# Okay, Fine, Abortion Again. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 11, 2016, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635 "2016-03-11T07:59:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/21 "2016-03-11T15:23:13Z")
> [@Flyer](#): > > I never cease to be amazed at how the pro-abortion crowd cannot understand what a poor argument “control” is. > > After all, when I hit somebody with a baseball bat, all I am doing is exercising my right to be in full control over my own body and what it does. > > The abortion argument is willfully blind to the fact that rights are not absolute. Which “somebody” is being hit with the “baseball bat” in your scenario? ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/22 "2016-03-11T15:27:32Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Which “somebody” is being hit with the “baseball bat” in your scenario? I think it’s pretty clear that Flyer meant the fetus as the one receiving the blow from the baseball bat. ---
**Author:** ![CaptMurdock](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captmurdock/32/11736_2.png) [@CaptMurdock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaptMurdock)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/23 "2016-03-11T15:27:49Z")
> [@Flyer](#): > > The abortion argument is willfully blind to the fact that rights are not absolute. And you’re saying this to support the argument that the “rights” of a clump of cells the size of my thumb trumps the rights of a fully grown woman? :smack: ---
**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:** [March 11, 2016, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/24 "2016-03-11T15:30:18Z")
I don’t know if “the doctor” is necessary in the argument, but it is not an appeal to authority fallacy. The doctor, in this case, is an actual authority on the matter, so an appeal to his or her decision is not fallacious. If I were to invoke Einstein’s opinion on that matter, that would be fallacious. Einstein was a pretty smart guy, but he was not a medical doctor, and not an authority on abortion. But an abortion is a medical procedure, so it’s always wise for a woman to consult a doctor when an abortion is planned. The exception might be a “Plan B” situation where it’s not practical to do so. If we get to the point where there is an abortion pill a woman can safely take further along in the pregnancy, then that would be another instance where the doctor needn’t be involved. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/25 "2016-03-11T15:43:37Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > Right from the start, you are deliberately trying to hide the fact that there are three parties, not two: the woman, the doctor _and the unborn child_. Right from the start, you have an unwarranted premise there that is based on nothing more than a value judgment, and one that many people find completely bizarre. > [@Flyer](#): > > The abortion argument is willfully blind to the fact that rights are not absolute. Except speech rights and gun rights. Those are totally absolute. Or so I’ve been told. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/26 "2016-03-11T15:56:18Z")
> [@CaptMurdock](#): > > And you’re saying this to support the argument that the “rights” of a clump of cells the size of my thumb trumps the rights of a fully grown woman? Different rights. Right to live v. right to not be pregnant anymore. If the right to live is the same, i/e the woman will likely die due the pregnancy, then her right’s would “trump”. And the smack smilie doesn’t really help your point. ---
**Author:** ![Gedd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gedd/32/4938_2.png) [@Gedd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gedd)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/27 "2016-03-11T16:11:09Z")
> [@Flyer](#): > > I never cease to be amazed at how the pro-abortion crowd cannot understand what a poor argument “control” is. > > After all, when I hit somebody with a baseball bat, all I am doing is exercising my right to be in full control over my own body and what it does. > > The abortion argument is willfully blind to the fact that rights are not absolute. And the anti-abortion argument is blind to the fact that you not wanting an abortion doesn’t mean you get to force everyone else not to have one. True, abortion rights aren’t absolute. That’s why (legal) abortions have always been regulated. But it’s a right women have, so let them practice it. If you don’t want one, don’t have one. No one is controling your body or forcing you to. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/28 "2016-03-11T16:15:45Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > And actually, rather than explore abortion again, what I’d really like to explore are political parties’ internal conflicts between ideology and coalition politics. Okay, let’s explore. The Republicans (by and large) oppose abortion. Yet they: - oppose comprehensive sex education in favor of abstinence-only education which has repeatedly been shown to have much worse outcomes; - have repeatedly espoused making women’s access to birth control pills more difficult; - are busily working to shut down women’s health clinics and Planned Parenthood, which often provide both the aforementioned birth control (of various sorts) and valuable family planning advice; and - have on various occasions taken stances on rape which, if not actually “pro-rape”, have certainly minimized the effects of the crime and the penalties therefore. All of the above are things that would and have resulted in _more_ unwanted pregnancies, which in turn have led to _more_ abortions. Yet the GOP keep pushing for them harder, which makes me suspect that the real position of many of these people is not “we don’t want abortions” but rather “we want women who have sex to suffer”, particularly when you consider the lack of support for those babies once born. If the GOP _really_ wanted to stop abortions they’d do the exact opposite of the above: make birth control as accessible as possible, promote full and frank sex education, provide access to women’s health clinics\* to poor women, and get men to be responsible for the babies they helped make (or get them to be more responsible for not making them). They should thank God for Planned Parenthood, which prevents far more unwanted pregnancies than it terminates. But they won’t, because then they wouldn’t get to feel all smug and self-righteous. Oh, and another fun fact: states where access to abortion has been severely restricted in recent years have shown an uptick in internet searches for how to perform home abortions. But I guess those sluts deserve whatever happens to them. - those Christian “family planning” shame factories don’t count. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/29 "2016-03-11T16:16:27Z")
