Now, artichokes are known to be devious when your toilet faces due northwest. I do not know what direction your loo is positioned toward, so this entire engagement is pointless. ---
**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, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/117 "2009-08-28T06:02:38Z")
> [@pedescribe](#): > > Hey! Always nice to see a peer around here. > > Anyway, I’m not sure what you are arguing. If you’re saying that a 14 year old is less mature, and more likely to be traumatized by a pregnancy (however it ends) than a 40 year old, I completely agree. But that has little to do with abortion. > > If you are suggesting that 14 year-olds be legally barred from stopping their pregnancy, because they’re less well-equipped to handle it…well, I don’t follow your logic. > > Abortion is the end of a process, a highly traumatizing event, perhaps, but just one event. Meanwhile, a full pregnancy is nine months, and a child takes 18 _years_ to raise. It seems to me that if there’s a pregnant female unable to deal with her pregnancy, abortion would be significantly less tramautizing than not aborting. > > Now, would it have been better for her to not get pregnant at all? Of course. But the looming prospect of kids has always been a consequence of sex for humans, and it’s never been a significant deterrent. To pretend that preventing abortion would deter teen sex is ignorant. I was arguing for the institution of a different approach to the whole ordeal. Then I found out it already exists. My argument has been rendered meaningless, basically. I just learned through debate what I could have learned through research, but with the additional of personal insights, which is far more valuable to me than data. ---
**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, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/118 "2009-08-28T06:05:25Z")
> [@LEGTHEIII](#): > > You’re missing the entire point of what I previously stated. > I was implying that simply BECAUSE a giraffe vomits on a local raccoon, it does not make him a sex offender in coastal regions. > Now, artichokes are known to be devious when your toilet faces due northwest. I do not know what direction your loo is positioned toward, so this entire engagement is pointless. Interestingly enough, I just recently diagrammed my infallible position on the matter: [http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/6338/lietzsche.jpg](http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/6338/lietzsche.jpg) I can see your bowels quaking in fear. ---
**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, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/119 "2009-08-28T06:07:27Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > 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. Pure garbage. Just because there’s no neat division between two extremes doesn’t mean the extremes don’t exist. The existence of twilight does not mean midnight and noon are the same. The fact that there’s no neat line between mindless fetus and person just means that nature isn’t constrained to follow humanity’s fondness for neat divisions. > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > 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). I don’t agree; viability is a technological definition not a biological or moral one. Eventually, artificial wombs will be developed and viability will start at conception. Defining abortion rights by viability is just asking to have a woman’s right to choose eroded away by advancing medical technology. > [@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. So basically you want to punish women. And what right do you have to coerce women to NOT treat sex as just being for fun? > [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > 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. Yes; they are more easily terrorized and oppressed by anti-abortion people; although perhaps forced breeding advocates would be a better term. > [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > If nothing is explained and all that happens is a form is signed and the fetus is bumped off, then there should be careful explanation as to the procedure and ultrasounds of the fetus before the final decision. In other words, you want to try to talk them into feeling guilty and try to make sure they are traumatized. Since I’m sure that by “Counselling” you mean “tell them they are horrible and evil for wanting to have an abortion and that God hates them and that the should submit to men and be a good breeder like God intended them to be.” And even if I’m wrong and that isn’t what you intend, that IS what the result will be. ---
**Author:** ![LEGTHEIII](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/db5fbb/32.png) [@LEGTHEIII](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LEGTHEIII)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961/120 "2009-08-28T06:07:27Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > Interestingly enough, I just recently diagrammed my infallible position on the matter: > > [ImageShack - Best place for all of your image hosting and image sharing needs](http://img361.imageshack.us/img361/6338/lietzsche.jpg) > > I can see your bowels quaking in fear. EVERY time I attempt to defend my position on local wasps migrating into my Captain crunch, somebody pulls out the picture of Nietzsche sucking on somebodies arm. Cornflakes attempt to shock roller coasters with no more than four times the eucalyptus urine of a Siamese cat’s left eyebrow. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-abortion-contradict-the-declaration-of-independence-and-the-constitution/507961.md?page=7)