# Pro-choicers: would you take this abortion deal? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 30, 2013, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119 "2013-04-30T16:39:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**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 1, 2013, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/61 "2013-05-01T11:14:40Z")
> [@drewtwo99](#): > > 22 weeks is just as arbitrary as any other point. The best way to do it, for logical consistency, is to define life in some way that is measurable. Currently, we define life as measurable brainwave activity. That is, someone is legally dead when there is no longer any detectable brain activity. I don’t see what would be wrong with defining that criteria as the moment when life begins, when brain activity can be measured. At which point you go from having an abortion, to killing a human being. The brain activity issue is more complicated than that. As I recall you actually get brain activity fairly early, but it isn’t like the activity you see in people, and the brain tissue involved dies well before birth anyway; it’s basically just the equivalent of scaffolding. You don’t see “humanlike” brain waves until around six months. And assuming that that’s enough to make it a “person” is really reaching, and fairly irrelevant anyway. Even if it was a thinking, talking actual little person it _still_ wouldn’t have the right to parasitize someone against their will, any more than someone would have the right to steal someone else’s kidney if they needed it. The whole personhood argument is really besides the point. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 11:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/62 "2013-05-01T11:25:20Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > You can’t have it both ways. Why not? In the first case, she’s saying that once you’ve had N weeks (22 per the OP) to decide whether to abort, there comes a point at which ab abortion ought be performed only for health reasons. In the second case, she’s addressing an unchosen pregnancy. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/63 "2013-05-01T11:32:38Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > [Kevin Drum](http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/04/quick-survey-abortion), in commenting on a Washington Monthly column linked to in the link I provide, asks this question: > > Both authors involved note that, of course, no pro-lifers would ever touch it, but he was curious about the pro-choice side. > > And I’m curious about the ones here, specifically. What say you? Pro- choice people are also Pro -life they are concerned for the already born. Look for them to have a good life, there are many who call themselves pro-life and are really just pro-birth. To me the test should be; if they were in a room with several frozen embryo’s and one helpless born person, and they could only save one from the burning building;, who would they save? It is really a religious question, ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 11:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/64 "2013-05-01T11:35:17Z")
> [@monavis](#): > > Pro- choice people are also Pro -life they are concerned for the already born. Look for them to have a good life, there are many who call themselves pro-life and are really just pro-birth. To me the test should be; if they were in a room with several frozen embryo’s and one helpless born person, and they could only save one from the burning building;, who would they save? It is really a religious question, As a post script, I think the law already covers that. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/65 "2013-05-01T11:40:56Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > … the more ardent pro-abortion side … This would be as opposed to the pro-rape, pro-incest, and pro-child molestation positions? (As I see it, in a Newspeak environment where calling for the death penalty but opposing abortions is “pro-life” and saying a woman has a choice whether to carry a pregnancy full-term or terminate it is “pro-abortion”, then insisting that no abortion is available for pregnant victims of rape, incest, or child molestation is equivalent to favoring those behaviors. If you disagree, kindly distinguish the usages in a logical manner. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/66 "2013-05-01T11:44:03Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > How is that having it “both ways”? You said, _your body, your choice_. But you said that choice could be taken away from women after a time limit. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/67 "2013-05-01T11:46:18Z")
> [@drewtwo99](#): > > 22 weeks is just as arbitrary as any other point. The best way to do it, for logical consistency, is to define life in some way that is measurable. Currently, we define life as measurable brainwave activity. That is, someone is legally dead when there is no longer any detectable brain activity. I don’t see what would be wrong with defining that criteria as the moment when life begins, when brain activity can be measured. At which point you go from having an abortion, to killing a human being. > > The idea that an egg and a sperm colliding is a human being is patently ridiculous, and for a while, that mass of cells is not a human. But after a while longer, it most certainly is, and I think brainwave activity is a good way to define when a human life begins and ends. > > But I am _not_ a medical expert (is brainwave actually what it’s called, for example?), so if I’m off base here I would love to be corrected. At least it seems like it would be consistent. Actually, Life began eons ago, had it not been for your ancestors you wouldn’t be here today, nor any of us. Life is a passed on thing. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/68 "2013-05-01T11:49:44Z")
