# Now THIS is an example of where anti abortionists actually just hate women. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 26, 2011, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288 "2011-05-26T14:00:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/41 "2011-05-26T20:46:01Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > It’s a principled stand against killing babies. They think a fetus is a person. None of the other training that money is spent on results in the death of a person. > > This is not rocket surgery, unless you refuse to accept that the other side actually holds principled beliefs. I was under the impression that many/most Republicans supported legal abortion in the case of imminent death of the mother. Why are those legal and necessary (even in extreme pro-life views like the Catholic Church’s) abortions never discussed when this kind of bill comes up–even if only to apologize for the bill’s effect on them? ---
**Author:** ![curlcoat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@curlcoat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curlcoat)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/42 "2011-05-26T20:48:31Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > I don’t think the bill is indication they hate women. I think the people behind the bill hate the notion of people making their own decisions in life, and the rest of them are just the typical scummy politicians who will do anything to keep their jobs. Have they proposed any bills that only affect a man’s right to live? > [@John\_Mace](#): > > It’s a principled stand against killing babies. They think a fetus is a person. None of the other training that money is spent on results in the death of a person. > > This is not rocket surgery, unless you refuse to accept that the other side actually holds principled beliefs. Principled beliefs or not, it still means that they are likely to end up killing women, to save a fetus that will also die. Government’s efforts are best spent when they aren’t trying to force religious belief, principled or not. Prevent the need for abortions instead of killing off women. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/43 "2011-05-26T20:54:43Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Eh. This is no different than not using federal funds to perform abortions. If you’re pro-life, why would you want to expend federal funds to teach doctors how to kill? I don’t see this as evidence of misogyny. It is an example of the unintended consequences of getting the federal government involved in health care-- you are going to get national standards set by people who may not agree with you. > > Sort of reminds me of people who cry censorship when the government withholds funds for “objectionable” art. Get your own funding. Ok, what if they tweak this bill just a little to withhold federal funds from any medical school which offers training in abortion procedures? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/44 "2011-05-26T21:00:37Z")
> [@ladyfoxfyre](#): > > But even then, many still allow for the exceptions in the case of rape, incest, or the health of the mother. This demonstrates that they indeed have no such exceptions, and would rather a woman die because she could not receive a legal medical procedure than to train doctors to do their jobs appropriately. It appears to be a less a principled stand against killing babies and more one favor of letting women die from lack of access to medical care. Nope. You’d have to demonstrate that without this federal funding, there would not be enough abortion doctors to perform the bare minimum allowed by pro-life politicians. That would be a tiny fraction of the ~1M abortions performed every year in the US. And there are enough staunchly pro-choice people in this country who, if they really feel that strongly about the issue, can fund any amount of abortion training they want. There is no per se reason that this must be a government function. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/45 "2011-05-26T21:04:59Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > Does that mean we need to make sure no funding goes to training doctors on handling No Resuscitation Orders too (or whatever the term is)?.. FYI, I’m trained to not resuscitate people. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/46 "2011-05-26T21:06:59Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Ok, what if they tweak this bill just a little to withhold federal funds from any medical school which offers training in abortion procedures? I’m a pro-choice libertarian leaning guy. I’m fully in favor of abortion on demand, up until some point of “viability”, as defined the current science. But I’m not in favor of government funding for any medical school training. So, you’re asking the wrong guy about that question. However, since money is fungible, it would seem consistent with the pro-life position to agree with the tweak you are suggesting. However, politics is the art of the possible, and it is unlikely that you would get enough Republican support to essentially withdraw all funding from medical schools. ---
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/47 "2011-05-26T21:24:04Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Nope. You’d have to demonstrate that without this federal funding, there would not be enough abortion doctors to perform the bare minimum allowed by pro-life politicians. Why does the medical community have to justify the use of a legal medical procedure, and justify the value of teaching all legal medical procedures in medical school to pro-life politicians? The issue is not necessarily about the morality of abortion but rather the morality of the legislature determining what doctors are and are not allowed to learn. You seem to be under the impression that each med student gets a chunk of money that is specifically portioned out for the teaching of each area of medicine, and that they are just yanking the portion designated to teaching about abortion. It’s exactly like when abstinence only education was the only type of sex-ed that was allowed