# How stupid do these anti-choicers think we are? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 6, 2013, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813 "2013-07-06T21:36:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2013, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/361 "2013-07-11T21:48:50Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > There was no (c), leaving me confused and unable to respond. Heh heh heh. My bad. (b), particularly the third question in para (b). ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2013, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/362 "2013-07-11T22:56:49Z")
So you’re asking me to evaluate this post: > [@DragonAsh](#): > > The ‘few months to a year’ in jail is a lot shorter than the time that Martin will be dead, which is FOREVER. > > You want to carry a gun around, and have the ‘right’ to exercise mind-numbingly poor judgement that results in you shooting someone dead? Sorry dude, you absolutely should end up in court. > > I don’t think he’s guilty of 2nd degree murder, but reckless homicide / manslaughter or some other charge? Abso-fucking-lutely. Either way, I still expect him to walk because of how skewed the law is (and how mind-blowingly bad the prosecution was \). > > So congratulations; he won’t spend the next 20 years in jail. I’m not going to lose a wink of sleep over any jail time he serves or any legal bills he has. Small price to pay for the ‘right’ to play wannabe-cop. And see if I think your summation is reasonable: > [@Bricker](#): > > This seems to embody the same sort of attitude: I don’t care what the actual law says; because I am convinced of the wrongness of Zimmerman’s actions, I am willing to see the law ignored to impose some consequence on him, even acknowledging that the consequence is not mandated by the law. Well, I don’t know DragonAsh from Adam, I have barely ready any of the Martin/Zimmerman stuff, I have not been following the thread, I’m generally hesitant to attempt to interpret or speak for other dopers, and I have no idea what the point of this exercise is. But, I’m curious where this is going, so I’ll play along… Taking the original quote line by line: > [@](#): > > The ‘few months to a year’ in jail is a lot shorter than the time that Martin will be dead, which is FOREVER. Obviously true > [@](#): > > You want to carry a gun around, and have the ‘right’ to exercise mind-numbingly poor judgement that results in you shooting someone dead? Sorry dude, you absolutely should end up in court. Clearly an anti-gun sentiment, but note that he says “sorry dude, you absolutely should end up in COURT” as opposed to “in JAIL”. Zimmerman did, in fact, end in up court. I don’t see many people holding the position that Zimmerman was so obviously blameless that he shouldn’t have even gone on TRIAL. > [@](#): > > I don’t think he’s guilty of 2nd degree murder, but reckless homicide / manslaughter or some other charge? Abso-fucking-lutely. This is the money quote, I think. I’ll come back to it later. > [@](#): > > Either way, I still expect him to walk because of how skewed the law is (and how mind-blowingly bad the prosecution was \). Disagreeing with the law as written and saying the prosecution is incompetent, both reasonable positions. > [@](#): > > So congratulations; he won’t spend the next 20 years in jail. I’m not going to lose a wink of sleep over any jail time he serves or any legal bills he has. Small price to pay for the ‘right’ to play wannabe-cop. Basically seems to be saying “he’s such a jerk that if he was in jail for a while before trial, serves him right”, seems emotional but reasonable, as long as he’s not endorsing some “gee, it would be a shame if we lost his case docket and he had to spend 7 extra years in jail before the trial started, wink wink” type of abuse of power. So the only part of the quote that really seems to be similar to the position you were ascribing to him is this: > [@](#): > > I don’t think he’s guilty of 2nd degree murder, but reckless homicide / manslaughter or some other charge? Abso-fucking-lutely. And again, he’s talking about him being guilty of some “charge”. IE, some law. DragonAsh’s position seems to be that he believes that (whether or not the court finds this) Zimmerman broke some law in the reckless homicide/manslaughter category, and deserves to be punished for it. Which seems like a reasonable position to take. I don’t see any vigilanteism, any “I don’t care what the court finds, he should go to jail” any “I know more than the jury”, etc. So, no, I don’t think your analysis holds up at all. It’s also very important to note that people ranting on the SDMB about things are NOT necessarily carefully metering their words in some “what I say here is actually the world view I really think should be imposed on everyone” sense. I can well imagine someone saying “that guy is a criminal and deserves to die” and you responding with “wait, you’re saying he IS a criminal? So you think that your word is enough to condemn someone? And you think he deserves to die? What about due process? Won’t someone think of the children and lawyers!!!” when in fact, if you pressed the person at all, they’d of course say that they in fact have great respect for the rule of law and were just speaking informally about a topic they’re passionate about. (I mean, they’d first call you a jerk for so blatantly and facilely misinterpreting what was clearly not intended to be a serious claim about how they desire the world to work, and they would be right.) Anyhow, what all does that have to do with abortion and ultrasounds? ---
**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:** [July 11, 2013, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/363 "2013-07-11T23:22:18Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > Anyhow, what all does that have to do with abortion and ultrasounds? I’ll hazard a guess of “Nothing, but somebody somewhere is happy to ignore the law and by implication, the people arguing against me are also doing it, since I’m by definition correct about the law.” Or something along those lines. Essentially a liberal is wrong about something somewhere, therefore all liberals are wrong about everything everywhere. Personally, I haven’t been following the Zimmerman/Martin case. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2013, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/364 "2013-07-11T23:29:08Z")
I’m seeing more classic **Bricker** , along the lines of “My opponents are so utterly and blindly biased against the clear truth I present, their very refusal validates my position, and I win.” ---
