# Is a turning point in the abortion debate possible, and are we there? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 18, 2008, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330 "2008-11-18T19:02:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/1 "2008-11-18T19:02:52Z")
Barack Obama won the election and will most likely get to appoint a couple of Supreme Court justices. This most likely cuts off one of the more likely ways of changing the terrain on abortion, since the SC will most likely (nothing is guaranteed, obviously) uphold Roe. I was reading [this article](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27778146/) this morning and began to wonder if it’s possible to reach a turning point in the abortion debate where the majority of the debate shifts from “should abortion be legal?” to “how can abortions be reduced?” From the article: > [@](#): > > The activists are beginning with ad campaigns to raise their profile, advocating legislation and planning rallies. They say they hope to harness the two-thirds of Americans who want a “middle ground” on abortion, according to a 2006 survey by the Pew Research Center for People and the Press and the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. Obviously, anything Obama does can be undone later, but it’s also obvious, I think, that the majority opinion in the US is not in line with hardcore abortion opponents. So, is it possible to shift the debate away from legalities toward practicalities? Is it wise? And is that time now (or soon)? ---
**Author:** ![Palo\_Verde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/65b543/32.png) [@Palo\_Verde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Palo_Verde)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/2 "2008-11-18T19:12:01Z")
I’m right there in that middle group. I’m totally turned off by the rhetoric on both sides. Really. Whatever your side is, they make me mad by their hard line spewing. But I would be very happy to see the debate morph into one regarding the best way to reduce the number of abortions to as close to zero as possible. ---
**Author:** ![Llama\_Llogophile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@Llama\_Llogophile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Llama_Llogophile)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/3 "2008-11-18T19:40:01Z")
Well it’s about friggin’ time. We’ve had the capability now for some decades to effectively move the rate of unplanned pregnancies to near ZERO. Unfortunately, some idealogues can’t stomach the notions of: 1. Providing birth control to people because that means they’ll have SEX!!! Oh, noes!!! 2. Providing birth control to people because they think five cells that have divided are now a human being. As I see it, without these two stopping points, nobody would be having unplanned children. Allow everybody who doesn’t believe in abstinence\* to get on birth control starting at age 11 or so. OK, we’re done - no more abortions necessary. - Maybe everybody, since abstinence education seems not to be terribly effective. On the whole, asking people (especially adolescents) not to have sex is as silly as asking people to not eat or breathe. How ironic it would be if in the future I’ve envisioned, it was the abstinence-only crowd that needed the most abortions because they chose not to use birth control. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/4 "2008-11-18T19:49:31Z")
**Mach Tuck** , the things you’re saying just don’t make sense. > [@](#): > > We’ve had the capability now for some decades to effectively move the rate of unplanned pregnancies to near ZERO. Really? If humanity has had this ability for so long, there surely must be some city, state, or nation that’s actually achieved it. Can you name such a place? > [@](#): > > As I see it, without these two stopping points, nobody would be having unplanned children. Allow everybody who doesn’t believe in abstinence\* to get on birth control starting at age 11 or so. That so, eh? But birth control is available at every corner store, so according to your logic there should not be any unplanned pregnancies. And yet there are. So your logic must be faulty. > [@](#): > > On the whole, asking people (especially adolescents) not to have sex is as silly as asking people to not eat or breathe. I have a long-standing, principled opposition to smilies, but this statement brought me very close to using a rolleyes. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/5 "2008-11-18T20:03:54Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Obviously, anything Obama does can be undone later, but it’s also obvious, I think, that the majority opinion in the US is not in line with hardcore abortion opponents. Nor is it in line with hard core abortion proponents. If you are suggesting a compromise where the NARAL side gives way on things like partial birth abortion and parental notification, progress can (possibly) be made. If you are merely suggesting that once we have a pro-choicer in the White House, we can overrule every parent in the US who doesn’t toe the line on abortion-on-demand, that doesn’t sound like much of a compromise to me. From your cite - > [@](#): > > Some of the activists are actually working with abortion rights advocates to push for legislation in Congress that would provide pregnant women with health care, child care and money for education – services that could encourage them to continue their