to get federal funding. So you end up with med schools having to eliminate it from the curriculum or else they don’t have any students because they’re all there on Stafford loans. That is a bad precedent for education and legislating. > [@](#): > > There is no per se reason that this must be a government function. That what must be a government function? Providing loans to students who want to go to med school? Because you failed to address what I said before, which was that _specifically the teaching of abortion_ isn’t in and of itself a “function of government”, but the government does have a very vested interest in people being educated, which is why they provide federally subsidized education loans. The government also has an interest in people who go to med school being educated well, which is why you must pass a licensing board in order to practice medicine once you finish school. And again, the issue is whether it is appropriate, as a condition of those loans, to dictate arbitrarily the content of the education being provided beyond the general aptitude of students who leave the program. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/48 "2011-05-26T21:25:24Z")
> [@curlcoat](#): > > Have they proposed any bills that only affect a man’s right to live? They haven’t done much to change the military draft or combat regulations. I wouldn’t say those laws were passed or remain in place because they hate men. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/49 "2011-05-26T21:27:37Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > None of the other training that money is spent on results in the death of a person. I’m happy to hear that person ever died from medical treatment after they were born. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/50 "2011-05-26T21:59:40Z")
nevermind … misread a post. ---
**Author:** ![margin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/65b543/32.png) [@margin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/margin)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/51 "2011-05-26T22:06:05Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > They haven’t done much to change the military draft or combat regulations. I wouldn’t say those laws were passed or remain in place because they hate men. There hasn’t been a draft in forty years and never will be, unless somebody’s eager to kill their political career. And women are in combat now, too----they just don’t get any recognition for it. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/52 "2011-05-26T22:40:57Z")
> [@margin](#): > > There hasn’t been a draft in forty years and never will be, unless somebody’s eager to kill their political career. And women are in combat now, too----they just don’t get any recognition for it. The SSS has been in place for a long time, as are the draft laws, and they were originally passed for reasons other than man hating. A scummy politician voting for an anti-abortion law is not necessarily a woman hater. They want to control the lives of men as much as they do for women. Even their ideas that limit women’s rights are a coverup for their goal of eliminating everybody’s rights and instituting a theocracy. This doesn’t make them woman haters. And some of them are just large sacks of shit wearing business suits, and couldn’t care less what the law was as long as they are better off for voting the way they do. And that doesn’t make them woman haters either. ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/53 "2011-05-26T23:12:10Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Nope. You’d have to demonstrate that without this federal funding, there would not be enough abortion doctors to perform the bare minimum allowed by pro-life politicians. That would be a tiny fraction of the ~1M abortions performed every year in the US. And there are enough staunchly pro-choice people in this country who, if they really feel that strongly about the issue, can fund any amount of abortion training they want. > > There is no per se reason that this must be a government function. Doctors do not have magical transportation powers. They cannot zoom from NYC to Anchorage, Alaska when a woman needs an emergency abortion. There are already a great many places in which a woman who needs an abortion cannot get one. Being able to perform an abortion is, or should be, a procedure that every doctor must learn. ---
**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:** [May 26, 2011, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/54 "2011-05-26T23:14:36Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > It’s a principled stand against killing babies. They think a fetus is a person. None of the other training that money is spent on results in the death of a person. > > This is not rocket surgery, unless you refuse to accept that the other side actually holds principled beliefs. They don’t, clearly. They don’t act in ways that reduce abortions; just in ways that make them more humiliating and dangerous. Like the so-called “partial birth abortion ban”, which didn’t ban late term abortions, just the safest method of them. To use the classic example, if you had the choice of saving one six year old girl or a canister filled with hundreds of frozen embryos, would you save the girl or the canister? Even the majority of “pro-lifers” wills say they will save the girl because despite all their speech-making they don’t believe that a few cells are a person. They just use that as an excuse in their campaign against women. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/55 "2011-05-26T23:19:53Z")
> [@ladyfoxfyre](#): > > Why does the medical community have to justify the use of a legal medical procedure, and justify the value of teaching all legal medical procedures in medical school to pro-life politicians? Because they are soliciting public funds. If they didn’t solicit public funds, they would not have to justify anything to anyone. > [@](#): > > The issue is not necessarily about the morality of abortion but rather the morality of the legislature determining what doctors are and are not allowed to learn. No one is forbidding anyone from doing anything. Withholding federal funds does not prevent private funds from being used. > [@](#): > > You seem to be under the impression that each med student gets a chunk of money that is specifically portioned out for the teaching of each area of medicine, and that they are just yanking the portion designated to teaching about abortion. It’s exactly like when abstinence only education was the only type of sex-ed that was allowed to get federal funding. So you end up with med schools having to eliminate it from the curriculum or else they don’t have any students because they’re all there on Stafford loans. That is a bad precedent for education and legislating. When I was in graduate school, I didn’t have government funding of my education. I secured my own funding. Medical students can do the same. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/56 "2011-05-26T23:28:57Z")
