# What really motivates people with extremely strong opinions on abortion **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 23, 2011, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308 "2011-02-23T02:12:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Dogzilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e480ec/32.png) [@Dogzilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dogzilla)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/121 "2011-02-23T19:08:54Z")
> [@VarlosZ](#): > > Nice post by **even sven** (as usual). > Because one is catching a bad break and the other is an atrocity? Because in one case the woman accepted the small chance that her birth control would fail, but in the other she was the victim of a brutal assault? Because if a failure of birth control earned one a pass on abortion, then anyone who wanted to terminate would just claim that the condom broke? > > I don’t know, the situations are just different in a number of ways. The most important of which is that a rape victim garners _an entirely different type and degree of sympathy_ than the victim of a birth control mishap. As I said earlier, it’s not so much about the arguments in favor of a rape exception hanging together logically in an airtight way, and more about the emotional response to one situation or another. > (And I should clarify here again that, in the quoted post above, I was speaking hypothetically and for other people. I was not saying that I, personally, consider abortion to be ethically distasteful.) Re: your parenthetical. I know. Just wanted to hear what that argument was. It suggests to me that the difference is in the choice. Woman has no choice in consenting to sex? Oh, psh, well, that’s an atrocity. Woman has no choice regarding whether or not she can carry an unwanted and unplanned for pregnancy to term? That’s just a minor inconvenience. I take issue with the attitude this choice is okay (for whatever projected moral reasons) but that choice is not okay. No. Either I get to control my own choices or I don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/122 "2011-02-23T19:33:53Z")
> [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > And some of us Roe v. Wade is a good law that has withstood the test of time and if some people don’t like it, they should try to get it overturned instead of harassing woman about their choices in health care. [Planned Parenthood v. Casey](http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-744.ZS.html) has supplanted Roe as the controlling ruling on abortion rights in the US. While it upheld the fundamental question of a woman’s right to obtain an abortion it allowed greater intrusion by the state than Roe did. It was unlikely Roe would be overturned wholesale so they punted and whittled away at it. ---
**Author:** ![Giltathriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b38774/32.png) [@Giltathriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giltathriel)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/123 "2011-02-23T21:13:02Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > The Times Magazine had an article a while back on how the “pro-lifers” were working on their next project, which is spreading lies about how birth control was dangerous and so should be limited or banned. Do you have a cite? ---
**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:** [February 23, 2011, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/124 "2011-02-23T21:24:24Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Your objection is a bit incoherent. The quote says that the procedure is mostly performed on “a healthy mother and a healthy baby”. There is no medical necessity on behalf of the mother, and I would have thought it obvious that being aborted is going to have bad effects on the health of the baby being aborted. Incoherency is pretty common with me, i’m afraid. Anyway, my objection was that the status of mother and fetus prior to any kind of abortion, or birth, isn’t necessarily the same as the result after or during. Healthy mothers and healthy fetuses, after all, do not always stay so, sad as that is. > [@](#): > > Well, that’s a point, but you will find that the pro-abortion folks will not be able to produce any cites at all to back up false claims like this one - Even pro-abortion types know this is not true. This seems like an unreasonable point to me. It’s fair to say (per your cites) that some pro-choice types agree that that is not true. But it is quite another to declare uniform opinions based on the beliefs of a few, simply due to membership of the same group. I’ve known humans that have lied to me. You’re a human. Therefore, you are a liar. It doesn’t really work. Out of general interest to the whole labelling debate, i’ve extended the courtesy of calling the “other side” pro-life, as the term they’d presumably prefer. If you would personally prefer some other label, and my insulting of you has led to you using pro-abortion when debating me (a label i’d not prefer, on the whole), please, say so. > [@](#): > > Time did a [Q&A](http://healthland.time.com/2010/11/05/qa-the-last-remaining-doctor-who-performs-late-term-abortions-speaks-out/) with a doctor who does late-term abortions (after Tiller was killed), and admitted (albeit carefully phrased to minimize what was said) that he did not