# Virginia strikes again - abortion clinics must pass hospital standards **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 24, 2011, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521 "2011-02-24T23:53:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/161 "2016-06-28T03:47:58Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > It’s not obvious at all. From a biological standpoint, it’s nonsense to consider a fertilized egg or embryo as equivalent to a baby. The only way you can support that equivalence is by postulating some kind of immaterial soul or spirit that confers full human personhood on a fertilized egg at the moment of conception. That’s a religious doctrine, not a moral one (although if you believe such a doctrine, I can see why you would therefore consider abortion to be morally equivalent to murder). I’m confused as to why you think this requires a religious belief. Do you believe a person with a severe mental disability is a person? ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/162 "2016-06-28T03:49:21Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > I don’t see how you can say that abortion is essentially a gravely immoral form of homicide, almost like another form of infanticide, and then pivot and say that there are benefits to society. Your premise is that one of the chief benefits that justifies abortion is that there would be fewer unwanted children, to which I ask, since when does being unwanted qualify as an excuse to terminate an infant? > > My point is not to criticize abortion rights, which I support wholeheartedly. Rather, I just don’t quite see how you can reconcile your qualms with the practice of abortion with your support for abortion rights. If you really do believe that abortion is infanticide, then reducing the number of unwanted children hardly seems like a solid rationale. > > Abortion rights should be protected for the simple fact that we don’t agree on when a fetus becomes a person worthy of legal protection – and we never will. Further, we should all acknowledge that pregnancy, even in modern times, is complicated, psychologically and physiologically. A pregnancy can be physically and psychologically traumatic to the woman bearing the child. A pregnancy risks death and permanent damage to the mother’s health. These are reasons to protect abortion rights. I don’t support “abortion rights” at all, I don’t believe women should have a right to decide to end their pregnancy. I support legal abortion–because it’s a practical necessity. This is called pragmatism, something more people should exercise on a regular basis. ---
**Author:** ![Not\_Carlson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/bc79bd/32.png) [@Not\_Carlson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Not_Carlson)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/163 "2016-06-28T03:53:10Z")
I could respect the person who wrote this. > [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Abortion is obviously abominable and its perpetrators (especially the mothers) the worst type of killers. However, that being said we live in a society of laws. Given what I feel are the relatively easy to understand decisions in Roe and Casey, I think it’s obvious the current legal status of abortions is that they should be essentially freely available pre-fetal viability and that the States have the right to restrict their use after this point. (People often still speak of trimesters, which was the specific wording of Roe, Casey specifically overturned the trimester system as a requirement upon the states. However many States still use the more permissive trimester system as is their right.) > > Whether it’s something I support (gun rights) or oppose (abortion), I hate seeing legislators try to kill a currently protected constitutional right with a mountain of regulatory statutes that ultimately effect the removal of the free exercise of said right. I opposed it when Chicago responded to its gun ban being ruled unconstitutional by passing a package of laws directly gutting private gun ownership rights; and I’ll oppose similar action here. I think in both cases the local politicians need to work within the _spirit_ of the current constitutional law. It’s crass, craven, bullshit to try and do an end run around it with these sort of laws. If you believe abortion should be illegal, you need to either pass a constitutional amendment or try and bring suit up to the SCOTUS level and get them to rule in your favor. Same thing for gun rights, other methods are disingenuous and not defensible ethically. Well, except for that first sentence, which seems to sit there like an angry little cyst of cruelty. But in the course of 5 years, it seams to have developed like a raging cancer. > [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > FWIW, I favor legal abortion anyway–it means less poor people and less unwanted babies, and importantly less Democrat voters (while I’m voting HRC this year it’s not in my long term interests for Dems to have a permanent demographic advantage.) But while I’m fine with its legality, that doesn’t mean I do not view its practitioners as immoral. At first I thought you might have intended this as irony, but your subsequent posts were less Modest Proposal and more Final Solution. > [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Unwanted babies are a societal ill. They have worse outcomes across the board. They are more likely to grow up to be criminals, more likely to grow up to be low income, uneducated etc. Even their IQ is likely to be lower. There’s all kinds of studies showing this to be true. > > You guys are trying to paint me as some sort of eugenicist, which is not accurate. I can view the decision to have an abortion as an immoral personal decision, but view the net effects of allowing abortion to be performed as a net societal positive. I know **Czarcasm** already Godwinized the thread, but I’ll flip that dial to 11. > [@](#): > > Originally posted by **Aryan Ubermesch** > [RIGHT]Join Date: July 1943 > Location: Nazi Germany[/RIGHT] > I’m morally opposed to genocide, but life is so much better without all those Jews about. > LOL!🙂 > > Sieg Heil! ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/164 "2016-06-28T03:55:46Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > I don’t support “abortion rights” at all, I don’t believe women should have a right to decide to end their pregnancy. I support legal abortion–because it’s a practical necessity. > > This is called pragmatism, something more people should exercise on a regular basis. Would you similarly support a law that allowed newborns to be killed as long as it was within a certain amount of time after birth? ---
