# What is the point of abolishing abortion? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [August 30, 2024, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471 "2024-08-30T16:00:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![DavidNRockies](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidnrockies/32/6279_2.png) [@DavidNRockies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidNRockies)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/161 "2024-09-02T14:43:40Z")
Then we simply disagree about what’s happening here. To go a bit further… There’s an ATMB thread (doesn’t seem appropriate to link to it) where a Doper objects to the characterization of one of the two major political parties in disparaging terms because he is a member of that political party. But we’re defining a subset of the people, and/or a subset of the actions _of_ that group. I view that as substantively different from generalizing to the extent of saying “Christianity stands in firm opposition to abortion; therefore, all Christians are evil, imperious, domineering people.” Much as I viewed it as fair play when Joe Biden characterized some Trump-following Republicans as “semi-fascist.” Some are. Another example: I can decry the [**racist history of golf’s Augusta Nationals**](https://africanamericangolfersdigest.com/the-masters-lets-not-forget-augusta-nationals-ugly-past/) without it being a broad indictment of the sport of golf. ---
**Author:** ![We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/We_re_wolves_not_werewolves)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/162 "2024-09-02T14:50:20Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > > [@Babale](#): > > > > That doesn’t mean that individual members of the religion are motivated by a desire to control and dominate. > > Wrong, since that’s exactly what they are _doing._ Controlling, dominating, torturing and killing. Demonstrably false. My motivation for opposing abortion resides in my desire to protect an unborn child, and my belief that contraception should be easily accessible is to motivated by a desire to reduce the number of woman who get pregnant who do not want to be pregnant. This is my belief and that of a large swath of Christians. ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/163 "2024-09-02T14:54:29Z")
> [@DavidNRockies](#): > > But we’re defining a subset of the people, and/or a subset of the actions _of_ that group. I view that as substantively different from generalizing to the extent of saying “Christianity stands in firm opposition to abortion; therefore, all Christians are evil, imperious, domineering people.” Again, I agree with you, you can do that. That’s why I asked Der Trihs if that’s what he was doing: > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Of course not, it would remove their excuse for declaring their desires divine will, and remove their excuse for abusing and killing people. They’ll never _admit_ what they are doing, in many cases even to themselves; that doesn’t change what they _are_ doing. You might as well expect a slavemaster to admit that slaves deserve freedom > [@Babale](#): > > You are right in the sense that from a, like, social evolution perspective, you explain the trends and forces that bring about organized religions and makes it so that the organized religions that successfully spread and stick around have these aspects of control. > > That doesn’t mean that individual members of the religion are motivated by a desire to control and dominate. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Wrong, since that’s exactly what they are _doing._ Controlling, dominating, torturing and killing. > > At most they are lying to themselves about their own actions. They might as well go around shooting people and claiming it’s not _really_ killing since their targets just go to Heaven. Yes it is possible to criticize Christianity without condemning all Christians. That is very deliberately _not_ what Der Trihs does. ---
**Author:** ![DavidNRockies](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidnrockies/32/6279_2.png) [@DavidNRockies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidNRockies)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/164 "2024-09-02T14:55:22Z")
> [@Babale](#): > > Yes it is possible to criticize Christianity without condemning all Christians. That is very deliberately _not_ what Der Trihs does. I explicitly see the objected-to _actions_ in his/her posts. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/165 "2024-09-02T14:57:19Z")
The Bible doesn’t talk much about abortion. There’s a weird bit in [Numbers](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%205%3A11-31&version=NIV) that appears to be a priest-mandated abortion for an unfaithful wife. And Leviticus imposes a death penalty for killing a person, but a property-damage fine for hitting a pregnant woman and causing her to miscarry. And God gave life to Adam and Eve by breathing into them, and Judaism traditionally holds that the fetus is ensouled at birth, when it takes its first breath and becomes a baby. But, the Bible also clearly commands Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply, and forbids most sex outside of marriage. The Catholic Church is pretty clear about objecting to any sexual contact that “isn’t open to making a baby”. It’s not clear to me why they consider a man having sex with a menopausal woman, or a pregnant woman to be “open to having a baby” and don’t consider a man having sex with a woman taking hormonal birth control or wearing an IUD to be “open to having a baby”. Really, i think most of the energy behind the anti abortion movement is powered by a dislike of fornication. The idea that adults, and especially women, might enjoy sex without first getting married and without planning to settle down and rear children is what’s offensive. That’s why the pregnant and menopausal women having sex don’t present a problem. Because it’s not even about the sex, at about the sex without its traditional trappings. ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/166 "2024-09-02T14:57:20Z")
> [@DavidNRockies](#): > > I explicitly see the objected-to _actions_ in his/her posts. And what _actions_ are those? ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Mouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mighty_mouse/32/7776_2.png) [@Mighty\_Mouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Mouse)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/167 "2024-09-02T14:59:46Z")
So you want absolute IMMUNITY for Christians? ---
**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:** [September 2, 2024, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/168 "2024-09-02T15:03:16Z")
When your different motivation provides the same restrictive and discriminatory results, then it just doesn’t matter at all. Do try to remember that the ballots have no lines to state “reason”, so when you vote the same way an asshole votes, you are going to be called the same names the asshole is called. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/169 "2024-09-02T15:06:39Z")