> [@Lynn\_Bodoni](#): > > Doctors do not have magical transportation powers. They cannot zoom from NYC to Anchorage, Alaska when a woman needs an emergency abortion. There are already a great many places in which a woman who needs an abortion cannot get one. If the residents of the state of Alaska think they need to subsidize abortion doctors (or any other kind of doctors, for that matter), they can do so with Alaska state funds. > [@](#): > > Being able to perform an abortion is, or should be, a procedure that every doctor must learn. That’s absurd. There is nothing unique about abortions that every doctor should be able to perform one. Why should my podiatrist be able to perform an abortion? I don’t want my doctor visit costs to go up because you think he needs to be trained to do abortions. You don’t get this stuff for free. Besides, the only way to be trained to do abortions is to, do abortions. You are now disallowing anyone who is pro-life from being a doctor unless they are willing to go against their religious principles. And you guys think the pro-life side is crazy… ---
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/57 "2011-05-26T23:41:04Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > No one is forbidding anyone from doing anything. Withholding federal funds does not prevent private funds from being used. That’s ridiculous. You’re just trying to rebrand extortion, which is what they’re doing. It’s withholding the possibility of obtaining student loans to extort the schools and twist their science-based curriculum to suit the whims of the legislature. > [@](#): > > When I was in graduate school, I didn’t have government funding of my education. I secured my own funding. Medical students can do the same. That’s nice. Most people can’t do that. The reason we allow federal funds to be provided to subsidize education is so that education is not inherently a meritocracy, where only the rich get to continue their education presumably so they can be richer. Just as it would be inappropriate for the government to put stipulations on student loans such as “We will give you the money, but only if you study engineering”, it is ridiculous for them to say “you can study medicine, just as long as you don’t learn to do this medical procedure which we do not like.” ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/58 "2011-05-26T23:41:58Z")
> [@](#): > > Why should my podiatrist be able to perform an abortion? Podiatrists are generally not MDs, and can’t perform most medical procedures. Orthopedists ARE MDs, and cost more than podiatrists. I go to a podiatrist, and I love him to bits, but he’s not capable of performing something like a Pap smear, for instance. And I don’t expect him to. ---
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/59 "2011-05-26T23:47:16Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > That’s absurd. There is nothing unique about abortions that every doctor should be able to perform one. Why should my podiatrist be able to perform an abortion? Because your doctor has to become a fully trained physician before he can specialize in podiatry. People don’t just go to school to become podiatrists or dermatologists, they become physicians and then specialize from there. ETA: There is a branch of podiatry that begins with an MD or DO, but apparently there is also another branch which takes the first 2 years of normal med school and specializes at that point. My mistake. > [@](#): > > I don’t want my doctor visit costs to go up because you think he needs to be trained to do abortions. You don’t get this stuff for free. As stated earlier, there is not an allocation of money to the degree where just “cutting out the abortion training” is going to result in any lowering in the cost of education. It’s just the cost of education, and medical school is pretty well planned to go in a specific schedule with exceptions for electives. > [@](#): > > Besides, the only way to be trained to do abortions is to, do abortions. You are now disallowing anyone who is pro-life from being a doctor unless they are willing to go against their religious principles. That’s quite a stretch, to go from the GOP disallowing medical schools to teach abortion if their students receive federal funding, from someone else requiring a med student to perform an abortion? This isn’t the thread about conscientious objection to abortion. This is the one about funding med schools to teach medicine, all of it, not just the parts you like. > [@](#): > > And you guys think the pro-life side is crazy… Thinking that med schools should teach medicine is hardly crazy. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 26, 2011, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288/60 "2011-05-26T23:56:36Z")
It’s still absurd to say you are going to require every doctor to be able to perform an abortion. What is so special about abortions that every doctor should have to be able to give one? And how are you going to get around the 1st amendment issue of requiring someone to violate her religious principles in order to become a doctor? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-this-is-an-example-of-where-anti-abortionists-actually-just-hate-women/583288.md?page=4)