I would take it but only with revisions. a- Up to 22 weeks, abortions are freely available and fully funded with federal money regardless of the citizenship of the woman. b- Any pharmacist that refuses to dispense contraception or morning after pills shall lose his license permanently. c- After 22 weeks, abortions shall be available if fetal testing reveals that the child would be born with severe deformities. A list of abortible deformities and the criteria for determination would be provided by law. d- Religious organizations that continue to protest the 22 week rule would have their tax exempt status revoked. ---
**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:** [May 1, 2013, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/69 "2013-05-01T12:14:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **monavis** : > > Actually, Life began eons ago, had it not been for your ancestors you wouldn’t be here today, nor any of us. Life is a passed on thing. I’ve pointed out several times before that a just-fertilized zygote is certainly and unambiguously human life. But that fact is also completely irrelevant to the abortion debate. Human life isn’t sacred or special or worth protecting-- A cancerous tumor is human life, too, and nobody has any qualms about excising those and incinerating them. What’s important isn’t human life, but personhood. Yeah, I know, everyone on both sides of the debate will jump in now and say “Well, duh, that’s what we meant”. But I think using the wrong terminology this way really does encourage sloppy thinking. > [@](#): > > Quoth **BobLibDem** : > > d- Religious organizations that continue to protest the 22 week rule would have their tax exempt status revoked. Wait, are you seriously suggesting that we should have a law whose existence people shouldn’t be allowed to protest? That looks to me like a fundamental betrayal of the core principles of democracy. ---
**Author:** ![Jman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jman/32/4416_2.png) [@Jman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jman)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/70 "2013-05-01T12:34:37Z")
> [@Rachellelogram](#): > > Are you sure you’re a _pro_-choicer? I am. I would never fight for a 14 week end date, but it wouldn’t bother me all that much. I do have a problem with late term abortions where the mother’s life isn’t in jeopardy, or the child isn’t so horribly malformed that death is near certain shortly after birth…at that point you’re really killing a viable child simply because you haven’t given birth yet. If you wanted to make it 24 weeks, where most fetuses are viable, I’d be OK with that too. And, in all cases, I think that if there’s a good chance the mother will die or have serious life-altering complications, that takes precedence over anything else. That said, as a guy, I don’t feel comfortable actively telling a woman what to do with her body, but at some point, it does become pretty close to infanticide in the womb…where that line is has in many cases really been the sticking point. I think it’s ridiculous to think it’s at conception. At the same time, seeing my son in my wife’s belly right now (she’s 35 weeks), and there’s no way you can tell me that’s not a child in there…heck, you can see and feel his knees moving and reacting to external stimuli. If you did a C-section right now, he’d be just fine. Where is that line between simply a part of the woman’s body and a fully independent child? I don’t know…First trimester is pretty much where almost all miscarriages happen, so abortion in that timeframe doesn’t really bother me. Viability may be the best line to draw to take in both sides. (though the ardent pro-lifers would never go for it.) ---
**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 1, 2013, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/71 "2013-05-01T12:35:13Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > That looks to me like a fundamental betrayal of the core principles of democracy. This entire proposal requires that - you can’t just “settle” an issue by fiat like this without tossing democratic principles out the window. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/72 "2013-05-01T13:00:38Z")
> [@Jman](#): > > At the same time, seeing my son in my wife’s belly right now (she’s 35 weeks), and there’s no way you can tell me that’s not a child in there… Where is that line between simply a part of the woman’s body and a fully independent child? I don’t know… You’re telling us you’ve impregnated a woman and you still aren’t familiar with the boundaries of the territory? Yes, that’s a baby in there. But still inside and connected? No, it’s not independent. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/73 "2013-05-01T13:08:53Z")
Best wishes for a safe birthing and a healthy child, BTW. If you attend and pay careful attention, that “line” should become a little clearer. 😉 ---
