# "Party of Death" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 15, 2006, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810 "2006-06-15T15:35:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2006, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/141 "2006-06-18T23:15:56Z")
Alright. I don’t think either of us are going to convince each other, Sarahfeena, so I think i’ll bow out. I still think the title of the book is contentious, but hey, that’s what opinions are for. ---
**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:** [June 18, 2006, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/142 "2006-06-18T23:17:00Z")
> [@DMC](#): > > While I don’t disagree completely with the sentiment, if we used this as a guideline, shouldn’t the supporters of the war all be enlisting or volunteering for the war effort in some other way? There are a hell of a lot more tax dollars going to it (and I don’t want to fund it) than are going to any subsidized abortion organizations (which you don’t want to fund). They should be volunteering for the war effort, and many of them are. I post on another message board that has a lot of conservative types on it. Do you know that many of the women who post there send care packages every week to Iraq? These are women who don’t even have any friends or family over there. They just collect stuff they see on sale, such as toothpaste, playing cards, snacks, etc., pack it up once a week and mail it off. This is the kind of thing I am talking about…putting your actions where your heart is. I am iffy on the war myself, but I truly admire that kind of dedication to the troops. Regarding the tax dollars, I get what you are saying, but **generally speaking** I have less of a problem with money going to national defense than I do with having it go to abortions. ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2006, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/143 "2006-06-18T23:19:11Z")
You’re aware that Medicaid doesn’t cover abortions, right? ---
**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:** [June 18, 2006, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/144 "2006-06-18T23:21:28Z")
> [@DianaG](#): > > You’re aware that Medicaid doesn’t cover abortions, right? Yes. And what is your opinion on that? ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2006, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/145 "2006-06-18T23:23:04Z")
That my tax dollars aren’t being used to fund abortions. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2006, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/146 "2006-06-18T23:59:21Z")
> [@DianaG](#): > > That my tax dollars aren’t being used to fund abortions. Well, unless you count [shooting pregnant Iraqis](http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2025900&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312). That’s your tax dollars at work right there. ---
**Author:** ![volvelle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/e0b2c6/32.png) [@volvelle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/volvelle)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/147 "2006-06-19T00:09:54Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > **volvelle** , you are missing my entire point. I could come up with a bunch of links to articles & studies that refute the ones you linked to…but there is no reason to, because I will never change your mind about what you believe. However, the point I was trying to make is that being pro-life does not necessarily mean that you are involved in some sinister plot to oppress women. THAT is your point that I found offensive. My pro-life stance has nothing to do with hating women and everything to do with wanting to support women and give babies a chance to live. > > Regarding Plan B, forgive me for not wanting to get my information from the obviously partisan blog you linked to. Partisan or not he’s a scientist and the information is accurate. [Here’s](http://www.go2planb.com/ForConsumers/Index.aspx) a different site. If scientific studies of efficacy don’t convince you, how about the fact that we have one of the worst teen pregnancy rates in the industrialized world. Nations that have early and comprehensive sex ed (Norway for example) have the lowest. No, being pro-life does not necessarily make you anti-woman. And I’m not trying to suggest that you, personally, are. My point was that the movement as a whole, the effects it wishes to achieve, _are_ detrimental to women. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/148 "2006-06-19T00:14:55Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > **volvelle** , you are missing my entire point. I could come up with a bunch of links to articles & studies that refute the ones you linked to…but there is no reason to, because I will never change your mind about what you believe. Actually, I don’t think you can, at least, not to links that were not prejudicial or biased. If you could please link to these cites I would appreciate it, because it would change my mind that abstinence only sex education yields very poor outcomes relative to comprehensive sex education. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/149 "2006-06-19T01:29:51Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > Well, it’s kind of hard to imagine personhood being a matter of opinion! I mean, seriously if I believe a fetus is a person, how can I really say “but it’s ok if you don’t think so.” It’s either a person, or it’s not. This is actually one of the reasons I am pro-life. There are women who have abortions, and then later when pregnant with a wanted child, show the 6-week ultrasound to their friends and say “here’s a picture of the baby.” I can’t wrap my head around the idea that if it’s wanted, it’s a baby, and should be protected, and if it’s not wanted, it’s a fetus that you can just get rid of. Perhaps it’s personal to me, having been one of these unwanted babies, but it just is a dichotomy that I can’t reconcile in my own mind. Of course if you truly believe that is a fact you can’t say “it’s okay if you don’t” You might be able to realize that while you are being true to your beliefs in the positive efforts you make , you still in the final analysis don’t know for sure. You must act on what you believe to be true but can you also allow others to do the same without condemnation, knowing that we all must face the consequences of whatever choices we make? Just as you can perhaps support a war of self defense and oppose abortion without being a hypocrite, can’t the woman who sees an embryo as a potential person but not yet a person have an abortion and then later refer to that potential as “the baby” without being a hypocrite? She feels the choice to fulfill that potential or not to is her choice not someone else’s since that potential is her body not someone else’s. > [@](#): > > Well, you can’t really decide in advance who is fit or unfit. I know that there have to be systems in place to help children with abusive or neglectful