The "Silent Plurality" on abortion

[Learjeff]

@Shodan

But that’s the point - the argument does not change.

I disagree with Shodan’s position on abortion, but I have to agree with his very limited point here. The “argument” you cited when this issue came up was this:

@Shodan

So what BrightNShiny claimed about the position of the Democratic Party on late-term abortion is wrong. In order to bring them into alignment with the majority, they need to speak out against abortions performed in cases other than those involving “the health of the mother or significant deformity of the baby”, since those are the common reasons for seeking a late-term abortion.

This has little to do with whether abortion should be legal or not, but about the DP’s position on it. Is this the argument you’re calling disingenuous?

Or is it this part:

That probably wouldn’t help, because [… quoted stuff …]
Plus that is kind of besides the point - the claim was that late-term abortions were for “cases of the health of the mother or significant deformity of the baby”. It turns out that this is not the case - procrastination is not a matter of the health of the mother nor a fetal deformity.

I’m pro-choice, but I can’t knock either of those points. Neither is a point against pro-choice. One is an argument concerning whether the DP party represents a mainstream view; the other is an argument against a particular claim about late-term abortions.

As an innocent bystander here, who hasn’t checked the citations, I don’t see that anyone has fought these claims on their merits. So, until someone does, in my mind, they stand unchallenged.