> [@puzzlegal](#): > > The Catholic Church is pretty clear about objecting to any sexual contact that “isn’t open to making a baby”. It’s not clear to me why they consider a man having sex with a menopausal woman, or a pregnant woman to be “open to having a baby” and don’t consider a man having sex with a woman taking hormonal birth control or wearing an IUD to be “open to having a baby”. Back when I used to get in a lot of online ssm debates, and would ask that question, the answer I got was, essentially, if the people having sex are open to the possibility of having a baby, then it’s not a sin. Sure, your wife may be post-menopausal, but if you’re still consciously trying to conceive, even when the odds are basically zero, then it’s okay - you’re still open to God performing a miracle and giving you a baby even when it was technically impossible. Never got a good answer for asking, “Can’t God ‘perform a miracle’ and make a guy pregnant after he has sex with his boyfriend?” Which is a shame, because that would blow the whole “virgin birth” thing right out of the water, as far as “miraculous conceptions” go. ---
**Author:** ![DavidNRockies](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidnrockies/32/6279_2.png) [@DavidNRockies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidNRockies)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/170 "2024-09-02T15:06:56Z")
Partial list: - controlling - dominating - torturing - killing - lying to themselves about their own actions ---
**Author:** ![Ulfreida](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ulfreida/32/8014_2.png) [@Ulfreida](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ulfreida)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/171 "2024-09-02T15:11:29Z")
The overall point is about demonizing a vast number of people you do not know. There is a name for this, no matter who you are doing it to. Not a nice name. ---
**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:** [September 2, 2024, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/172 "2024-09-02T15:13:47Z")
Maybe it is a good idea not to associate with those people who are being demonized when you find out why they are being demonized? ---
**Author:** ![DavidNRockies](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidnrockies/32/6279_2.png) [@DavidNRockies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidNRockies)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/173 "2024-09-02T15:13:59Z")
But it may be _far_ more productive to talk about the _accusations_ than the _accused_, just as it’s the ethos of this board to discuss the _message_, not the _messenger_. ---
**Author:** ![kenobi\_65](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kenobi_65/32/13178_2.png) [@kenobi\_65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenobi_65)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/174 "2024-09-02T15:14:06Z")
> [@puzzlegal](#): > > The Catholic Church is pretty clear about objecting to any sexual contact that “isn’t open to making a baby”. It’s not clear to me why they consider a man having sex with a menopausal woman, or a pregnant woman to be “open to having a baby” and don’t consider a man having sex with a woman taking hormonal birth control or wearing an IUD to be “open to having a baby”. My understanding on the thinking here is that, in the former case, of a “barren” woman, if there is no artificial birth control being used, then the couple is still being “open” to children, and a miracle _could_ occur, if it is God’s will; there are several biblical examples, including Sarah (wife of Abraham, mother of Isaac) and Elizabeth (wife of Zechariah, mother of John the Baptist). In the latter case, the woman has taken artificial, willful steps to thwart pregnancy. ---
**Author:** ![We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/We_re_wolves_not_werewolves)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/175 "2024-09-02T15:18:19Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > if you’re still consciously trying to conceive, even when the odds are basically zero, then it’s okay - you’re still open to God performing a miracle and giving you a baby even when it was technically impossible. With the Catholic Church at least, its official teaching is that there is not really a requirement to “try to conceive”, it’s more that you should not be doing anything to “prevent conception”…you’re statement that you need to be “open to conception” is essentially correct. ---
**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:** [September 2, 2024, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/176 "2024-09-02T15:19:40Z")
I quit contemplating the reasoning of the Catholic Church when I found out about the time they declared, _purely for a monetary standpoint_, that the beaver was officially a fish, thus turning a religious holiday (Lent) into a religious joke. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/177 "2024-09-02T15:20:40Z")
> [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](#): > > With the Catholic Church at least, its official teaching is that there is not really a requirement to “try to conceive”, it’s more that you should not be doing anything to “prevent conception”…you’re statement that you need to be “open to conception” is essentially correct. So its okay for me to fuck a guy in the ass, so long as I’m “open to conception,” right? Because I don’t think that’s what the church actually teaches. ---
**Author:** ![DavidNRockies](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidnrockies/32/6279_2.png) [@DavidNRockies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidNRockies)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/178 "2024-09-02T15:22:38Z")
To amplify the point… I’ve known a fair number of male-male couples who _desperately_ wanted children. This seems like a no-brainer. ---
**Author:** ![We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/We_re_wolves_not_werewolves)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/179 "2024-09-02T15:23:04Z")
I would vote against any ballot item attempting to restrict or outlaw contraception. So I am voting against the “asshole votes” in that instance. The results are not the same. ---
**Author:** ![We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@We\_re\_wolves\_not\_werewolves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/We_re_wolves_not_werewolves)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2024, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471/180 "2024-09-02T15:26:20Z")
I’m not a religious scholar, but I don’t think the Catholic Church’s opposition to homosexual relations is based on the impossibility of conception. Likewise, it does not countenance any heterosexual relations just BECAUSE the “open to conception” requirement is met. That is a requirement, but not sufficient. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-point-of-abolishing-abortion/1006471.md?page=10)