parents, of course, but it’s hard to predict who will or won’t be abusive. Even mothers who have unplanned babies are terrific mothers the vast majority of the time. I agree. Because we\* can’t\* predict who will be fit and we haven’t done all we need to to care for the children who are born into an unwanted or uncared for situation we need to be cautious about insisting that woman not have this choice. This doesn’t really apply to is you don’t support removing that choice. I agree with you that we may need more restrictions and certainly more education. I remember reading an article about Jesse Ventura when he was governor. He passed a law that required a mandatory waiting period of something reasonable like 48 hours after a woman applied for an abortion. The pro choice people were all over him and eventually successful in getting him to rescind the law. I was flabbergasted. If we care about about the women making this incredibly important and emotionally critical choice then why not have them wait a couple of days to really consider it and try to make all the alternatives available to them. That supports the women and tries to respect the potential life without removing the choice. > [@](#): > > I wouldn’t necessarily disagree with that. I’m not particularly hot on the idea of outlawing abortion. I believe that more restrictions might be a good idea, and I believe in legislating it through state legislatures and not federal courts, but I think it’s more important to work on social issues that help women not to be stuck in these bad situations in the first place. Whether or not these issues can be solved through massive social programs with faceless bureaucracies is another story altogether. I agree. I don’t think they will be solved by faceless bureaucracies and social programs. I think we need to try to make more people realize that they need to be personally involved. That change will take some real time and dedication. ---
**Author:** ![volvelle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/e0b2c6/32.png) [@volvelle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/volvelle)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/150 "2006-06-19T02:57:26Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I agree with you that we may need more restrictions and certainly more education. I remember reading an article about Jesse Ventura when he was governor. He passed a law that required a mandatory waiting period of something reasonable like 48 hours after a woman applied for an abortion. The pro choice people were all over him and eventually successful in getting him to rescind the law. I was flabbergasted. If we care about about the women making this incredibly important and emotionally critical choice then why not have them wait a couple of days to really consider it and try to make all the alternatives available to them. That supports the women and tries to respect the potential life without removing the choice. Do you think these women _haven’t_ thought about their decision before they go in for an abortion? Why do they need another 48 hours? Why do we need “more restrictions”? If it’s legal, you don’t need to make it harder to obtain. All this does is penalize women of lesser means. Many states have driven out most of the doctors or clinics that provide abortion services, which means that women in rural areas have to make a trip to a city and stay for at least three days, an option they may not have depending on money or being able to get time off from work. This, in no way “supports the women”, and since they’re having an abortion anyway, doesn’t make the pro-life side any happier. ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 10:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/151 "2006-06-19T10:20:43Z")
I’m with **volvelle**. We certainly do \*not \* need more restrictions. Of all the myths propagated by the anti-abortion lobby, the two that piss me off most are the prevalance of late-term abortions, and the idea that women opt for abortion blithely and impulsively, and if she just had a couple of days to think about it (as though she hasn’t!), she might change her little hormone-addled mind. How charmingly paternalistic. All a waiting period does is impose extra stress and hardship on a woman who is already dealing with sufficient amounts of both. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/152 "2006-06-19T11:19:43Z")
> [@volvelle](#): > > Do you think these women _haven’t_ thought about their decision before they go in for an abortion? Why do they need another 48 hours? Why do we need “more restrictions”? If it’s legal, you don’t need to make it harder to obtain. > > All this does is penalize women of lesser means. Many states have driven out most of the doctors or clinics that provide abortion services, which means that women in rural areas have to make a trip to a city and stay for at least three days, an option they may not have depending on money or being able to get time off from work. This, in no way “supports the women”, and since they’re having an abortion anyway, doesn’t make the pro-life side any happier. Of course I don’t think that. I’m sure they’ve been weighing the options since they suspected they might be pregnant. I see abortion as an incredibly difficult choice and my concern is for the mental and emotional well being of the women making that choice. It isn’t about pleasing one side ot the other. My concern is also that an abortion clinic might become focused on profit rather than on the true well being of their clients. Do you think that’s a possibility? If you’ve been actually reading and thinking about what **Sarahfeena** has been posting rather than looking for flaws you can respond to, then you’ll see that there are women who might want to keep their babies but consider abortion out of some emotional desperation because they can’t seem to resolve certain economic issues or some other issue they need help with. You’d also see that another post showed stats that clearly indicated economics was a major factor. A simple waiting period wouldn’t be enough. What I’d like to see is a widespread distribution of information about programs like the ones **Sarafeena** works with so that woman actually know what their choices are. We’re talking pro\* choice\* right. I’d like to see some considerate but mandatory counseling or every abortion clinic has to distribute information about support programs available so that women who mistakenly thought abortion was their only option might realize it isn’t. This isn’t simply to honor the potential life inside her but to protect the woman who might choose otherwise if she had more information and more support from society. The poor that you speak of. The transportation issue you speak of isn’t much of a hurdle. The woman might make an appointment by phone and be sent the proper information in the mail or perhaps talk to a counselor by phone or if the situation required a counselor might go to them to discuss options. I’d want these counselors trained not to convince the woman either way but to assess her needs and help her choose whats best for her. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 11:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/153 "2006-06-19T11:31:13Z")
