# I pit Gov. Scott Walker for mandating the unnecessary inserting of objects into women **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 5, 2013, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746 "2013-07-05T20:19:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 35
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 10:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/681 "2013-07-19T10:54:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Because in my experience, people who substitute furious attack and insult for argument are terrified. > > Again, just my opinion. Who says we’re not terrified? We’re just not terrified women will change their minds. We’re terrified women will be forced into procedures they don’t want. We’re terrified because we’re **pro-choice** , as in “in favor of the right to choose”. ---
**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 19, 2013, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/682 "2013-07-19T10:55:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I believe that readers can read, and judge, those comments without my assistance, so, no, I will decline your invitation. Well, unbacked claims are hardly unusual in this thread. I just thought you might have some particular examples of “vitriol” in mind and maybe I could see if I could also detect “terror” in them. ---
**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 19, 2013, 10:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/683 "2013-07-19T10:58:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What isn’t the most relevant portion this one: Before I comment, I’d ask if you could rephrase this more clearly. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 10:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/684 "2013-07-19T10:58:40Z")
> [@raventhief](#): > > Yes, this. Thank you Max. Why, **Bricker** , do you think that people who are pro-choice would be terrified by fewer abortions, rather than terrified of legal rights being eroded? That scares me. I hope abortion remains safe, legal and _rare_. Fewer abortions doesn’t “scare” me. Assholes chipping away at the right to choose scares me. In my opinion, it’s not simply the overall number of abortion being decreased that inspires this terror – it’s the spectre of such a choice being made by a woman who was already abortion-minded and already at a facility to procure the abortion. And those people that are scared worry that a change at that point somehow validates the theory that the fetus is recognizably and chillingly perceived as a human baby. And that, in turn, obliges them to confront an unpleasant truth about their support of abortion rights. In my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 11:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/685 "2013-07-19T11:00:30Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > LOL! Do you seriously think this supports your argument, **Bricker**? Read it again: “All ten interviewees recommended that this **choice** be offered to every woman and recommended more communication between care providers and patients at the time of the US.” Bolding mine. Yes, I do. Is that choice offered to every woman? Does every abortion provider have ultrasound facilities? I was under the impression this is not so. Perhaps I have been incorrect? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 11:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/686 "2013-07-19T11:02:12Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, I do. Is that choice offered to every woman? Does every abortion provider have ultrasound facilities? I was under the impression this is not so. Perhaps I have been incorrect? And what does this have to do with the Wisconsin law? If you want to propose a law that mandates abortion clinics have ultrasound facilities, and that they offer the woman the choice to get and view an ultrasound prior to the abortion, then go ahead. The Wisconsin law, as you well know, is totally different. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 11:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/687 "2013-07-19T11:04:45Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > And what does this have to do with the Wisconsin law? If you want to propose a law that mandates abortion clinics have ultrasound facilities, and that they offer the woman the choice to get and view an ultrasound prior to the abortion, then go ahead. The Wisconsin law, as you well know, is totally different. I think you’ll find that Republicans don’t want to propose a law like this because it doesn’t close any abortion clinics, and doesn’t make it more difficult to get abortions. In other words, they don’t like it because it doesn’t harm a woman’s right and ability to **choose**. ---
**Author:** ![Trion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ccd318/32.png) [@Trion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trion)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/688 "2013-07-19T11:20:31Z")
Appeal to emotion. It’s not just a logical fallacy. It’s the law! ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 11:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/689 "2013-07-19T11:28:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > In fact, I think the vitriol with which one responds to the very idea is a good indication of the amount of terror involved. I will remember that next time you go off on Democrat hypocrisy. You are really terrified of us. ---
**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 19, 2013, 11:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/690 "2013-07-19T11:28:50Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > In my opinion, it’s not simply the overall number of abortion being decreased that inspires this terror – it’s the spectre of such a choice being made by a woman who was already abortion-minded and already at a facility to procure the abortion. And those people that are scared worry that a change at that point somehow validates the theory that the fetus is recognizably and chillingly perceived as a human baby. And that, in turn, obliges them to confront an unpleasant truth about their support of abortion rights. > > In my opinion. It’s unclear to me why any argument based on a perceived terror level should be taken seriously if you can’t or won’t name at least one example of a terrified person. In any case I don’t expect the idea that someone exists who sees a fetus as a human baby to be very terrifying. Haven’t YOU been claiming such throughout this and similar threads? ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 11:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/691 "2013-07-19T11:33:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What I think is that those people who supposedly favor choice are terrified that abortion-minded women will see their baby’s face in 3D ultrasound and become emotionally committed to keeping the child. > > That’s just speculation, of course. And here is where you consciously decide to abandon Rational Way and go traipsing down Lunatics Lane. Would you also characterize gun proponents vocal protestations of gun laws to be caused by their absolute terror that fewer guns will be sold or do you think it is more reasonable to take them at their word that they are fighting against the chipping away of a right and that they support the right of people to choose whether they have a gun? People in this thread have given rational and reasonable reasons why this is a bad law. You can’t just spew “Terrified!” and expect to be taken seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 11:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/692 "2013-07-19T11:52:50Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Before I comment, I’d ask if you could rephrase this more clearly. Ok. The study seems to suggest that the choice of viewing an ultrasound before an abortion is a good one. To the extent that this law ensures all women in Wisconsin have that choice, it seems relevant. The only major difference is this law requires the ultrasound - but it specifically does not require the woman view it. In fact, it specifically says that no person permitted to require that she view it. So this law gives the choice of viewing an ultrasound to the prospective mother. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 11:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/693 "2013-07-19T11:55:14Z")
> [@Cyros](#): > > And here is where you consciously decide to abandon Rational Way and go traipsing down Lunatics Lane. Would you also characterize gun proponents vocal protestations of gun laws to be caused by their absolute terror that fewer guns will be sold or do you think it is more reasonable to take them at their word that they are fighting against the chipping away of a right and that they support the right of people to choose whether they have a gun? > > People in this thread have given rational and reasonable reasons why this is a bad law. You can’t just spew “Terrified!” and expect to be taken seriously. And I have given rational and reasonable responses indicating why I think the law s wise. I have ALSO shared my opinions, which are not as supportable, being merely opinions. But in my view, there is little hope of being taken seriously by opponents on this issue, no matter what approach I use. ---
**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 19, 2013, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/694 "2013-07-19T12:12:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Ok. The study seems to suggest that the choice of viewing an ultrasound before an abortion is a good one. To the extent that this law ensures all women in Wisconsin have that choice, it seems relevant. > > The only major difference is this law requires the ultrasound - but it specifically does not require the woman view it. That’s the ONLY major difference you see? Has the 24-hour requirement you discussed EARLIER TODAY slipped your mind already? > [@](#): > > In fact, it specifically says that no person permitted to require that she view it. So this law gives the choice of viewing an ultrasound to the prospective mother. Do you not honestly see the problem with this? Did you think our objection was not about the woman having to ENDURE the ultrasound (whether she wanted to or not) but just about viewing the results? ---
**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 19, 2013, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/695 "2013-07-19T12:25:14Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And I have given rational and reasonable responses indicating why I think the law s wise. Oh, not really. I can imagine a few hypothetical rational arguments for the law, applicable if circumstances were dramatically different, but the core of your argument is: -humans are special, including (or especially) preborn humans -if we could be made to see images of the preborn, we’d recognize their specialness That’s the wellspring of what you claim as “wisdom”, and when that doesn’t work, fall back on how the law is properly formatted and passed with correct procedure by an elected legislature, as though process was evidence of wisdom. Your rationality was not being crucified; it never even showed up. ---
**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 19, 2013, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/696 "2013-07-19T12:32:31Z")
In the interests of accuracy, when I said “EARLIER TODAY” (typing on phone, hence capitals instead of italics, in case anyone thought I was terrified), I should have said NINE HOURS AGO. Whether that counts as earlier today depends what time zone one is in. ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/697 "2013-07-19T12:55:20Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And I have given rational and reasonable responses indicating why I think the law s wise. More accurately, you have indicated that you approve of the intended effects of the law but have provided nothing but supposition, appeal to emotion and argumentum ad populum to support the belief that the law will actually accomplish the aim of reducing abortions. Balancing that are the very real burdens imposed on women who try to exercise their rights. Hell, it would be more rational of me to declare the way to lower the abortion rate is to remove all restrictions. I at least can offer the evidence of Canada to show that having no laws results in a lower rate (it is not good evidence but it is certainly more than you have offered). ---
**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 19, 2013, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/698 "2013-07-19T13:20:32Z")
Well, you could enhance that argument by describing Canada’s denser social safety net, i.e. fewer Canadian women getting abortions because they know they’ll have access to various governmental supports for themselves and their future children, but I doubt it’ll make an impression because negative reinforcement is an easier sell than positive. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/699 "2013-07-19T13:57:19Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > That’s the ONLY major difference you see? Has the 24-hour requirement you discussed EARLIER TODAY slipped your mind already? I don’t regard the 24 hour waiting period as major. > [@](#): > > Do you not honestly see the problem with this? Did you think our objection was not about the woman having to ENDURE the ultrasound (whether she wanted to or not) but just about viewing the results? I think your objections – and I use the pronoun ‘your’ in its indefinite sense – are quite varied. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2013, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/700 "2013-07-19T13:58:27Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Oh, not really. I can imagine a few hypothetical rational arguments for the law, applicable if circumstances were dramatically different, but the core of your argument is: > > -humans are special, including (or especially) preborn humans > -if we could be made to see images of the preborn, we’d recognize their specialness > > That’s the wellspring of what you claim as “wisdom”, and when that doesn’t work, fall back on how the law is properly formatted and passed with correct procedure by an elected legislature, as though process was evidence of wisdom. > > Your rationality was not being crucified; it never even showed up. I don’t claim the process is evidence of wisdom – I claim it’s evidence that deference is owed to the law as a valid enact of a state’s plenary legislative power. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746.md?page=34) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746.md?page=36)