**Author:** ![Not\_Carlson](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/bc79bd/32.png) [@Not\_Carlson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Not_Carlson)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/165 "2016-06-28T03:57:09Z")
> [@Anaamika](#): > > Ok then. Also, a tip of the hat to someone who chose to take the high road. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/166 "2016-06-28T05:13:36Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > I’m confused as to why you think this requires a religious belief. Do you believe a person with a severe mental disability is a person? There’s no debate extant over killing people with severe mental disabilities. It doesn’t matter if they are a person or not. There is no infringement on anyone else’s rights by assuming they are. Only a religious assumption can make a fetus or embryo into a person, because there aren’t any of the actual physical functions of personhood available to one. No brain, no nervous system, no senses. Even the most severely disabled person has all of these. There is no need for a religious assumption regarding disabled persons, but there is regarding a fetus. Also, that’s what the religious opposition says in large part. They, themselves, phrase the debate in religious terms. (Not all of them, but a great many, certainly a majority.) ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/167 "2016-06-28T05:31:38Z")
I have to admit finding the reaction to Martin Hyde a tad amusing. Seems to me one could get a similar response by saying something along the lines of “I agree with your views, but I think your reasoning is just a little skewed.” Then be coy about _why_ you think their reasoning is skewed, though never forget to _mention_ the skew at all opportunities. Heck, if you meet someone who stands in total opposition to your stance, just shrug. Meet someone who is in _almost_ total agreement with your stance except for that stubborn unbudgable oft-cited one percent… Anyway, it’s a thought experiment. I figure Martin’s free to view abortion as the darkest sin conceivable in the mind of omniscient Yahweh and every D&C procedure sends Satan into trilling climaxes of ecstasy, but as long as Martin doesn’t _vote_ along those lines (or even if he does, really)… big deal. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 6:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/168 "2016-06-28T06:11:22Z")
Also, this thread shouldn’t devolve into the abortion-debate de jour. We’re celebrating a victory here. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/169 "2016-06-28T06:43:17Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > I don’t support “abortion rights” at all, I don’t believe women should have a right to decide to end their pregnancy. I support legal abortion–because it’s a practical necessity. > > This is called pragmatism, something more people should exercise on a regular basis. You are just twisting yourself into knots. It’s possible to not support abortion but still support a woman’s right to do it. It is not possible to not support a woman’s right to abortion but still support legal abortion. Those are the exact same fucking thing. If something is legal, that means people have a right to do it. Not that it matters. You said you supported it being used by your political opponents to reduce their numbers. So you do support abortion. You are okay with someone you believe to be a person being killed to further your political goals. You showed you just are against it in order to hurt people, and have no problem switching allegiances if that hurts people. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/170 "2016-06-28T06:46:12Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Heck, if you meet someone who stands in total opposition to your stance, just shrug. And then be partly guilty because you didn’t even try to dissuade them. I don’t mean you have to put in a lot of effort, but this is a fucking message board. It takes very little effort to call people on their shit. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 10:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/171 "2016-06-28T10:27:57Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > To many prochoice people, myself included, that’s the only qualification. That the pregnant person not want to be pregnant. Perhaps that is because they don’t want a child right now, perhaps that’s because they don’t want this child, but whatever, I don’t care. The only thing I care about is that the fetus is unwanted. That’s exactly why we need abortion to be legal and available on demand. I understand it if you’re saying that abortion should be allowed to prevent unwanted children (i.e. another form of birth control), and if you’re of the opinion that having an abortion for this reason isn’t gravely immoral. However, if you truly believe that abortion is akin to infanticide, then the fact that a child is unwanted should not be a factor. If you believe that killing an infant is gravely immoral, and if you believe that the the killing of a fetus is tantamount to killing an infant, then it would follow that terminating a fetus is equally repugnant and therefore impermissible. It’s the logic that bothered me, not the opinion itself. Personally, I have problems with abortion used as another form of birth control. However, I would not say that it is gravely immoral. > [@WhyNot](#): > > These are shitty reasons to protect abortion rights. What happens to your abortion rights when medical science has advanced to the point where pregnancy is no more a risk to a person than a manicure? Pregnancy will never be without the risk of serious medical complication to a mother. This is especially true if we limit access to safe and legal abortions. > [@WhyNot](#): > > The only people these abortion rights protect are those “to save the life or health of the mother” cases - which even anti-abortionists are grudgingly in acceptance of. That’s not a prochoice position. The anti-abortionists absolutely do not care about the life of the mother - at all. They are passing some of the harshest legislation knowing that they are imperiling the lives of pregnant women. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 10:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/172 "2016-06-28T10:36:01Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > If something is legal, that means people have a right to do it. That’s my take as well. It seems to me he’s arguing that preventing unwanted children is more important than preventing infanticide, which seems strange by conventional ethical standards. ---
