# How come conservatives are against abortion? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 9, 2014, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063 "2014-05-09T16:43:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 43
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2014, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/841 "2014-06-06T21:47:43Z")
> [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > One anti-abortion protestor told me “You should be grateful your mother was pro-life.” Never mind that I was obviously born before legal abortion. > > I asked him “How do you know my mother was pro-life?” He replied “She gave birth to you, didn’t she?” I asked “And pro-choice people don’t give birth?” > > He walked away. It seems to be the strategy of the “pro-life” types to characterize the pro-choice side as some sort of abortion-happy baby haters. They need to look up the meaning of the word “choice” in the dictionary. Consider that the abortion rate in Canada where there are no abortion laws at all and abortions are covered by free health care [is far lower than in the US](http://drjengunter.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/what-happens-when-there-is-no-abortion-law/) (as is the overall rate of teen births and abortions): > [@](#): > > The abortion rate among all women of reproductive age (15-44) in Canada is 14.1/1,000 versus 20/1,000 in the United States. I’ll say it again: The abortion prohibitionists really need to look up the meaning of the word “choice” in the dictionary. They should stare at the definition for as long as it takes for the meaning of the word to really sink in. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2014, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/842 "2014-06-06T21:56:17Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > While liberals of course believe quite differently, viz. that their behavior is the only correct one. Actually, the real difference is that liberals tend to bring facts to the table, such as scientific evidence for stages of fetal development and development of meaningful brain function, and the effects that abortion laws or lack thereof have on society. While anti-abortion conservatives (the self-proclaimed “non-intrusive small government” types) only know one thing: a fetus is “a person”, and the laws must enforce that, facts and consequences be damned, no matter what anyone else thinks, period. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2014, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/843 "2014-06-06T22:12:13Z")
> [@aldiboronti](#): > > While liberals of course believe quite differently, viz. that their behavior is the only correct one. > [@wolfpup](#): > > Actually, the real difference is that liberals tend to bring facts to the table, such as scientific evidence for stages of fetal development and development of meaningful brain function, and the effects that abortion laws or lack thereof have on society. While anti-abortion conservatives (the self-proclaimed “non-intrusive small government” types) only know one thing: a fetus is “a person”, and the laws must enforce that, facts and consequences be damned, no matter what anyone else thinks, period. In addition to that superb answer, **aldiboronti** ’s charge is inexact. Liberals are, at very least, less dogmatic about sole choices. Liberals tend to favor diversity for its own sake. (There’s another thread exploring whether or not this is dumb, but at least it’s granted as factual.) You never see liberals picketing in front of a maternity hospital waving signs demanding anyone have an abortion! ---
**Author:** ![Nars\_Glinley](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nars_glinley/32/8177_2.png) [@Nars\_Glinley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nars_Glinley)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2014, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/844 "2014-06-07T11:59:03Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Actually, the real difference is that liberals tend to bring facts to the table, such as scientific evidence for stages of fetal development and development of meaningful brain function, and the effects that abortion laws or lack thereof have on society. While anti-abortion conservatives (the self-proclaimed “non-intrusive small government” types) only know one thing: a fetus is “a person”, and the laws must enforce that, facts and consequences be damned, no matter what anyone else thinks, period. ISTM that the primary argument that I hear from the pro-choice side is that the government shouldn’t “get between a woman and her doctor”. This is hardly a factual argument. Neither is “A woman shouldn’t have to carry an embryo/fetus/baby that she doesn’t want.” ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2014, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/845 "2014-06-07T13:34:15Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > It seems to be the strategy of the “pro-life” types to characterize the pro-choice side as some sort of abortion-happy baby haters. They need to look up the meaning of the word “choice” in the dictionary. Consider that the abortion rate in Canada where there are no abortion laws at all and abortions are covered by free health care [is far lower than in the US](http://drjengunter.