**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 1, 2013, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/74 "2013-05-01T13:21:40Z")
> [@Cliffy](#): > > No, of course not. Abortion is a constitutional right… It is? It’s unconstitutional to outlaw abortion at 8 months, as long as there is an exception for the health of the mother? Can I have a cite for that? ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/75 "2013-05-01T13:33:47Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > Yes, that’s a baby in there. But still inside and connected? No, it’s not independent. I think the abortion issue around independence is more about the right of the woman to choose what happens to the fetus/baby, when choosing what happens within her womb. As the fetus/baby becomes more independent, their individual rights become more important. It’s like that old I Love Lucy episode, when Lucy got handcuffed to Ethel and desperately wanted to meet the big Hollywood Movie Producer, and the locksmith didn’t have the right key, so they got Fred to chop Ethel’s hand off. Ok, that’s made up, but it’s ridiculous because nobody would accept that Lucy has the power to decide what happens to Ethel’s body, especially when there are other ways to sever the link without Ethel losing her hand. With a post-viability abortion, the woman is deciding the fate of the fetus/baby by choosing a particular method for severing their link. If there are other methods of ending the pregnancy that do not impinge on the fetus/baby’s ability to live, then I would consider it reasonable to restrict the woman’s choices to those options. ---
**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 1, 2013, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/76 "2013-05-01T13:48:43Z")
Pro-choicer here. Regarding the OP, I would only accept the deal in the OP provided we made the following changes: b) not just the life, but the “health” of the Mother. c) strike this completely as it would violate any number of sections of the US constitution. No issue is so sacrosanct that we should forbid discussion of it, protest for or against it, etc. Twenty-two weeks is not where I’d put the limit myself, but it’s close enough for government work. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/77 "2013-05-01T13:55:58Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > I think the abortion issue around independence is more about the right of the woman to choose what happens to the fetus/baby, when choosing what happens within her womb. As the fetus/baby becomes more independent, their individual rights become more important. > > It’s like that old I Love Lucy episode, when Lucy got handcuffed to Ethel and desperately wanted to meet the big Hollywood Movie Producer, and the locksmith didn’t have the right key, so they got Fred to chop Ethel’s hand off. Ok, that’s made up, but it’s ridiculous because nobody would accept that Lucy has the power to decide what happens to Ethel’s body, especially when there are other ways to sever the link without Ethel losing her hand. > > With a post-viability abortion, the woman is deciding the fate of the fetus/baby by choosing a particular method for severing their link. If there are other methods of ending the pregnancy that do not impinge on the fetus/baby’s ability to live, then I would consider it reasonable to restrict the woman’s choices to those options. There are no methods for ending a pregnancy that are not sustained by the pregnant woman’s body. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/78 "2013-05-01T13:58:50Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > No, the anti-abortion side boils down to “suffer, slut!” They don’t care about reducing the number of abortions, the welfare of the fetus or whether or not the fetus is even alive; they just care about hurting the woman as much as possible. Which is where you get things like forcing rape victims to undergo “transvaginal ultrasound”; they can’t quite get away with ordering the woman chained down and raped again, so they go for the next best thing. Knock it off. This doesn’t further the discussion and contributes nothing but hostility. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2013, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/79 "2013-05-01T14:05:59Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > This would be as opposed to the pro-rape, pro-incest, and pro-child molestation positions? No, as opposed to the pro-_choice_ position, where people’s choices are respected even if they choose not to support or assist in abortions. > [@](#): > > (As I see it, in a Newspeak environment where calling for the death penalty but opposing abortions is “pro-life” and saying a woman has a choice whether to carry a pregnancy full-term or terminate it is “pro-abortion”, then insisting that no abortion is available for pregnant victims of rape, incest, or child molestation is equivalent to favoring those behaviors. If you disagree, kindly distinguish the usages in a logical manner. “Pro-choice” = the belief that people should be able to choose for themselves whether or not to have/support/enable abortions. “Pro-abortion” = the belief that people should not be allowed to choose not to for themselves. The rest of your garbage about being in favor of child molesting and rape is too reminiscent of **Der Trihs** ’ crap to bother with. Regards, Shodan ---
**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 1, 2013, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119/80 "2013-05-01T14:09:06Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > No, as opposed to the pro-_choice_ position, where people’s choices are respected even if they choose not to support or assist in abortions. Is this “choice” label applied to any other issue besides abortion? Do I get to say I’m “pro-choice” wrt wars if I don’t want my $$ going to fund a war I disagree with, or am I just “anti-war” in that case. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-choicers-would-you-take-this-abortion-deal/657119.md?page=5)