> [@DianaG](#): > > I’m with **volvelle**. We certainly do \*not \* need more restrictions. Of all the myths propagated by the anti-abortion lobby, the two that piss me off most are the prevalance of late-term abortions, and the idea that women opt for abortion blithely and impulsively, and if she just had a couple of days to think about it (as though she hasn’t!), she might change her little hormone-addled mind. How charmingly paternalistic. > > All a waiting period does is impose extra stress and hardship on a woman who is already dealing with sufficient amounts of both. Please see my previous response. I did not imply that women have abortions blithely or impulsively nor any of the patronizing you describe. When a woman shows up at a clinc how do we know she is aware of all her options and has considered them unless we make some effort such as I described. If we assume, “of course she has” are we then really looking out for the well being of that person as best we can? ---
**Author:** ![scotandrsn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a4c791/32.png) [@scotandrsn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scotandrsn)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/154 "2006-06-19T15:33:03Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > …The book, despite its inflammatory title, is very well-reasoned, and has helped me immensely in grounding my own pro-life philosophy. … Well-reasoned, my ass. If you look at the fact that women have been choosing to end pregnancies for tens of thousands of years, and decide that the law should not prevent them from implementing this choice under medical supervision, you are a member of the Party of Death\*. If you call for an “electric couch” for mass killings, and decide that 2500 American troops, and, by your own estimate, 30,000 Iraqis are an acceptable loss for achieving nothing in particular, you are not a member of the Party of Death. Which scenario is more indicative of a worldview containing “unpersons”? \*To put closure on an earlier point, I am very saddened by Wesley Clark’s reported statistics that so large a percentage of women are choosing to end a pregnancy due to financial worries. I concede that point to you. Of course, the fact that these worries may be more easily alleviated than the women might realize, does not mean they should be legally barred from seeking medical supervision for their abortion if that is their ultimate decision. ---
**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:** [June 19, 2006, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/155 "2006-06-19T15:35:54Z")
> [@scotandrsn](#): > > Well-reasoned, my ass. > > If you look at the fact that women have been choosing to end pregnancies for tens of thousands of years, and decide that the law should not prevent them from implementing this choice under medical supervision, you are a member of the Party of Death\*. > > If you call for an “electric couch” for mass killings, and decide that 2500 American troops, and, by your own estimate, 30,000 Iraqis are an acceptable loss for achieving nothing in particular, you are not a member of the Party of Death. > > Which scenario is more indicative of a worldview containing “unpersons”? Did you read the book, by any chance? ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/156 "2006-06-19T15:39:41Z")
> [@](#): > > When a woman shows up at a clinc how do we know she is aware of all her options and has considered them unless we make some effort such as I described. So should we have a waiting period and a sit-down lecture on guns? On cars? On dishrags? You never know what women will try to purchase next without thinking it through! When does it end? ---
**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:** [June 19, 2006, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/157 "2006-06-19T15:49:37Z")
> [@Apos](#): > > So should we have a waiting period and a sit-down lecture on guns? On cars? On dishrags? You never know what women will try to purchase next without thinking it through! When does it end? The point is that a woman who has an abortion which she doesn’t necessarily want because she feels that she has no option may regret it for the rest of her life. Many of these women go through a lot of psychological pain from it. Doubtful that the same thing will happen with a bad dishrag purchase. ---
**Author:** ![scotandrsn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a4c791/32.png) [@scotandrsn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scotandrsn)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/158 "2006-06-19T15:55:15Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > Did you read the book, by any chance? If it doesn’t explain the discrepancy I posted, which is based on words coming out of the author’s own mouth, I have no interest. If it does, I ask you the favor of laying out the reasoning for me. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/159 "2006-06-19T16:20:20Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#): > > The point is that a woman who has an abortion which she doesn’t necessarily want because she feels that she has no option may regret it for the rest of her life. Many of these women go through a lot of psychological pain from it. Doubtful that the same thing will happen with a bad dishrag purchase. There are many many tough decisions we all make in life that can affect us forever. I don’t think there are government mandatory counseling and waiting periods for any of those other ones. ---
**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:** [June 19, 2006, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810/160 "2006-06-19T17:07:34Z")
> [@Apos](#): > > There are many many tough decisions we all make in life that can affect us forever. I don’t think there are government mandatory counseling and waiting periods for any of those other ones. That’s not true. In some states, there are waiting periods for getting married. Some have a period of anywhere from 1-6 days between applying & receiving the license, and some have a period from 1-3 days between receiving the license and actually getting married. Granted, there is no counseling involved, but the counseling I am talking about is not the kind where you have a shrink trying to decide if you are mentally or emotionally competent to make the decision, it is more of an informative meeting, to be sure that a woman has all the necessary tools she needs to make the decision. What would the sense be in having all kinds of government & private organizations that are supposed to help women in these desperate situations, and then not be sure that she is aware of them at the time she most needs them? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/party-of-death/360810.md?page=9)