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/what-happens-when-there-is-no-abortion-law/) (as is the overall rate of teen births and abortions): > > I’ll say it again: The abortion prohibitionists really need to look up the meaning of the word “choice” in the dictionary. They should stare at the definition for as long as it takes for the meaning of the word to really sink in. [Here’s another tale about my run-in with an anti-abortion protestor](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=561271). Sorry for the typos, but I was typing one-handed. When Whoopi Goldberg’s 15 year old daughter got pregnant and choose to have the baby, her mother supported her in every way because Whoopi is “pro-choice.” ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2014, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/846 "2014-06-07T20:48:29Z")
> [@Nars\_Glinley](#): > > ISTM that the primary argument that I hear from the pro-choice side is that the government shouldn’t “get between a woman and her doctor”. This is hardly a factual argument. Neither is “A woman shouldn’t have to carry an embryo/fetus/baby that she doesn’t want.” You’re misrepresenting my point. I don’t think I’ve ever made those arguments at all, let alone claimed they were “factual”, although I happen to agree with them and think they represent important value judgments. A factual argument would be something like the biological phases of fetus development, whereby a fetus in an early stage of gestation – the stage where virtually all abortions are performed – could not be considered “a human being” in any sane or rational meaning of the term, since it has no more mind or body than a collection of organic chemicals in a test tube. One could certainly argue that there eventually comes a gray area where the distinction isn’t so clear, and arguments against late-term abortions carry a certain amount of moral weight. But by the same token, in the early developmental stages the claim of “human being” is ludicrous, relying for its authority not on medicine but on scripture and baseless emotion and sometimes imaginative fantasy. When meddling amateurs don’t try to cast their personal fantasies into restrictive abortion laws, the medical profession – guided by the Hippocratic Oath and a rational code of ethics – generally has no ethical problem with early-term abortions on demand, but typically requires a good medical reason for late-term abortions. Another factual argument would be the observation that sociologically similar countries to the US, in the absence of abortion laws but in combination with progressive social and educational policies and availability of contraception, actually have fewer abortions, as well as fewer teen pregnancies. One could also examine the impacts on mother and child and society of unwanted children. These are all real and tangible and measurable impacts. The so-called “pro-life” side has no such logical grounding. They have only one argument, one which makes no scientific sense, and they parrot it incessantly. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2014, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/847 "2014-06-07T21:14:52Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > You’re misrepresenting my point. I don’t think I’ve ever made those arguments at all, let alone claimed they were “factual”, although I happen to agree with them and think they represent important value judgments. A factual argument would be something like the biological phases of fetus development, whereby a fetus in an early stage of gestation – the stage where virtually all abortions are performed – could not be considered “a human being” in any sane or rational meaning of the term, since it has no more mind or body than a collection of organic chemicals in a test tube. Hmm. “Mind” is a terrible term to use if you’re trying to be factual and scientific, as it doesn’t have a well agreed upon definition. And “Body”? You are trying to tell us how rational and factual you are by claiming a fetus in the first trimester has no more of a **body** than a collection of organic chemicals? The median point at which abortions are performed in the US is about [9 weeks.](https://images.search.yahoo.com/images/view;_ylt=AwrTcXxgf5NTpQYAW7GJzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTIzZmJmbzMzBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1nBG9pZAM0NzNmY2E1YWE2YjFhOWRhNzVhMDNhMDM2YzUyYzY0ZgRncG9zAzEwBGl0A2Jpbmc-?back=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.search.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3F_adv_prop%3Dimage%26va%3Dhuman%2Bfetus%2Bat%2B9%2Bweeks%26fr%3Dymyy-t-557%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D10&w=600&h=600&imgurl=img-new.cgtrader.com%2Fitems%2F3357%2Fhuman_embryo_9_weeks_3d_model_4d95fb5c-6914-4c49-90ca-722ddfb23cfb.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cgtrader.com%2F3d-models%2Fcharacter-people%2Fanatomy%2Fhuman-embryo-9-weeks&size=27.2KB&name=...+%2C+detailed+and+anatomically+accurate+textured+%3Cb%3E9+Weeks+Human+%3C%2Fb%3EEmbryo&p=human+fetus+at+9+weeks&oid=473fca5aa6b1a9da75a03a036c52c64f&fr2=&fr=ymyy-t-557&tt=...+%2C+detailed+and+anatomically+accurate+textured+%3Cb%3E9+Weeks+Human+%3C%2Fb%3EEmbryo&b=0&ni=160&no=10&ts=&tab=organic&sigr=12fg26tvr&sigb=13nuhl37l&sigi=136dlbust&sigt=12dk4948h&sign=12dk4948h&.crumb=Tm9SR49moMT&fr=ymyy-t-557). You’re seeing no more of a body than you’d see in a collection of organic chemicals? ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2014, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/848 "2014-06-07T21:59:51Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Hmm. “Mind” is a terrible term to use if you’re trying to be factual and scientific, as it doesn’t have a well agreed upon definition. No, it’s actually reasonably clear, especially if one wants to define what a human mind **isn’t**. A picture isn’t scientific evidence in this kind of context, especially a picture that we tend to anthropomorphize as looking like a baby, the way that children anthropomorphize teddy bears. Yes, a body-like thing starts to develop within weeks, but the brain takes much, much longer. You may recall I posted a link [to this article](http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/books/chapters/0619-1st-gazza.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&) earlier. Herewith a relevant snippet, emphasis mine: > [@](#): > > … not until the end of **week 5 and into week 6** (usually around forty to forty-three days) does the first electrical brain activity begin to occur. This activity, however, is not coherent activity of the kind that underlies human consciousness, or even the coherent activity seen in a shrimp’s nervous system. Just as neural activity is present in clinically brain-dead patients, early neural activity consists of unorganized neuron firing of a primitive kind. Neuronal activity by itself does not represent integrated behavior. > > During **weeks 8 to 10** , the cerebrum begins its development in earnest. Neurons proliferate and begin their migration throughout the brain. The anterior commissure, which is the first interhemispheric connection (a small one), also develops. Reflexes appear for the first time during this period. > > The frontal and temporal poles of the brain are apparent during **weeks 12 to 16** , and the frontal pole (which becomes the neocortex) grows disproportionately fast when compared with the rest of the cortex. The surface of the cortex appears flat through the third month, but by the end of the fourth month indentations, or sulci, appear. (These develop into the familiar folds of the cerebrum.) The different lobes of the brain also become apparent, and neurons continue to proliferate and migrate throughout the cortex. By **week 13** the fetus has begun to move. Around this time the corpus callosum, the massive collection of fibers (the axons of neurons) that allow for communication between the hemispheres, begins to develop, forming the infrastructure for the major part of the cross talk between the two sides of the brain. \*\*Yet the fetus is not a sentient, self-aware organism at this point; it is more like a sea slug, a writhing, reflex-bound hunk of sensory-motor processes that does not respond to anything in a directed, purposeful way. Laying down the infrastructure for a mature brain and possessing a mature brain are two very different states of being. \*\* So we see that through your median point of 9 weeks (I’ll take your word for that number being correct), and straight through the entire first trimester and beyond, there is nothing even remotely like a human brain. There’s a reason that the usual medical ethics apply the guidelines that they do. ---
**Author:** ![Nars\_Glinley](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nars_glinley/32/8177_2.png) [@Nars\_Glinley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nars_Glinley)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2014, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/849 "2014-06-08T00:21:03Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > You’re misrepresenting my point. I don’t think I’ve ever made those arguments at all, let alone claimed they were “factual”, although I happen to agree with them and think they represent important value judgments. A factual argument would be something like the biological phases of fetus development, whereby a fetus in an early stage of gestation – the stage where virtually all abortions are performed – could not be considered “a human being” in any sane or rational meaning of the term, since it has no more mind or body than a collection of organic chemicals in a test tube. One could certainly argue that there eventually comes a gray area where the distinction isn’t so clear, and arguments against late-term abortions carry a certain amount of moral weight. > > But by the same token, in the early developmental stages the claim of “human being” is ludicrous, relying for its authority not on medicine but on scripture and baseless emotion and sometimes imaginative fantasy. When meddling amateurs don’t try to cast their personal fantasies into restrictive abortion laws, the medical profession – guided by the Hippocratic Oath and a rational code of ethics – generally has no ethical problem with early-term abortions on demand, but typically requires a good medical reason for late-term abortions. > > Another factual argument would be the observation that sociologically similar countries to the US, in the absence of abortion laws but in combination with progressive social and educational policies and availability of contraception, actually have fewer abortions, as well as fewer teen pregnancies. One could also examine the impacts on mother and child and society of unwanted children. These are all real and tangible and measurable impacts. The so-called “pro-life” side has no such logical grounding. They have only one argument, one which makes no scientific sense, and they parrot it incessantly. I apologize if you mistook my comments as having come from you. I thought that my preface of “from the pro-choice side” implied an origin from other sources. At any rate, I certainly didn’t mean to misrepresent your point. I do think that implying that the pro-life side is unscientific is incorrect. We do not dispute the facts of fetal development. We simply disagree as to the point during fetal development that the “thing” is deserving of legal protection and the extent to which this legal protection should take. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2014, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/850 "2014-06-08T01:43:01Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > No, it’s actually reasonably clear, especially if one wants to define what a human mind **isn’t**. A picture isn’t scientific evidence in this kind of context, especially a picture that we tend to anthropomorphize as looking like a baby, the way that children anthropomorphize teddy bears. Yes, a body-like thing starts to develop within weeks, but the brain takes much, much longer. You may recall I posted a link [to this article](http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/books/chapters/0619-1st-gazza.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&) earlier. Herewith a relevant snippet, emphasis mine: > > So we see that through your median point of 9 weeks (I’ll take your word for that number being correct), and straight through the entire first trimester and beyond, there is nothing even remotely like a human brain. There’s a reason that the usual medical ethics apply the guidelines that they do. The issue of using “mind” wasn’t the main point of that post (and, oddly enough your own cite never uses that term). But the idea that a 9 week old fetus looks like a collection of organic chemicals in a test tube is, in fact, rebutted by a picture of said fetus. Actually, I can’t imagine anyone would even needing a picture to reject your claim. I’m baffled why you would make it after boasting how your argument is centered on facts. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2014, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/851 "2014-06-08T02:01:44Z")
> [@Nars\_Glinley](#): > > . . . I do think that implying that the pro-life side is unscientific is incorrect. We do not dispute the facts of fetal development. We simply disagree as to the point during fetal development that the “thing” is deserving of legal protection and the extent to which this legal protection should take. Speaking as a pro-choicer…I agree. Some terms do not have a scientific definition, but have to be defined arbitrarily, as a point of law. Minors vs. Adults, for instance: we could define an adult as someone who has started growing pubic hair – but it is more convenient to use an arbitrary age. (Much less embarrassing when showing up to vote!) ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2014, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/852 "2014-06-08T02:22:27Z")
> [@Nars\_Glinley](#): > > I do think that implying that the pro-life side is unscientific is incorrect. We do not dispute the facts of fetal development. We simply disagree as to the point during fetal development that the “thing” is deserving of legal protection and the extent to which this legal protection should take. I think for most people who are pro-life, their position is informed mainly by religion. And religion simply isn’t scientific. But science doesn’t tell us when we become human, so that’s neither here nor there. Science might help us inform our decision on abortion, but it’s ultimately a moral decision, not a scientific one. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2014, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/853 "2014-06-09T00:30:59Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > The issue of using “mind” wasn’t the main point of that post (and, oddly enough your own cite never uses that term). But the idea that a 9 week old fetus looks like a collection of organic chemicals in a test tube is, in fact, rebutted by a picture of said fetus. Actually, I can’t imagine anyone would even needing a picture to reject your claim. I’m baffled why you would make it after boasting how your argument is centered on facts. Let me clarify a few points. The comment about “not having a body” was obviously in reference to the earliest stages of gestation, where the fetus begins as literally a [microscopic sphere](http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Fertilized-human-egg.jpg). I made it because there are those who claim that “human life” exists from the moment of conception, or else the moment of implanation. I note that you conveniently ignore the link and the quote relating to fetal brain formation. Wherever the point may be at which any sort of plausible claim can be made for sentience or any other human-like brain function – if any such clear point even exists before birth – it’s clear that no such function exists at the gestational periods for which even many of the less fanatical pro-lifers would declare to be absolutely out of bounds for abortion. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > I think for most people who are pro-life, their position is informed mainly by religion. And religion simply isn’t scientific. But science doesn’t tell us when we become human, so that’s neither here nor there. **Science might help us inform our decision on abortion, but it’s ultimately a moral decision, not a scientific one.** I completely agree, and the last sentence that I bolded expresses very well what I’ve been trying to say. Science will never answer moral questions, but we need to allow it to help inform our decision-making, just as we routinely rely on medical science in everyday life. Whether to have an abortion, pull the plug on a comatose patient, the delicate questions of DNR and even euthanasia in terminal illness – these are all moral questions, sometimes deeply personal ones, sometimes religious ones, but science can at least give us some rudimentary facts to guide us to wiser decisions. And that is what I mean by fact-based and science-based decision-making on abortion: it’s not that science will answer the moral questions of the ages, like at what point a fetus is actually a human being, but that it gives us information and a frame of reference to help us make judgments consistent with our own moral outlook. Different people will make different decisions based on that information, reflecting different moral or religious views, and I respect that. I really do. I wish others would respect it, too. That’s why I’m pro-choice, and why I’ve emphasized several times the significance of that word _ **choice** _. ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/854 "2014-06-10T14:10:50Z")