pregnancies. Is this the sort of thing you want to encourage? ---
**Author:** ![Llama\_Llogophile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@Llama\_Llogophile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Llama_Llogophile)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/6 "2008-11-18T20:48:33Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > \*\* > Really? If humanity has had this ability for so long, there surely must be some city, state, or nation that’s actually achieved it. Can you name such a place? \*\* I can name quite a few individuals of my acquaintance who have never had unplanned pregnancies because they’ve always used birth control. Add that to others not of my personal aquaintance who have surely done the same, and I’m guessing that would add up to a fair-sized city or state. Or will you only settle for an actual lattitude / longitude? > [@ITR\_champion](#): > > \*\* > That so, eh? But birth control is available at every corner store, so according to your logic there should not be any unplanned pregnancies. \*\* Oh, yes, and it’s so easily available to everyone without restrictions. Please. Planned Parenthood exists for several reasons, and this is one of them. Adult women I know (with health insurance) complain about the hassles and hoop jumping necessary for getting on the pill. And that was before we had pharmacists complaining they don’t want to prescribe it because it offends their religious sensibilities. But it’s not just the pill. Try handing out condoms to adolescents and see how that goes over. I’ve seen community organizations get skewered for that. The brave ones do it anyway. You seem to think birth control is easily available. Although that may be the case in some places, I don’t think it is so overall in the U.S., especially for adolescents. My point is, it should be. **ITR champion** , you scoff at my notion that sex is a basic need, and that it is silly to expect people to completely repress it. I appreciate the kind restraint in your use of smilies, but have you got any argument against that thought? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/7 "2008-11-18T20:58:35Z")
> [@](#): > > Nor is it in line with hard core abortion proponents. There are very, very few of those in the US. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a politician running on a pro-abortion platform anywhere in this country. Pro-choice is not synonymous with pro-abortion, any more than anti-choice is synonymous with anti-abortion. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Some of the activists are actually working with abortion rights advocates to push for legislation in Congress that would provide pregnant women with health care, child care and money for education – services that could encourage them to continue their pregnancies. > > Is this the sort of thing you want to encourage? Not to speak for **jsgoddess** , but those look like sensible policies, the sort of thing that will lead to fewer abortions and other positive results. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2008, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/8 "2008-11-18T21:12:04Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Not to speak for **jsgoddess** , but those look like sensible policies, the sort of thing that will lead to fewer abortions and other positive results. Right. Women being pressured into abortion is not an ideal state of affairs. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/9 "2008-11-19T00:03:41Z")
> [@Mach Tuck](#): > > \*\*I can name quite a few individuals of my acquaintance who have never had unplanned pregnancies because they’ve always used birth control. > > Add that to others not of my personal aquaintance who have surely done the same, and I’m guessing that would add up to a fair-sized city or state. Or will you only settle for an actual lattitude / longitude? You claimed the ability to “move the rate of unplanned pregnancies to near ZERO.” I’m waiting to see that some jurisdiction of reasonable size has actually achieved such a thing. Birth control has problems. People can accidentally forget it or misuse it. It can fail. People can decide not to use it and then change their minds a few days later. Birth control is not an automatic cure-all for unwanted pgrenancies. > [@](#): > > Oh, yes, and it’s so easily available to everyone without restrictions. Yes, it is. Anyone can purchase a condom at WalMart, KMart, Target, CVS, Walgreens, or any number of other stores. Or, if they feel nervous in such a public space, there is also Planned Parenthood as they mention. Numerous charities provide birth control for free. Many college and universities offer it in every dorm. etc… People who want birth control can get birth control. If they’re not using it, it’s because they choose not to use it. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/10 "2008-11-19T00:09:47Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > You claimed the ability to “move the rate of unplanned pregnancies to near ZERO.” I’m waiting to see that some jurisdiction of reasonable size has actually achieved such a thing. Birth control has problems. People can accidentally forget it or misuse it. It can fail. People can decide not to use it and then change their minds a few days later. Birth control is not an automatic cure-all for unwanted pgrenancies. Having the capability and having the will are not the same thing. With the use of extremely effective birth control like Depo-Provera, Mirena, Implanon, etc., user error is extremely reduced and pregnancies are extremely rare. I think Implanon went a long stretch without a single reported pregnancy, for example. So, we have the capability. We don’t have the will to do it. ---