**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:** [July 11, 2013, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/365 "2013-07-11T23:36:06Z")
Possibly. Of course, he’s admitted that he’s okay (well, maybe tragically conflicted, but overall okay) with arbitrary and punitive abuses of law to get a result he wants. Offhand I’m trying to think of a comparable example where I’d do the same, but I tend to fall back on abuses in the sense of cops looking the other way on victimless crimes, i.e. selective application toward non-enforcement, rather than selective legislation toward moral/social engineering. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2013, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/366 "2013-07-12T00:10:26Z")
Yes, that was pretty surprising, usually he is coy about such admissions, usually leaves himself a trapdoor to a hidey-hole. Like when we were arguing voter suppression/ID laws, he accepts that _some_ Republicans have cynical motivations, but won’t hazard a guess as to how many. And yes, “voter fraud” is bullshit, but these laws will prevent the voter fraud that \*doesn’t \*happen as effectively as it prevents the voter fraud that \*could \*happen, but doesn’t. He then waits graciously for the kudos and applause for his honesty, and if none is forthcoming, provides them There is only one **Bricker** , and this, in itself, provides some small evidence for a just and loving Diety. Or if not loving, at least merciful. ---
**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:** [July 12, 2013, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/367 "2013-07-12T00:21:05Z")
Heck, sometime ask **OMG a Black Conservative** if individuals should only be allowed to do what the government permits. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2013, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/368 "2013-07-12T00:36:08Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > Anyhow, what all does that have to do with abortion and ultrasounds? Evidently nothing. My mistake. I took away a different read from that post, but I’m inclined to credit your analysis over my own. ---
**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:** [July 12, 2013, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/369 "2013-07-12T00:38:23Z")
Didn’t get traction, huh? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Plastic\_Ninja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f07891/32.png) [@Little\_Plastic\_Ninja](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Plastic_Ninja)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2013, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/370 "2013-07-12T02:19:14Z")
**Bricker** , some questions. - First, a philosophical one: do you believe forcing people to take a moral action has an equivalent effect on their psyche and/or soul as the force of their choosing to take it? In other words, should we legislate morality? - Do you think you’re more capable or less capable of determining a course of treatment than a medical doctor? - Do you think a specialist in a field of medicine is more capable or less capable of determining a course of treatment than someone who is not a specialist? - Do you believe legislating against an activity is more likely or less likely to prevent that activity? - As an addendum to that one: do you have proof one way or the other? - If you believe the life of the mother is of at least somewhat greater importance to that of the unborn child, do you believe psychological damage is as acceptable a reason as physical damage for termination? And, as extra credit: A 21 year old Army linguist at Fort Bliss is married and pregnant. The pregnancy is surprising because she should have an IUD, but an examination determines that it became detached and is free-floating in the uterus. This has a strong chance of causing a miscarriage and of perforating the uterus, causing lifelong infertility and internal hemorrhaging. Having a child will affect the linguist’s promotion chances and career options. She’d like to have a child eventually, but this might not be the best time – more than that, this has become a very high-risk pregnancy. Also problematic is the fact that she’s at Fort Bliss, and the closest in-state abortion doctor is six hundred miles away. Which reason or reasons are acceptable for termination? - Timing - Promotion chances - Risk of miscarriage - Risk of infertility - Risk of internal hemorrhaging At which point is it acceptable to terminate the pregnancy? - Immediately upon discovery - Upon a doctor’s say-so - When complications begin - If the woman begins to miscarry - When death from those complications is imminent ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2013, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/371 "2013-07-12T03:46:58Z")
Does she have access to ultrasound equipment? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Plastic\_Ninja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f07891/32.png) [@Little\_Plastic\_Ninja](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Plastic_Ninja)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2013, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/372 "2013-07-12T03:57:10Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Does she have access to ultrasound equipment? Sure. ---
**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:** [July 12, 2013, 11:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/373 "2013-07-12T11:08:30Z")
Then everything’s a-ok. ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2013, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/374 "2013-07-12T17:14:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Because I don’t agree that a functioning brain is the _sine qua non_ of humanity. Again, specifically, why not? Do you think there is an aspect that make us ‘us’ other than the physical brain? Or are you referring to humans in a persistent vegetative state who’s brain has broken down or ceased to function? ---