Because it gives men [“teh gay”](http://www.lifeissues.org/men/impact.html) > [@](#): > > The relationship most always fails after a decision to abort. In addition, future relationships with women are often difficult or impossible. A woman has total control over the decision to abort their baby, leaving the father no legal recourse. This lack of control regarding a critical, life-impacting decision often generates considerable resentment and mistrust towards women. As a result of a previous experience, they do not want to be put into another situation where another pregnancy may occur and they have no control of the outcome. Some men experiment with homosexuality because it allows them to have a successful sexual relationship with no commitment and no worry of pregnancy. Men may suffer from other forms of sexual dysfunction such as impotency and addiction to pornography and masturbation. The first time I read that in an anti-abortion tract, I laughed so hard I thought I was going to pee my pants. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/855 "2014-06-10T14:31:36Z")
Do you also pee your pants when people on the pro-abortion side make statements they can’t back up? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/856 "2014-06-10T14:54:29Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Do you also pee your pants when people on the pro-abortion side make statements they can’t back up? :dubious: I think you’d be hard pressed to find pamphlets supporting abortion rights that contain such ludicrously unscientific misinformation as the statements **Annie-Xmas** quoted. But hey, if you do, by all means post quotes from them here. I can always do with a good laugh. The thing is, though, that pro-choice arguments in general don’t have the same sort of incentives to be dishonest about the facts, because they’re not trying to **encourage** anybody to have abortions if they don’t want to. The anti-abortion side, on the other hand, is fundamentally driven by a one-size-fits-all ideological mission: they want to get people to stop having abortions, whatever their personal views on fetal personhood or the science of fetal development or abortion rights. That, plus a hefty admixture of ignorance and/or unscrupulousness on the part of many anti-abortion activists, makes it easy for them to spout whatever bullshit comes to mind about alleged negative consequences of abortion. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/857 "2014-06-10T15:01:12Z")
> [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > Because it gives men [“teh gay”](http://www.lifeissues.org/men/impact.html) > > The first time I read that in an anti-abortion tract, I laughed so hard I thought I was going to pee my pants. Well, I know for a fact I’ve been addicted to masturbation ever since my SO had an abortion. And the 10-15 years before that, too. It’s \*that \*traumatic. ---
**Author:** ![Annie-Xmas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecc23a/32.png) [@Annie-Xmas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Annie-Xmas)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/858 "2014-06-10T15:19:01Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > The anti-abortion side, on the other hand, is fundamentally driven by a one-size-fits-all ideological mission: they want to get people to stop having abortions, whatever their personal views on fetal personhood or the science of fetal development or abortion rights. That, plus a hefty admixture of ignorance and/or unscrupulousness on the part of many anti-abortion activists, makes it easy for them to spout whatever bullshit comes to mind about alleged negative consequences of abortion. That sums it up nicely. I’ve heard the anti-abortion crowd state that “abortion makes women sterile” and “some woman have ten abortions.” Uh, both statements cannot be true. You can have your own opinions. You cannot have your own facts. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/859 "2014-06-10T15:24:04Z")
> [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > You can have your own opinions. You cannot have your own facts. Then perhaps you can provide a cite for your earlier-asserted “fact”. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2014, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063/860 "2014-06-10T16:05:50Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Then perhaps you can provide a cite for your earlier-asserted “fact”. 😕 Which “earlier-asserted ‘fact’” are you referring to, **Shodan**? This thread is 18 blessed pages long and I haven’t been able to find in recent posts any statement by **Annie-Xmas** that seems to be a factual assertion requiring a cite. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063.md?page=42) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-come-conservatives-are-against-abortion/688063.md?page=44)