**Author:** ![Enola\_Gay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ab097/32.png) [@Enola\_Gay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enola_Gay)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/11 "2008-11-19T00:14:17Z")
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. There is no doubt in my mind that preventing unwanted pregnancies is the common ground in the abortion debate. It only gets sticky when those on the “pro-life” side are also anti- birth control. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/12 "2008-11-19T00:15:02Z")
> [@Mach Tuck](#): > > **ITR champion** , you scoff at my notion that sex is a basic need, and that it is silly to expect people to completely repress it. I appreciate the kind restraint in your use of smilies, but have you got any argument against that thought? A person who does not breath dies in a few minutes. A person who does not eat typically dies within a few weeks. A person who abstains from sex does not die, and does not suffer any ill effects at all. In fact, every adult person must exert some level of control over their sexual desires in order to function in society. In any case, enormous numbers of people have practiced chastity in the past, and many are doing so right now, so plainly it is doable. ---
**Author:** ![Enola\_Gay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ab097/32.png) [@Enola\_Gay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enola_Gay)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/13 "2008-11-19T00:23:44Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > You claimed the ability to “move the rate of unplanned pregnancies to near ZERO.” I’m waiting to see that some jurisdiction of reasonable size has actually achieved such a thing. \*\* Birth control has problems. People can accidentally forget it or misuse it. It can fail. People can decide not to use it and then change their minds a few days later. Birth control is not an automatic cure-all for unwanted pgrenancies.\*\* Of course it’s not a panacea, but it sure as shit will reduce the # of unwanted pregnancies, don’t you think? ---
**Author:** ![Llama\_Llogophile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@Llama\_Llogophile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Llama_Llogophile)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/14 "2008-11-19T00:24:49Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > A person who abstains from sex does not die, and does not suffer any ill effects at all. Speak for yourself - I sure as hell suffer ill effects! But seriously, I think an argument can be made that we eat and breathe in the service of our sexuality. The desire to procreate may be our very reason for being. Either way, it’s a tremendously strong drive, and most people aren’t going to choose to live a life of chastity. Strong methods of birth control exist, although I think you overestimate the availability. It’s not the same as buying condoms. I wish it were. I’d like to see a world where pregnancies are always chosen, and abortions are a rarity. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/15 "2008-11-19T00:28:56Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > You claimed the ability to “move the rate of unplanned pregnancies to near ZERO.” I’m waiting to see that some jurisdiction of reasonable size has actually achieved such a thing. Birth control has problems. People can accidentally forget it or misuse it. It can fail. People can decide not to use it and then change their minds a few days later. Birth control is not an automatic cure-all for unwanted pgrenancies. I think \*\*Mach \*\*is underestimating the failure rate of even the best contraceptives, not to mention the horrific side effects some women experience using hormonal contraception, but there’s no doubt we could be doing better than we are. [This article](http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/tgr/08/2/gr080201.html) pretty much sums it up for me: > [@](#): > > …the U.S. abortion rate remains among the highest of all industrialized nations—more than twice as high, for example, as the Netherlands (nine per 1,000 women of reproductive age). There, unlike here, government and social institutions support comprehensive sex education and health care services aimed at helping people, including young people, avoid unintended pregnancy and disease; contraceptive use is widely encouraged and contraceptives are easily available; and national health insurance helps ensure that people have access to timely and affordable care. In short, the abortion rate in the Netherlands—and in other western and northern European countries—is low because unintended pregnancy rates are extremely low due to widespread and effective contraceptive use. And, earlier in the argument, but I’ll quote it second for better flow here: > [@](#): > > Yet, much in American society is not currently structured to facilitate effective contraceptive use. The high cost of health care, including contraceptive supplies and services, is a major issue for many. One in five American women of reproductive age lack health insurance, and even those who