attempt to exercise his medical judgment to determine the reason why a woman sought a late-term abortion from him. As I understand the term, similarly late-term abortion is no more synonymous to 3rd trimester abortion as is partial birth abortion. Having read your cite, i’m not sure which part you believe is a carefully phrased reference to not exercising his medical judgement in that way; perhaps it’s simply too subtle for me, so could you cite the specific part you understand to mean that? > [@](#): > > What I think happened was, and the reason the cites I provided are fourteen or fifteen years old, is that pro-abortionists found out why women seek late-term abortions and realized that they had better lie about it, because the general public is not going to accept hacking holes in the back of babies’ heads just because the mother never got around to arranging an abortion until she was twenty months along. Well, I would tend to imagine that the general public already doesn’t accept hacking holes in babies’ heads at twenty _months_ along, no. 😉 As to twenty weeks along, I’d note that we don’t know to what extent from that first cite that women were having an abortion for which reason at 20 weeks. It’s 16 weeks or more that covers the entirety of those opinions, for which i’d personally not consider any of those reasons given as equivalent to “never got around to arranging an abortion”. The first two would indicate a lack of knowledge of a problem, while the latter two would indicate that getting around to arranging an abortion was difficult, and therefore something they’d already been arranging for some time. “Never got around to arranging” tends to imply to me more an attitude of “Meh, can’t be bothered”, which would be not only not covered but positively at odds which each of those reasons - of course, I could be mistaking the tone you meant it in. Anyway, my point is that it could well be, from that cite, that each and every 20 week old fetus was aborted in those cases for medical reasons. We don’t know, of course, but it’s possible, and so it doesn’t really work as a cite. > [@](#): > > Notice that the cite lists “changing her mind” as a health risk. Of course, if that is your definition of “seeking a late-term abortion because the fetus is dead or dying” I doubt the discussion is going anywhere. No, it doesn’t. It lists “changing her mind” as a _reason_ for a woman to choose to have a late term abortion, “apart from the serious or life threatening health risks”, meaning that those reasons are in addition to already assumed considerable medical problems. You’ve misread the cite. I also note that the site appears to refer to the UK, not the US, though I don’t know if that affects your point at all. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/125 "2011-02-23T21:45:29Z")
> [@SpoilerVirgin](#): > > I did come up with a hypothetical that I would like to pose to **Qin Shi Huangdi** and any other posters who oppose the right to choose abortion. > > Suppose that tomorrow a pharmaceutical company announces that they have perfected an artificial womb. Any time a woman has an abortion, the fetus is now removed and placed in the artificial womb where it can be raised as successfully as if it were being carried to term. The woman no longer has any rights to the child and never has any contact or responsibility again. From the woman’s perspective her life is identical to what it would be if she had had an abortion under current circumstances; however her fetus will develop into a living baby. > > Are you now pro-choice? I didn’t see anyone respond to this, but I thought it was interesting. In that context, what would pro-choice mean? It sounds akin to giving the baby up for adoption, except you’re doing it pre-natally. That would be way more preferable then abortion. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/126 "2011-02-23T21:47:54Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > I didn’t see anyone respond to this, but I thought it was interesting. In that context, what would pro-choice mean? It sounds akin to giving the baby up for adoption, except you’re doing it pre-natally. That would be way more preferable then abortion. It’s preferable if you think we don’t have enough orphans to go around. I’m guessing most of the “pro-life” side will be conspicuously absent when it comes time to dole out the babies. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/127 "2011-02-23T22:22:31Z")
> [@VarlosZ](#): > > So the controlling ethic here is: “Two wrongs make a right”? No, just that one side is not going to get a pass on using loaded and pejorative terms for the other. > [@Revenant Threshold](#): > > Anyway, my objection was that the status of mother and fetus prior to any kind of abortion, or birth, isn’t necessarily the same as the result after or during. Healthy mothers and healthy fetuses, after all, do not always stay so, sad as that is. Well, that is certainly true. Especially if someone shoves a scissors into the back of your head and sucks out your brains. > [@](#): > > This seems like an unreasonable point to me. It’s fair to say (per your cites) that some pro-choice types agree that that is not true. But it is quite another to declare uniform opinions based on the beliefs of a few, simply due to membership of the same group. I’m not talking about opinions. An assertion was made (that PBAs and other late-term abortions were always done because the fetus was dead or dying). That assertion has been shown to be false. > [@](#): > > As I understand the term, similarly late-term abortion is no more synonymous to 3rd trimester abortion as is partial birth abortion You don’t think “late-term” means the same as “third trimester”? I have no idea how to respond to something as silly as that. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/128 "2011-02-23T22:33:24Z")