**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:** [June 28, 2016, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/173 "2016-06-28T13:16:22Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > You seem quite confused. I have said that abortion is gravely immoral, that it is morally no different than any other kind of infanticide. But that I support its being legal. This is because morality and legality are not the same thing, nor should they be. I’m not confused at all. I’m not the one who equated abortion with infanticide, and then said I supported the one but not the other. You support murder\* to foster some sort of social change. It’s not any more complicated than that. I actually HOPE you’re confused, because if if you’re not, that’s pretty scary!! \*What you call murder, not what I call murder, since I don’t consider abortion (before a certain point) to be equivalent to infanticide. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/174 "2016-06-28T17:39:49Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > I’m confused as to why you think this requires a religious belief. Because absent religious belief, the idea of human personhood as something that is instantaneously conferred, rather than something that gradually develops in the long process of gestation, doesn’t make any sense. For practical reasons, we as a society need to draw a more or less arbitrary “bright line” as to when in that developmental process we consider the developing person to acquire full human rights. But there’s absolutely no _a priori_ reason to set that point at some imagined “instant” of fertilization (and the fertilization process takes much more than an instant, anyway), rather than at some later point during gestation. [QUOTE=Martin Hyde] Do you believe a person with a severe mental disability is a person? [/QUOTE] Sure, as is a person in a permanent vegetative state. But that’s got nothing to do with how well their brain functions compare to those of the average person: it’s based on the incontestable fact that they went through the fetal development process. People can certainly have different views about **where** in the fetal development process we should place the arbitrary cutoff for legal “attainment of personhood”. But there’s nothing in the least “obvious” about saying it has to coincide with conception— **unless** you’re equating personhood with some kind of immediate abstract quality like “spirit” or “soul”, which is ultimately a religious concept. ---
**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:** [June 28, 2016, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/175 "2016-06-28T19:05:03Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Abortion is obviously abominable and its perpetrators (especially the mothers) the worst type of killers. And even if I accepted that - which I don’t - forbidding a woman an abortion is the moral equivalent of raping her for nine months, and far more evil than murder. > [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > I’m confused as to why you think this requires a religious belief. Do you believe a person with a severe mental disability is a person? The term for someone as “mentally disabled” as a fetus is “brain dead”, and no I _don’t_ consider them people. Nor does the law, which is why they can be taken apart for their organs. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/176 "2016-06-28T19:24:31Z")
> [@raventhief](#): > > Would you similarly support a law that allowed newborns to be killed as long as it was within a certain amount of time after birth? No–there’s no practical reason to allow that. Abortion would be almost impossible to stop and women would actively seek alternatives, some much worse for everyone involved. Plus with abortifacient pills these days, black market abortions would actually be a lot “easier” than they were in the early 20th century. If we can’t control all the heroin and cocaine coming into America I doubt very seriously we could stop the black market trade in abortifacients were it banned. Absolutely no practical argument would be present for allowing newborns to be killed–they can just become wards of the state. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/177 "2016-06-28T19:42:23Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Absolutely no practical argument would be present for allowing newborns to be killed–they can just become wards of the state. But based on your prior points, allowing them to be killed would result in fewer Democrats. Why do you favor legal abortion because it results in fewer Democrats, but oppose this which could similarly result in fewer Democrats? ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/178 "2016-06-28T19:48:30Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > No–there’s no practical reason to allow that. […] > > Absolutely no practical argument would be present for allowing newborns to be killed–they can just become wards of the state. Why do you consider it “practical”, and even a “practical necessity”, to allow embryos/fetuses to be killed because they are unwanted and/or might grow up to vote Democratic, but reverse your position for newborns? Newborns can be unwanted and/or grow up to vote Democratic too. (ETA: or what **iiandyiiii** said.) Your arguments here are not in any way logically defensible. If you really think that abortion is morally equivalent to infanticide but it ought to be legal anyway, then you have no rational grounds for arguing that infanticide ought **not** to be legal. ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/179 "2016-06-28T21:17:25Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > No–there’s no practical reason to allow that. Abortion would be almost impossible to stop and women would actively seek alternatives, some much worse for everyone involved. > > Plus with abortifacient pills these days, black market abortions would actually be a lot “easier” than they were in the early 20th century. If we can’t control all the heroin and cocaine coming into America I doubt very seriously we could stop the black market trade in abortifacients were it banned. > > Absolutely no practical argument would be present for allowing newborns to be killed–they can just become wards of the state. What if it could be shown , conclusively beyond a shadow of a doubt (to whatever level of satisfaction you currently have that abortion reduces the number of Democrats) that those “wards of the state” would not only be more likely to voteD, but could indeed become passionate progressive activists, swaying other voters? I mean, they would have only survived infancy thanks to the welfare, nanny state, Big Government- style of government; that kind of start to life could kindle a passionate activism. Would you support such a proposed law in that case? Consider it in conjunction with legal abortion, not replacing it. Twice as much political gain for your side! ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521/180 "2016-06-28T21:56:01Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > But based on your prior points, allowing them to be killed would result in fewer Democrats. Why do you favor legal abortion because it results in fewer Democrats, but oppose this which could similarly result in fewer Democrats? I don’t favor it because it would result in fewer Democrats, I explained already that I favor legal abortion because it’s societally necessary due to practical concerns. And that I would “tepidly” support it if that were all, but the demographic benefits mean I’m a pretty enthusiastic supporter. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/virginia-strikes-again-abortion-clinics-must-pass-hospital-standards/572521.md?page=10)