# 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:** 71
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1401 "2013-08-20T15:14:12Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Oh, you mean all that other stuff you find sinful, but don’t want laws against? I guess I was unreasonable to infer that you believe not all sins are equivalent, and some don’t rise to the level of advocating a law against them. Do most people believe all sins are equivalent? I don’t think that is a fair assessment at all. He is saying that sin lies completely within his religion and is never reason to legislate against something. He believes that there is a reason that exists independent of his religion to legislate against abortion. He has tried to defend that reason in this very thread without making reference to his religion. Seems to me that you are the one unable to separate secular from religious here. ---
**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 20, 2013, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1402 "2013-08-20T15:53:56Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. It’s the understanding that some acts are different than others. Even a murderer who kills with a single sniper shot to the head is horrible – but not as horrible as a murderer who cuts his victims apart, eats their still-beating hearts, and festoons his neck with their intestines while dancing to “Tearing me Apart,” by Agent Orange (1990). Are you under the impression some kind of revelry accompanies most surgical abortions? > [@](#): > > Nor is merely a “political” compromise. I suppose a pure scientific view might object that dead is dead, and the second murderer is guilty of nothing more additionally serious than improper disposal of a corpse. I obviously wouldn’t agree. Then why are you talking about “new genetic humans” and meiosis, if that’s not going to be where you draw the line? You’re arbitrarily moving the line where not-murder turns into murder later in the pregnancy, _and_ trying to muddy the waters by not just talking about the nature of the “victim”, but adding the irreverence of the “murderer”. For what it’s worth, I’m okay with arbitrary legal lines as a concept, i.e. age 18 or age 21 or the 49th Parallel, but I don’t pretend to have some precise scientific justification that I then abandon when it becomes inconvenient. Just say “no abortions after the first trimester” or the eighth week or whatever. Your views will still be short-sighted and impractical, but you’ll waste less time culling wikipedia pages for scientific jargon. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1403 "2013-08-20T16:25:23Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Are you under the impression some kind of revelry accompanies most surgical abortions? No. Are you under the impression that every example I create to show contrast must be tied in its particulars to the issue of abortion? I offered the cases of the sniper and the dancing dismemberer to show that two cases of murder may exist with one a worse crime than the other. Period. > [@](#): > > Then why are you talking about “new genetic humans” and meiosis, if that’s not going to be where you draw the line? You’re arbitrarily moving the line where not-murder turns into murder later in the pregnancy, _and_ trying to muddy the waters by not just talking about the nature of the “victim”, but adding the irreverence of the “murderer”. > > For what it’s worth, I’m okay with arbitrary legal lines as a concept, i.e. age 18 or age 21 or the 49th Parallel, but I don’t pretend to have some precise scientific justification that I then abandon when it becomes inconvenient. Just say “no abortions after the first trimester” or the eighth week or whatever. Your views will still be short-sighted and impractical, but you’ll waste less time culling wikipedia pages for scientific jargon. So far in this discussion, I haven’t had to rely on Wikipedia. As I mentioned before, as a pro-life person in a largely pro-choice country, I’ve been beset by the same types of objections you raise here many times before. “Nothing is new under the sun,” as the saying goes. I don’t agree that I’ve created any arbitrary lines not already present in how we view criminal actions. It’s not generally a crime to watch a man drown without rendering him assistance; it _IS_ a crime to start hitting him with a pole to speed up his demise. And it’s not nearly as culpable an act to take a medication which has the effect of thinning the endometrium as it is to reach into the uterus and physically remove and destroy a developing human being. That’s not an arbitrary distinction. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1404 "2013-08-20T16:30:25Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Oh, you mean all that other stuff you find sinful, but don’t want laws against? I guess I was unreasonable to infer that you believe not all sins are equivalent, and some don’t rise to the level of advocating a law against them. Do most people believe all sins are equivalent? In Catholic tradition, the main divide is between mortal and venial sins, and any mortal sin is serious in that it removes the sinner from a state of grace. But it’s true that even in that context, some mortal sins are worse than others. Nonetheless, what I’ve explained to you is that I don’t regard sinfulness as a proper basis for legislation. But there are acts which are both sinful and the proper basis for legislation, because there is an independent, secular reason to prohibit the act. I’m pretty confident that all other readers, except Lobohan, are clear on this, and you and Lobohan alone are puzzled. That’s a shame. What else can I do to help you two reach everyone else’s level? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1405 "2013-08-20T16:31:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I’m pretty confident that all other readers, except Lobohan, are clear on this, and you and Lobohan alone are puzzled. Yup. See? > [@Cyros](#): > > I don’t think that is a fair assessment at all. He is saying that sin lies completely within his religion and is never reason to legislate against something. He believes that there is a reason that exists independent of his religion to legislate against abortion. He has tried to defend that reason in this very thread without making reference to his religion. Seems to me that you are the one unable to separate secular from religious here. ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1406 "2013-08-20T16:31:53Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Are you asking my opinion? > > Are you Catholic? > > If not, why would you remotely care what the Catholic Church believes is sinful or not? I wasn’t asking you. I was merely responding to **Musicat.** ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1407 "2013-08-20T16:34:28Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Absolutely not. I personally regard the use of birth control as sinful. That has no bearing on what secular law should say, of course, but the use of any artificial means to prevent pregnancy is, in my view, a sin. I just can’t comprehend why it’s so sinful. What is your perspective on severely poverty-stricken, overpopulated areas that would benefit from some artificial birth control? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1408 "2013-08-20T17:06:35Z")
> [@Cyros](#): > > I don’t think that is a fair assessment at all. He is saying that sin lies completely within his religion and is never reason to legislate against something. He believes that there is a reason that exists independent of his religion to legislate against abortion. He has tried to defend that reason in this very thread without making reference to his religion. Seems to me that you are the one unable to separate secular from religious here. Very well said. ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1409 "2013-08-20T17:07:57Z")
> [@vivalostwages](#): > > I just can’t comprehend why it’s so sinful. Because God said so or it logically follows from something that God said. Is there any other reason for something to be sinful? > [@vivalostwages](#): > > What is your perspective on severely poverty-stricken, overpopulated areas that would benefit from some artificial birth control? Just because there is a good secular reason to enter into behaviour designated as sinful does not make the behaviour any less sinful. (or so says this atheist). ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1410 "2013-08-20T17:08:59Z")
> [@vivalostwages](#): > > I just can’t comprehend why it’s so sinful. > > What is your perspective on severely poverty-stricken, overpopulated areas that would benefit from some artificial birth control? My perspective is that they should probably use birth control, especially if they’re not Catholic. If they are Catholic, I think there’s value in finding a confessor who understands the totality of one’s circumstances. ---
**Author:** ![BigAppleBucky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigapplebucky/32/178_2.png) [@BigAppleBucky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigAppleBucky)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1411 "2013-08-20T17:43:04Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Are you asking my opinion? > > If not, why would you remotely care what the Catholic Church believes is sinful or not? Because the Roman church wants to impose its version of Sharia Law on the rest of us in contravention of the First Amendment. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1412 "2013-08-20T17:49:46Z")
> [@vivalostwages](#): > > Am I joining you in hell because I own a vibrator? Or because sometimes > > I use it? > [@Bricker](#): > > Are you asking my opinion? > > Are you Catholic? > > If not, why would you remotely care what the Catholic Church believes is sinful or not? > [@BigAppleBucky](#): > > Because the Roman church wants to impose its version of Sharia Law on the rest of us in contravention of the First Amendment. Are you able to cite some instance of the “Roman church” seeking to criminalize vibrators? ---
**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:** [August 20, 2013, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1413 "2013-08-20T17:54:16Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What else can I do to help you two reach everyone else’s level? Transorbital lobotomy? ---
**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 20, 2013, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1414 "2013-08-20T17:56:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. Are you under the impression that every example I create to show contrast must be tied in its particulars to the issue of abortion? After you asked if I was “proposing we abandon our democracy in favor of a technocracy”, you lost all authority to get huffy when I question your use of metaphor. > [@](#): > > I offered the cases of the sniper and the dancing dismemberer to show that two cases of murder may exist with one a worse crime than the other. Period. But you’re analogizing to a pre-ovulation and pre-implanation interruption of pregnancy, right? It’s easy to compile lists of things that are worse than other things, but you’re implying relevance then backpedaling when called on it. > [@](#): > > So far in this discussion, I haven’t had to rely on Wikipedia. As I mentioned before, as a pro-life person in a largely pro-choice country, I’ve been beset by the same types of objections you raise here many times before. “Nothing is new under the sun,” as the saying goes. Well, the _saying_ might go that way, but the King James version of Ecclesiastes 1:9 actually says “…and there is no new thing under the sun.” Trivial nitpick, I know. > [@](#): > > I don’t agree that I’ve created any arbitrary lines not already present in how we view criminal actions. It’s not generally a crime to watch a man drown without rendering him assistance; it _IS_ a crime to start hitting him with a pole to speed up his demise. And it’s not nearly as culpable an act to take a medication which has the effect of thinning the endometrium as it is to reach into the uterus and physically remove and destroy a developing human being. That’s not an arbitrary distinction. Sure it is. What’s the difference between “thinning the edometrium” (and thus denying critical life support to a “genetically unique human”) and, say, denying food to your baby? Isn’t it your premise that once a genetically unique human (or whatever the terminology) is formed, there’s no difference between it and a born child? If there _is_ a difference, when does that difference manifest? Why is thinning the endometrium less culpable? Does significant