As I already pointed out “Late term” is purely a political phrase, used by anti-abortion groups to refer to both second and third trimester abortions. When you see stats for “late term abortions,” you are seeing stats for 2nd trimester abortions. Third trimester abortions are vanishingly rare and never elective. As I also said upthread, the kind of confusion and misunderstanding you are demonstrating is exactly the intention behind the invention and use of that medically meaningless phrase. If you beg to differ, please show me a cite defining “late term abortion” as being synonymous with third trimester. You won’t find one. Virtually all of the abortions referred to as “late term” by anti-abortion activists are SECOND trimester. Not third - SECOND. You are regurgitating deceptive, misleading, obfuscatory bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/129 "2011-02-23T22:35:26Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > It’s preferable if you think we don’t have enough orphans to go around. I’m guessing most of the “pro-life” side will be conspicuously absent when it comes time to dole out the babies. I didn’t say it was ideal, I said it was preferable. Being an orphan is preferable to being sucked out of a womb in pieces. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/130 "2011-02-23T22:38:26Z")
I beg to differ. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/131 "2011-02-23T22:38:30Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > You don’t think “late-term” means the same as “third trimester”? > > I have no idea how to respond to something as silly as that. Did you even read the link you posted to earlier (and completely misinterpreted)? ---
**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:** [February 23, 2011, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/132 "2011-02-23T22:43:13Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Well, that is certainly true. Especially if someone shoves a scissors into the back of your head and sucks out your brains. Yes, that’s accurate. Also there are other complications that may ensue between pregnancy and birth. > [@](#): > > I’m not talking about opinions. An assertion was made (that PBAs and other late-term abortions were always done because the fetus was dead or dying). That assertion has been shown to be false. That certainly may be the main thrust of your argument, no doubt. But you did talk about opinions as part of your post; [QUOTE=Shodan] Even pro-abortion types know this is not true. [/QUOTE] You made an assertion, based upon opinions of pro-choicers, which I responded to as I did with the rest of your post. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me to address your claim that pro-choicers, by whichever name you’d care to use, either agreed with you on that point or were liars. > [@](#): > > You don’t think “late-term” means the same as “third trimester”? > > I have no idea how to respond to something as silly as that. Per Wikipedia; > [@](#): > > \*\*Second trimester \*\* > Weeks 13 to 28 of the pregnancy are called the second trimester Per one of your own cites; > [@](#): > > **Later term abortion** > This is the name given to a type of abortion which is performed after the 20th week of pregnancy. Per another of your own cites, which you used to prove “hat pro-abortionists found out why women seek late-term abortions and realized that they had better lie about it”; > [@](#): > > Of the 1,900, "420 had been pregnant for 16 or more weeks Per yet another; > [@](#): > > No doubt, being an abortion doctor is a stressful and dangerous profession. Being an abortion doctor who performs abortions well into the second and third trimesters only ups the ante. Ask Warren Hern, the only doctor in America who admits to performing delayed abortions. Per yet another; > [@](#): > > In the vast majority of cases, the procedure is performed on a healthy mother with a healthy fetus that is 20 weeks or more along, Mr. Fitzsimmons said. Your own cites do not seem to agree with you that “third trimester” and “late term” mean the same thing. Perhaps they are also silly. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/133 "2011-02-23T22:47:36Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I beg to differ. When an eight-month pregnant woman is killed in a car accident or dies in childbirth, you’d prefer not to try to save the baby? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/134 "2011-02-23T22:50:28Z")
Elective abortions don’t happen at 8 months. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2011, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/135 "2011-02-23T22:53:29Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > Is there another motive other than it being a proxy for women’s lib? The contradiction is confusing to me. I will give my opinion. I hate abortion, I hate that the procedure exists. It destroyed families it deceives women in particular under the grounds that it empowers them. Taking away what I see as God’s greatest gift, the ability to have children which is the ability for their love to grow. It comes from the belief that the children are the very heart of the parent (part of the essence of the ‘life or soul’ of the parents now resides in the child), and as the child is loved, the parent’s ability to love will increase, as that child has loved children of his or her own the now grandparents will have their love grow even more. This cycle continues forever in God’s plan. On a spiritual level a mother does chose the child and a child chooses the mother. The woman’s heart sees something desirable inside the heart of the man, so much so that she yearns to give that aspect of the man’s heart of life of it’s own, in our world this is what sexual attraction is. The woman’s heart offers a home to the nascent soul, and the soul accepts, this is conception after which time the nascent soul + the mother’s soul are one with each other - this is the ‘glow’ that women get when pregnant. With abortion that child is given to death, that soul dies, and so does that aspect of the heart of the parents, which they must hide from themselves, causing guilt and shame, and hiding that they even had a abortion. Blocking the admission is also blocking the healing that can happen. If a child’s soul is repeatedly aborted the child learns to detach from the mother emotionally, as they no longer trust the mothers due to past hurts - this happens in the womb. Normally in the womb the child is suppose to receive great continuous love, that doesn’t happen with a repeatably aborted soul. The child is detached from humanity and I believe very well be the cause of autism today. Autism as such is a detachment which occurred from a violation of trust between mother and child, and the child learns not to trust the mother and later others and loses the ability to interact normally with others. As with everything God does have a plan to redeem all. Every aborted child will eventually be given back to the woman to raise and love, actually I believe every egg a woman has will become a child. No aborted child is lost forever. So yes I hate the procedure, but have acknowledge that God allows it and everything will be restored, though it may cause great temporary pain. ---
**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:** [February 23, 2011, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/136 "2011-02-23T22:58:06Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > On a spiritual level a mother does chose the child and a child chooses the mother. The woman’s heart sees something desirable inside the heart of the man, so much so that she yearns to give that aspect of the man’s heart of life of it’s own, in our world this is what sexual attraction is. The woman’s heart offers a home to the nascent soul, and the soul accepts, this is conception after which time the nascent soul + the mother’s soul are one with each other - this is the ‘glow’ that women get when pregnant. Hang on. I seem to recall from previous debates that you’re against abortion even in cases of rape. In such cases, the woman does not see “something desireable inside the heart of the man”, nor does she yearn to give that aspect a life of it’s own. There’s neither spiritual nor sexual attraction on the part of the woman. So would it be correct to say that this _doesn’t_ happen in the case of rape? ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2011, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/137 "2011-02-24T01:28:57Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > But abortionists aren’t committing crimes (well, presumably some do, but abortion itself is not inherently a criminal act). They aren’t breaking laws; they are acting legally. Slave owners of course acted legally when they owned slaves in antebelleum America. > [@](#): > > And again, I think you’re mistaken. There is a difference between not having a moral problem with something, and not thinking there is a need for a moral situation in the first place. Abortionists aren’t going “Well, off to murder some kids today; luckily, I have no moral issue with murder!”. As compared to, say, a thief, who knows what they are doing is wrong and so takes precautions to stop being caught, yet is still able to commit their crime because they have no moral issue with doing so, who accept the idea that they are doing something wrong, either morally or legally, and don’t care. How criminals do something believing it to be wrong? Undoubtedly many do but how many commit crimes because they see nothing wrong with it? Or how about this: adultery is legal in the sense it carries no legal reprucussions and again many of those who commit it see no problem with it. > [@](#): > > It’s the difference between a deliberate murder and you pushing your button. When you’re pushing your button, you aren’t thinking “I realise that by doing this I am killing someone, but I have no moral disagreement with that” - you don’t know that you even need to have that thought. You aren’t aware there’s a moral quandary at all. Ah, but we have means in place for people who do not understand their actions. We don’t try children in the same way we try adults, because we don’t