# Most pro-choicers have it all wrong. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 19, 2006, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118 "2006-07-19T02:50:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/301 "2006-07-21T19:24:19Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Are you a Jain, then? Do you follow the path of [_ahimsa_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahimsa#Ahinsa_in_Jainism)? Do you sweep the ground when you walk so you won’t step on any bugs? Do you eat any meat or fish? Do you disapprove of killing plants for food? Do you avoid brushing your teeth so you won’t kill bacteria? If you don’t think these things are examples of “harm,” then you need to rethink your definition. As I said, You should try reading more than one post at a time before you respond. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/302 "2006-07-21T19:30:33Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Isn’t that just a little of an understatement? You’re Catholic - I don’t think that’s “somewhat religious” so much as “definitely religious”. I don’t know about that. I am a pretty bad Catholic in a lot of ways, and I formed this pro-life attitude when I would hardly call myself Catholic in any but the most superficial way. > [@](#): > > I personally think it’s more than coincidence that you’re Catholic and pro-life, but I accept that _you_ believe the two are not linked. _Why_ then do you consider the foetus a human life? Do you believe it has a soul? Logical reasons for not considering a foetus to be a human life have been offered before. I think what you lack is an emotional reason. I do consider a fetus to be a human life. As far as the soul is concerned, IMO the fetus has one as much as I do or you do. That is, if there is a such thing as a soul, then I believe the fetus has one. Whether or not humans have souls is not central to my argument. My emotional reasons for being pro-life probably have more to do with the fact that I am adopted than my Catholicism. I mention that I am adopted from time to time in these discussions, if adoption comes up or if it is relevant somehow. But, I don’t really consider this to be a good logical argument for the pro-life side, as much as it is simple gratitude that my birth mother didn’t want or couldn’t get an abortion. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/303 "2006-07-21T19:33:17Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > I, for one. I was pro-life long before I developed my religious convictions. The same is true of [Dr. Bernard Nathanson](http://www.aboutabortions.com/Confess.html), one of the founders of NARAL. He was an atheist when he turned away from the pro-choice cause. > > **Stratocaster** , **beagledave** and I have discussed the abortion issue on the SDMB many times before. To the best of my recollection, none of us have ever offered any religious arguments against abortion. In fact, we have steadfastly avoided doing so. Count me also in the category of people who avoid religious arguments. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/304 "2006-07-21T19:37:41Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > (my bolding) > An aborted foetus isn’t “destined” to be a sentient being either, clearly. It’s “destined” to be aborted. Why not let “destiny” take its course? I was talking about biological destiny. I grant you that the power the lab scientists and parents of the blastocytes have over them means that in reality, they are destined to be nothing but what they are. My point was that biologically speaking, a blastocyte does not exist as a blastocyte for its own sake…it is designed by evolution to develop into a baby. A skin cell or hair cell has no such biological destiny. > [@](#): > > BTW, **Sarafeena** , despite how I may have been sounding, I want you to know that I also think you’re a cool poster and appreciate your efforts, like **Salt Seller**. Don’t let anything I wwrite make you think different, y’hear? Thanks, man…you are OK, too. 🙂 ---
**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 21, 2006, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/305 "2006-07-21T19:41:15Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > Count me also in the category of people who avoid religious arguments. How about pragmatic arguments, as requested in post #291? ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/306 "2006-07-21T19:52:08Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > How about pragmatic arguments, as requested in post #291? I gave my logical argument, and I have a general distaste for “pragmatic” arguments when it comes to human life, but if I have to answer this question, I will give it a try. You said: > [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > Well, let’s evaluate it, then. A pregnant woman decides she doesn’t want a child. What is the value of denying her an abortion? The birth of that child into a situation where it wasn’t wanted? How valuable is that? And it’s not enough to simply say “life is precious” or something similar. An evaluation requires a hard factual analysis. First of all, I am not _necessarily_ for denying her an abortion. My goal in life is more to try to change people’s minds about abortion than to make it illegal. But, if you want to put words in my mouth and say that I am trying to “deny” her an abortion rather than change her mind about having one, then fine. I would say that it is not a good thing to put a child where he is not wanted. On the other hand, if the mother was that positive that she doesn’t want the child once it is born, then she should not have any problem with giving that child up for adoption. And, maybe to you it is not enough to say “life is precious,” but the fact that it IS means that maybe the point is to let people live, and try to solve some of the social problems that force a lot of women to make these tough choices. > [@](#): > > I tend to value her freedom more than the life of a potential person, in general terms. I’m perfectly happy to get far more specific and talk about crime rates and drug use in places where abortion is unavailable. I think the concept of using abortion to keep the crime rate down is a pretty sick one. I do not believe that this is a responsible way for society to solve its social problems. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/307 "2006-07-21T20:13:19Z")
Thanks for answeing, **JThunder** , **Sarahfeena**. I’ll no longer assert that pro-lifers neccesarily have a undisclosed religious motivation. **Sarahfeena** , I think “biological destiny” is the wrong term to use. It’s rather loaded and implies a certain inevitability that just isn’t there. Blastocytes get spontaneously ejected all the time (I’m tempted to say “more often than not”, if my recollection of antenatal classes is right). There’s no design in evolution, no intent. If we were a species that practiced r-selection, for instance, there’d be a lot less of an abortion debate. It’s just one of those things, that we’re K-strategists. ---