culpability attach the moment the embryo does? If that’s the arbitrary line you want, fine. It’s different from your earlier arbitrary line, but I guess that’s to be expected. My follow-up questions would be about the consequences of culpability, i.e. what penalties you have in mind for a woman who ends (or through negligence allows to end) a post-implantation pregnancy, but I never get an answer to those, it’s just amusing to see how the questions are ducked. ---
**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 20, 2013, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1415 "2013-08-20T18:04:01Z")
As an incidental note (and it should get its own thread, but it seems to be current conversational grist), is Catholicism more of an organized threat to American liberty than, say, Evangelical Protestantism? I’d’ve thought the latter was more dangerous, but perhaps just based on anecdotal evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1416 "2013-08-20T18:37:07Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What else can I do to help you two reach everyone else’s level? > [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Transorbital lobotomy? Yes, that would work, but I’m reasonably certain none of the other participants wants a transorbital lobotomy. ---
**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 20, 2013, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1417 "2013-08-20T18:46:05Z")
Yes, you clearly know they are, but what are _you?_ Disclosure: I’ve done the same thing in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1418 "2013-08-20T18:47:45Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, the _saying_ might go that way, but the King James version of Ecclesiastes 1:9 actually says “…and there is no new thing under the sun.” > > Trivial nitpick, I know. After numerous posts explaining that I am a Catholic, what possible reason would I have for quoting the King James translation? I quoted the [New American Standard](http://www.usccb.org/bible/ecclesiastes) from the USCCB. > [@](#): > > Sure it is. What’s the difference between “thinning the edometrium” (and thus denying critical life support to a “genetically unique human”) and, say, denying food to your baby? Isn’t it your premise that once a genetically unique human (or whatever the terminology) is formed, there’s no difference between it and a born child? No, that’s never been my premise. It’s been my premise that both should be entitled to the protection of the law, not that “there’s no difference” between them. In fact, that very argument was explored in [this post.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16583360&postcount=1342) Now, there is also a difference between actively killing, and passively denying food. Both are bad – one is worse. That’s precisely how I said the two cases differed in this post: > [@Bricker](#): > > That would be bad. > > It would not be quite as bad as abortion, but it would still be deliberately – as opposed to as an accidental side effect – creating a situation in which a human life perishes. > > Think of it as the difference between chopping someone up with a sword, or dropping them off in the middle of Joshua Tree National Park. > [@](#): > > My follow-up questions would be about the consequences of culpability, i.e. what penalties you have in mind for a woman who ends (or through negligence allows to end) a post-implantation pregnancy, but I never get an answer to those, it’s just amusing to see how the questions are ducked. I don’t have any penalties in mind for a woman who procures an abortion, or one who ends one through her negligence. I would like to see penalties for medical practitioners who assist in such actions, though. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1419 "2013-08-20T18:57:26Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I don’t have any penalties in mind for a woman who procures an abortion, or one who ends one through her negligence. This is a topic for another thread, but exploring what’s down this road is what leads me to be Pro-Choice. Now, back to your regularly scheduled thread. ---
**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 20, 2013, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746/1420 "2013-08-20T19:17:54Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, that’s never been my premise. It’s been my premise that both should be entitled to the protection of the law, not that “there’s no difference” between them. In fact, that very argument was explored in [this post.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16583360&postcount=1342) That’s not an exploration, it’s a bare “yes” and a flippant follow-up line about hair colour and then you went back to asserting similarity. > [@](#): > > Now, there is also a difference between actively killing, and passively denying food. Both are bad – one is worse. That’s precisely how I said the two cases differed in this post: [Well, in at least one case the difference turned out to be between being convicted of murder and being convicted of felony murder.](http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/local/city-of-richmond/richmond-woman-gets-years-in-baby-starvation-case/article_7bc152ef-556e-5331-983d-6a92c26f2acb.html) Anyway, there’s nothing “precise” about “bad” versus “worse.” It’s true that you precisely _said_ “bad” and “worse”, but the comparison itself is somewhat limited in its utility. > [@](#): > > I don’t have any penalties in mind for a woman who procures an abortion, or one who ends one through her negligence. > > I would like to see penalties for medical practitioners who assist in such actions, though. Like loss of license, jail time…? Since the demand for abortion isn’t likely to go down, have you looked ahead to what happens when trained medical practitioners no longer perform them? Does a pharmacist who supplies mifepristone or something comparable count as a medical practitioner, or would mifepristone just be banned outright? This is why I used the term “short-sighted” earlier. And seeing magellan’s response… suddenly my contempt for him is not quite as utter. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746.md?page=70) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gov-scott-walker-for-mandating-the-unnecessary-inserting-of-objects-into-women/662746.md?page=72)