**Author:** ![EverwonderWhy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee59a6/32.png) [@EverwonderWhy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EverwonderWhy)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2013, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/375 "2013-07-12T18:03:07Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure. So if I can step in and take a stab at it, the crucial difference is that you owe no duty that society is prepared to recognize to the violinist. If you saw the violinist wandering dazed in the street (due to the buildup of toxins from his ailment, perhaps) you are free to disregard him and go about your business, and society does not impose any particular duty to assist him. > > But if your infant child were wandering about the street, it would be a criminal violation to fail to assist your child. > > Why the difference? Because society is willing to impose, upon the biological parent, duties that do not inure to the random passerby. The relationship a pregnant woman has with an unwanted fetus is more akin to that between strangers than a parental relationship. Forced gestation forces her into a _physically intimate relationship_ that she does not want. To gestate is to be engaged in a physical intimacy of deep proportions, far beyond that of organ donation. To be pregnant is to be\* inhabited\*. It is to be\* occupied\*. It is to be in a state of physical intimacy of a particularly thorough-going nature. The fetus intrudes on the body massively; whatever medical risks one faces or avoids, the fact remains that _the fetus shifts, alters and expands the very physical boundaries of the woman’s body._ To mandate continuation of gestation is, quite simply, to force continuation of such occupation. To mandate that the woman remain pregnant is to mandate that she remain in a state of physical intertwinement against her consent. That in and of itself is a violation of body autonomy of epic proportions. Parental rights and guardianship _are assumed at birth_, not necessarily mandated. A maternal or paternal progenitor does not automatically confer a parental relationship despite the biological connection. The duties and obligations of parenthood are more a social role and legal responsibility, rather than a function of biology. Men who do not wish to become a parent are not forced to, despite their paternal genetic relationship. They may be mandated to provide financially for their unwanted offspring, but that’s it. A wage garnishment. They are not forced to enter into a parental relationship - to act as legal guardian responsible for the child’s welfare. They are not even mandated to ever actually be in any physical proximity to the child, to even know it’s name or birthday. Any of that is purely voluntary. Biological parents who _do assert their parent rights and responsibilities_ at birth are not mandated to share their bodies with their minor children, even if their child’s welfare depends on it. Why some may think parents should have a moral duty to donate a kidney to their child who needs one in order to survive, they have never been mandated to by the state, it remains voluntary. Who has the more compelling moral duty: a sperm or ovum donor or a man or woman that has assumed the social role of motherhood/fatherhood and has a lived relationship with the child? The duty to one’s child turns more on social familial roles than simple genetic connection. Thousands of fertilized eggs discarded after IVF are humanely euthanized every year when they are defrosted or donated to medical research by their so called “parents”. And these “parents” explicitly consented to the creations of these embryos because they actually wanted to become parents! Indeed, the fertility industry is pretty much allowed to operate with little restriction. Even after the Nadia Suleman aka ‘OctoMom’ debacle, there has been no legislative attempts to limit the number of embryos created or mandate that each embryo must be implanted. It seems that the concern over the “unborn” is simply a matter of geography. When these embryos are located in a petri dish - no big deal, but once a fertilized egg resides in the body of woman some would dictate she can’t even be allowed to defend herself from implantation in her body! Nope, some would go as far to dictate what medications a woman can take in order to ensure her uterine lining always remain ‘hospitable’. Even if she herself is adamantly NOT hospitable, her body must be against her will. ---
**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:** [July 12, 2013, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/376 "2013-07-12T20:03:35Z")
[Men Hurt From Abortion Too](http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/625343/posts) > [@](#): > > Men may suffer from a form of sexual dysfunction such as impotency. Some become addicted to pornography and masturbation - allowing them to experience sexual gratification while maintaining control. Some men experiment with homosexuality because it allows them to have a “successful” sexual relationship with no commitment and no worry of pregnancy. If claiming that abortion turns men gay isn’t the height of stupidity, I don’t know what is. ---
**Author:** ![Ann\_Hedonia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ann_hedonia/32/319_2.png) [@Ann\_Hedonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ann_Hedonia)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2013, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/377 "2013-07-12T20:05:40Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > On what basis do you (if indeed you share this belief) conclude that the major effect of the law will be inability to get an ultrasound? The women are given a free ultrasound; what expense is involved? I’m thinking that the places that offer “free” ultrasounds will be pro-life clinics such as BirthRight and that any woman who’s tricked into going there will be subjected to the full blown pro-life scree. I’m also doubtful that they will give the results of the free ultrasound to the woman should she decide to proceed.. ---
**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:** [July 12, 2013, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/378 "2013-07-12T20:25:19Z")
Well, when two right-to-lifers claim they know that a pregnant, comatose woman whom they have never seen before would not want an abortion, as opposed to her husband and parents, who claim she would, it got really [ridiculous](http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/27/nyregion/27folo.html?_r=0) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2013, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/379 "2013-07-12T20:49:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Because I don’t agree that a functioning brain is the _sine qua non_ of humanity. Well, it ain’t the soul. If it ain’t the brain either, what does that leave? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2013, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813/380 "2013-07-12T20:53:50Z")
> [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > [Men Hurt From Abortion Too](http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/625343/posts) > > If claiming that abortion turns men gay isn’t the height of stupidity, I don’t know what is. That would be an excellent example of, “OK, thanks, now stop helping, please.” When the folks are nominally “your side” say stupid crap like the quote above, it’s disheartening. I have laid out what I believe to be a defensible position against most abortion. Then something like this comes along. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-stupid-do-these-anti-choicers-think-we-are/662813.md?page=20)