**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 21, 2006, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/308 "2006-07-21T20:15:03Z")
Would it be far to say that though you have moral qualms about abortion, you don’t object to its availability? I’m just trying to get past the qualifiers: > [@](#): > > not _necessarily_ … to try to … if you want to … On the other hand, if … should not … maybe to you … maybe the point is … The one time you speak definitively is to assert that life IS precious, but you’ve built nothing firm on top of that foundation. That’s okay, though. Each of us builds their own moral framework. If you want to campaign against abortion laws using free speech, the petition and the vote, I’ve no objection. I’ll be doing the same on the other side. Right now, I’m pretty comfortable with the laws as they are, so my goal is relatively easy; maintenance, not change. ---
**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 21, 2006, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/309 "2006-07-21T20:18:06Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > I think the concept of using abortion to keep the crime rate down is a pretty sick one. I do not believe that this is a responsible way for society to solve its social problems. Incidentally, lower crime rates is not the goal of abortion, but it’s irresponsible to refuse to recognize that _higher_ crime rates may be one result of _banning_ abortion. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/310 "2006-07-21T20:20:20Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Thanks for answeing, **JThunder** , **Sarahfeena**. I’ll no longer assert that pro-lifers neccesarily have a undisclosed religious motivation. > > **Sarahfeena** , I think “biological destiny” is the wrong term to use. It’s rather loaded and implies a certain inevitability that just isn’t there. Blastocytes get spontaneously ejected all the time (I’m tempted to say “more often than not”, if my recollection of antenatal classes is right). > > There’s no design in evolution, no intent. If we were a species that practiced r-selection, for instance, there’d be a lot less of an abortion debate. It’s just one of those things, that we’re K-strategists. I see what you are saying, but I can’t think of a better way to phrase it. Blastocytes & embroys are compared to other clumps of cells all the time, but there are inherent differences. I believe someone earlier in the thread compared it to a “loogie” he spits up on the street. Well, if these were the same things in reality, then the scientists would use the loogie instead of the blastocytes. Loogies are much, much easier to come by, and probably wouldn’t cause all this controversy. In addition, if you implanted loogie cells into a uterus (gross, I know, but it WAS the example given), you would not end up delivering a baby in 9 months. The “biological destiny” I am speaking of is not so much that each and every blastocyte is destined to become a baby, as in some kind of cosmic destiny, but more that a blastocyte is just one phase of development. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/311 "2006-07-21T20:32:57Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > Would it be far to say that though you have moral qualms about abortion, you don’t object to its availability? I’m just trying to get past the qualifiers: > The one time you speak definitively is to assert that life IS precious, but you’ve built nothing firm on top of that foundation. The subject of this discussion wasn’t the legalities of abortion, and I haven’t mentioned its legality once until you brought it up. The “qualifiers” as you call them are my attempt to try to see more than one side of the issue. I could easily come in here and say, “Abortion is murder. It must be banned immediately.” But that wouldn’t be very productive, now, would it? I can’t imagine what you would have thought about me if I did that. Right-wing nutcase, perhaps? So, I try to be diplomatic, and I get critcized for that as well. Just can’t win with some people, I guess. :rolleyes: I think it is too complicated an issue to just declare abortion should ALWAYS be available under ANY circumstances, or to just declare it should NEVER be available under ANY circumstances. I believe in compromise, I believe in trying to get my POV out there to try to change other people’s minds, and I believe in helping women who want to keep their babies but don’t feel they can. > [@](#): > > That’s okay, though. Each of us builds their own moral framework. If you want to campaign against abortion laws using free speech, the petition and the vote, I’ve no objection. I’ll be doing the same on the other side. Right now, I’m pretty comfortable with the laws as they are, so my goal is relatively easy; maintenance, not change. Glad to know you have put the stamp of approval on my participation in the political process. But, it’s not really my goal to change the laws. ---
**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 21, 2006, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/312 "2006-07-21T20:47:16Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > The “qualifiers” as you call them are my attempt to try to see more than one side of the issue. I could easily come in here and say, “Abortion is murder. It must be banned immediately.” But that wouldn’t be very productive, now, would it? I can’t imagine what you would have thought about me if I did that. Right-wing nutcase, perhaps? So, I try to be diplomatic, and I get critcized for that as well. Just can’t win with some people, I guess. :rolleyes: Spare me. I’ve also expressed the need for compromises in forming laws that are tolerable to most of the population. I just don’t pepper my argument with weasel words. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/313 "2006-07-21T20:54:02Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > Spare me. I’ve also expressed the need for compromises in forming laws that are tolerable to most of the population. I just don’t pepper my argument with weasel words. And I’m glad you are so pleased with yourself as a result. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/314 "2006-07-21T20:55:58Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > I see what you are saying, but I can’t think of a better way to phrase it. Blastocytes & embroys are compared to other clumps of cells all the time, but there are inherent differences. I believe someone earlier in the thread compared it to a “loogie” he spits up on the street. Well, if these were the same things in reality, then the scientists would use the loogie instead of the blastocytes. Loogies are much, much easier to come by, and probably wouldn’t cause all this controversy. In addition, if you implanted loogie cells into a uterus (gross, I know, but it WAS the example given), you would not end up delivering a baby in 9 months. The “biological destiny” I am speaking of is not so much that each and every blastocyte is destined to become a baby, as in some kind of cosmic destiny, but more that a blastocyte is just one phase of development. No, I get the point, I think, but it doesn’t sway me. You think the potential of a human life is wasted, I say that potential gets wasted all the time. Nature does it all the time. What’s different about abortion over spontaneous miscarriage is the element of choice, of wilful action, is that it? Pro-lifers want to take that choice away from the women who would use it. That’s ultimately where the argument lies, despite what the OP might think (And what happened to the OP, anyway?). ---
**Author:** ![godzillatemple](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/49beb7/32.png) [@godzillatemple](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/godzillatemple)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/315 "2006-07-21T21:00:32Z")
Labels are a very convenient way to “win” an argument without having to actually debate or prove anything. If I label myself “pro-choice” because I support a woman’s right to have an abortion, that implies that anybody who disagrees with me must therefore be “anti-choice.” If, on the otehr hand, I label myself “pro-life” because I do not support a woman’s right to have an abortion, that implies that anybody who disagrees with me must therefore be “anti-life.” Basically, whoever gets to define the terms, wins the argument. Once you strip away the labels and the desire to win the argument, I think it becomes crystal clear that yes, a fetus (at least at some stage in its development) is just as much a human being (leaving aside the legal definition of “person”) as a newborn baby. Neither can survive on their own for any significant length of time, and the only real difference is one of location. And a fetus, just like a baby, has a right to life. At the same time, it is crystal clear that a woman (or a man, for that matter), should have the right to control what happens to her own body. The only real question is which of these two potentially conflicting rights should take precedence. It’s not whether a fetus is a person with the right to live, or whether a woman has the right to control what happens to her body – it’s which of these two rights we feel is most important. And, unfortunately, the answer to this question is wholly subjective and will never in a million years be resolved to anybody’s satisfaction. Regards, Barry ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/316 "2006-07-21T21:04:01Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Blastocytes get spontaneously ejected all the time (I’m tempted to say “more often than not”, if my recollection of antenatal classes is right). Just to correct myself, it turns out that the rate of spontaneous abortion is [more like 25%](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=10362823) for early pregnancy. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/317 "2006-07-21T21:07:24Z")
> [@godzillatemple](#): > > It’s not whether a fetus is a person with the right to live, or whether a woman has the right to control what happens to her body – it’s which of these two rights we feel is most important. > > And, unfortunately, the answer to this question is wholly subjective and will never in a million years be resolved to anybody’s satisfaction. But it is stimulating to argue, though. ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/318 "2006-07-21T21:09:48Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > No, I get the point, I think, but it doesn’t sway me. You think the potential of a human life is wasted, I say that potential gets wasted all the time. Nature does it all the time. > > What’s different about abortion over spontaneous miscarriage is the element of choice, of wilful action, is that it? Pro-lifers want to take that choice away from the women who would use it. That’s ultimately where the argument lies, despite what the OP might think (And what happened to the OP, anyway?). That’s how I look at it as well. If every egg were supposed to develop into a full-fledged baby, we’d be in deep shit. Deep _baby_ shit! We’re supposed to lose most of them. ---
**Author:** ![Sarahfeena](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sarahfeena/32/519_2.png) [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2006, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/319 "2006-07-21T21:13:22Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Just to correct myself, it turns out that the rate of spontaneous abortion is [more like 25%](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=10362823) for early pregnancy. That is the statistic I have heard, as well. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2006, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118/320 "2006-07-22T01:31:38Z")
> [@DianaG](#): > > **JThunder** , I assume that you believe that society has a certain responsibility toward children in general. In practice, society’s responsibility to unwanted children is \*already \* burdensome. So why is it out of line to ask someone who wants to prevent women from having abortions exactly what we’re to do with all these unwanted children? Because killing unwanted children is NOT an acceptable solution. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/most-pro-choicers-have-it-all-wrong/365118.md?page=17)