are insured may lack adequate coverage of contraception, placing some of the most effective methods beyond their financial reach. Sex education in schools and communities is increasingly teaching young people that the only acceptable option for them is to wait until marriage to have sex; to further this goal, this education either does not discuss the benefits of contraception or portrays it in a negative light. The right of young people to access confidential reproductive health services is perennially under attack in Congress and in many states. And conflicting social attitudes about sex hinder parents’ ability to discuss sex with their children, as well as partners’ ability to communicate about important intimate matters. > > In fact, researchers have noted two troubling trends. Recently released data from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG) show that between 1995 and 2002, the number of women at risk of unintended pregnancy but not using any method of contraception rose by 1.43 million. Research has not yet explained what accounts for this increase. However, should this trend continue, there is a very real potential for the number of unintended pregnancies, and therefore abortions, to also rise over time. > > Moreover, while abortion rates for U.S. women overall are currently at their lowest level since 1980 (down 29%, from 29.3 per 1,000 women of reproductive age in 1980 to 20.9 per 1,000 women in 2002), the rate of decline has slowed since the mid-1990s—in part because the abortion rate among poor women rose in the late 1990s. Again, the reasons behind this rise are unclear. The high cost of contraceptives and problems in accessing subsidized services may have played a role. Another contributing factor may have been the 1996 federal law to overhaul the nation’s welfare system, which decreased benefits and imposed new work requirements even for welfare recipients with very young children. I think our biggest obstacle is getting young people to use contraception, as well as getting their parents and churches to allow and even encourage it. Kids are notoriously impulsive, short-sighted, lazy and selfish. All those things work against responsible sex. And when they have to be sneaky as well, or face authoritarian consequences, they’re even less likely to bother. But in a culture where a vaccine that can prevent cancer is protested as promoting promiscuity, I despair of really reaching those who need it the most. ---
**Author:** ![Llama\_Llogophile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@Llama\_Llogophile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Llama_Llogophile)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/16 "2008-11-19T01:06:53Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > I think \*\*Mach \*\*is underestimating the failure rate of even the best contraceptives… I said “near” zero - didn’t mean to imply a panacea. Just making the point that we can do a lot (LOT) more with contraception. I do believe it’s possible to achieve something close to universally planned pregnancies being the norm. But as was noted earlier, being able doesn’t mean we will choose to do so. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/17 "2008-11-19T01:28:04Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > I was reading [this article](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27778146/) this morning and began to wonder if it’s possible to reach a turning point in the abortion debate where the majority of the debate shifts from “should abortion be legal?” to “how can abortions be reduced?” > > \< snip \> > > So, is it possible to shift the debate away from legalities toward practicalities? No, because the driving force for the anti-abortion movement is the desire to oppress and harm women, not stop abortions. Reducing abortion by providing better birth control and sex education won’t **hurt** women, therefore they will oppose it, and do. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/18 "2008-11-19T01:33:43Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > No, because the driving force for the anti-abortion movement is the desire to oppress and harm women, not stop abortions. Reducing abortion by providing better birth control and sex education won’t **hurt** women, therefore they will oppose it, and do. There are apparently some pro-life groups who are getting behind this, though. Are you going to claim a no-true-pro-lifer argument here? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/19 "2008-11-19T01:43:12Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > There are apparently some pro-life groups who are getting behind this, though. Are you going to claim a no-true-pro-lifer argument here? I’m saying that I see no reason to think that that attitude will ever becaome prevalent among anti-abortionists. Or even common. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2008, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330/20 "2008-11-19T01:48:28Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > I’m saying that I see no reason to think that that attitude will ever becaome prevalent among anti-abortionists. Or even common. I think there’s more pragmatism amongst some in the movement than you’re giving them credit for (if credit can be given for pragmatism). [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-turning-point-in-the-abortion-debate-possible-and-are-we-there/473330.md?page=2)