consider them to have the same level of understanding that an adult does. A mentally handicapped person, or an insane person, would also be treated in a different way, due to their different understandings of what they have done, than an average adult. Crime requires not only action, but _intent_. If your communist-murderer is truly unaware of his murdering, then he would be incapacitated in some fashion, incapable of understanding. If he is aware, but accepts his crime, then he is different to an abortionist. You, pushing your button, with no knowledge of the results, are not a murderer; nor would I be correct to say that it proves you have no moral issue with murder. > > Do you believe, in such a circumstance, that in pressing the button you are a murderer, legally or morally? What accountability should you be held to, in that scenario? [/QUOTE] No I don’t think pressing the button would make you morally guilty. But I see your point there; I would not try abortionists for first degree murder even if it was illegal. I think a good analogy here would be a drunk driver killing people. However is a murderer not seeing his murders as murder or victims as human an excuse? After all racists are not insane (necessarilly) but they without hesitation may murder someone of a different race because they don’t see him as human and until the 1950s was legally sanctioned (or at least tolerated). > [@villa](#): > > I think it is very interesting you use this example. The majority of abolitionists didn’t see slaves as having the same rights as white people. They didn’t support social equality. They didn’t support voting rights. They very often supported forced resettlement to Africa. While progressive for their time, by modern standards many of them were extremely racist. Their view was often that slavery degraded the slaver as much as the slave. It’s comparable to a modern view many hold to do with animal cruelty - that animals themselves don’t have rights, but that cruelty to animals should still be outlawed. > > This isn’t meant to critique the abolitionist movement, though I have a lot more respect for Brown than many of the others. However, I think the anti-abortion movement is similar - though people protest that a fetus is a human being with equal rights, the majority don’t believe it. That’s not totally inconsistent, of course - it is possible to think that a fetus is less than human, but still shouldn’t be eliminated on demand. But it doesn’t fit in very well with the soul at conception argument that people make. > > If anti-abortionists thought fetus were people with full rights, I would think they would fall more on the spectrum with John Brown. Interesting and probing thoughts. In fact while I’m undoubtedly pro-life I have questioned on whether I think fetuses are equal to other human life or inferior but still worthy or protection. > [@The\_Tooth](#): > > Since many of you anti-choicers supported Bush and his destroying Iraq to the tune of getting hundreds of thousands killed for no reason, I find it hard to take your claims regarding the sanctity of human life seriously. Much of the evidence was conflicting-perhaps Iraq was a mistake but it was not an intentional war of aggression. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2011, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/138 "2011-02-24T01:35:43Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > Well many are in favor of the death penalty to, and I don’t understand why that is, either. I don’t think they’re lying, though, they honestly see a distinction. If one supports the death penalty, one is not pro-life. Pro-life is not a description any more, it’s just a label. In my experience, and from news elsewhere, what really motivates people with _extremely_ strong opinions on abortion is religion. I was a security guard in an abortion clinic for a number of months during its construction and after it opened, and there was not a protest that didn’t have a religious theme to it. I didn’t have to deal with murderous religious zealots because this happened in Edmonton and it was more civilized then, but religious they were. Mostly peaceful, too. Mostly. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2011, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/139 "2011-02-24T01:38:08Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > Much of the evidence was conflicting-perhaps Iraq was a mistake but it was not an intentional war of aggression. This could turn into the Mother Of All Hijacks if I wanted it to, which I don’t. So I’ll just say “Bless Your Heart”. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2011, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308/140 "2011-02-24T01:38:35Z")
> [@Qin Shi Huangdi](#): > > Much of the evidence was conflicting-perhaps Iraq was a mistake but it was not an intentional war of aggression. Yes it was. That’s exactly what it was. The evdience wasn’t “conflicting,” it was made up. It was a lie, and it was an intentional lie. Jesus Christ, how old were you anyway? Weren’t you like two? Your comparison of abortion rights to slavery does nothing but trivialize slavery, by the way. Slavery had victims. Abortion does not. It’s that simple. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-really-motivates-people-with-extremely-strong-opinions-on-abortion/572308.md?page=8)