> [@Gedd](#): > > And the anti-abortion argument is blind to the fact that you not wanting an abortion doesn’t mean you get to force everyone else not to have one. Society does this all the time. Nobody says “YOU don’t have to steal, but you can’t force me to not steal” or “YOU may believe robbery is wrong so you don’t have to do it, but that doesn’t mean you can’t force me not to rob.” ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/30 "2016-03-11T16:18:02Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > But I guess those sluts deserve whatever happens to them. And I wonder why it’s so difficult to discuss abortion on this site. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/31 "2016-03-11T16:18:30Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > To expand on that, there is no way for me to say that a person who believes a zygote is a person with rights is morally incorrect. If that is your belief you’re certainly entitled to it and have every right to fight that battle in the political system. We’re not going to agree on this ever but one side or the other is going to prevail legally and that side may change back and forth over time. That being said, it is one thing to fight for the right to abortion on principle and to get the Constitution or court rulings to change and to throw up petulant legal roadblocks to prevent women from accessing a procedure that is legal. Sadly, I agree completely. I supported the ultrasound requirement, under the theory that it would cause women to reconsider after gaining more accurate information – which is a legitimate government goal. However, after seeing data on the actual experience – delay, but statistically insignificant changes in rates – I withdrew my support, concluding that it’s a pretext to hinder, not a good way to provide information. I fervently wish this were not so, but it is. The courts have spoken: it’s a right. The way to change this via persuasion and ultimately constitutional amendment. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/32 "2016-03-11T16:20:42Z")
Abortions for all!!! ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/33 "2016-03-11T16:25:14Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > And I wonder why it’s so difficult to discuss abortion on this site. [Did you think I was being hyperbolic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh%E2%80%93Sandra_Fluke_controversy)? (Also - I’ll take a miniature American flag please.) ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/34 "2016-03-11T16:29:18Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > Saying abortion should be between a woman and her doctor is like saying murder should be between a man and his hired assassin. Right from the start, you are deliberately trying to hide the fact that there are three parties, not two: the woman, the doctor _and the unborn child_. The unborn child doesn’t get a say because it is irrelevant. > [@Bricker](#): > > cause women to reconsider after gaining more accurate information – which is a legitimate government goal. What made you believe that a woman seeking an abortion is not fully aware of what she is doing so that further information might cause such a re-evaluation? ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/35 "2016-03-11T16:34:12Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > [Did you think I was being hyperbolic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh%E2%80%93Sandra_Fluke_controversy)? > > (Also - I’ll take a miniature American flag please.) No I think you’re taking the actions and beliefs of some pro-life people and ascribing them to all pro-life people. It’s a ton easier to do than deal with the issue, but I find it just drags down these threads until there is no point going on. ---
**Author:** ![CaptMurdock](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captmurdock/32/11736_2.png) [@CaptMurdock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaptMurdock)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/36 "2016-03-11T16:36:16Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > Different rights. **Right to live** v. right to not be pregnant anymore. If the right to live is the same, i/e the woman will likely die due the pregnancy, then her right’s would “trump”. Whose “right” to live…the clump of cells the size of my thumb? Sorry, not buying it. And if you’re so concerned about it, you’d either a) advocate increased access to safe and effective birth control or b) ensure every child has access to the necessities of life AFTER they are born (and don’t tell me they do, we both know that’s a lie). > [@](#): > > And the smack smilie doesn’t really help your point. Your opinion of my use of the smack smilie is duly noted. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/37 "2016-03-11T16:54:11Z")
> [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > The unborn child doesn’t get a say because it is irrelevant. You’re right. It’s my hope that this view will change. > [@](#): > > What made you believe that a woman seeking an abortion is not fully aware of what she is doing so that further information might cause such a re-evaluation? I thought that at least some abortion-minded women would literally expect a clump of cells, and would be dissuaded when they saw recognizably human features. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/38 "2016-03-11T16:59:42Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > Society does this all the time. Nobody says “YOU don’t have to steal, but you can’t force me to not steal” or “YOU may believe robbery is wrong so you don’t have to do it, but that doesn’t mean you can’t force me not to rob.” When the law says that that clump of cells is a legal person at conception you’ll have a valid argument. it doesn’t currently, and you don’t. We are not forced to use your stilted “unborn child” terminology, or your unbalanced “balanced rights” illogic, either. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/39 "2016-03-11T17:00:54Z")
> [@CaptMurdock](#): > > Whose “right” to live…the clump of cells the size of my thumb? Sorry, not buying it. And if you’re so concerned about it, you’d either a) advocate increased access to safe and effective birth control or b) ensure every child has access to the necessities of life AFTER they are born (and don’t tell me they do, we both know that’s a lie). OK. I fully advocate increased access to effective birth control and that children should have all the necessities after they are born. And? ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2016, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635/40 "2016-03-11T17:06:52Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > When the law says that that clump of cells is a legal person at conception you’ll have a valid argument. > it doesn’t currently, and you don’t. I think that the law does recognize that a clump of cells is afforded some protection, the issue is when. And, as an aside, I don’t think “the law says” is a great argument for determining the validity of a moral argument, lest you rouse the ire of Bricker. > [@Czarcasm](#): > > We are not forced to use your stilted “unborn child” terminology OK, dont. We can use your “clump of cells” terminology if it makes this easier on you. > [@Czarcasm](#): > > or your unbalanced “balanced rights” illogic, either. I don’t understand what you mean. Other than the simple attempt to hand wave away something, I just don’t understand what you’re trying to hand wave away. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/okay-fine-abortion-again/748635.md?page=3)