# What would REALLY happen if abortion was banned? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 19, 2005, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921 "2005-10-19T16:03:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/41 "2005-10-19T19:20:55Z")
> [@Anne Neville](#): > > Planned Parenthood has a few other things to do than to refute everything an organization opposed to them says. And yet they spend voluminous amounts of time and effort in producing pro-choice materials and propaganda. They send speakers across the nation, and distribute large quantities of material defending their cause. All it would take is a single citation from their own publication, proving that Mary Calderone said no such thing. Their silence on this matter is deafening. > [@](#): > > 1. Planned Parenthood is a non-profit organization. They also do things other than abortions. That’s why I spoke about _revenue_, rather than profit. Like it or not, abortion provides a huge source of revenue for Planned Parenthood, and so they have a large financial stake in promoting abortion. > [@](#): > > 1. National Right to Life certainly does have an interest in making abortion illegal (that’s the whole point), and therefore has an interest in convincing people that not many women would die from back-alley abortions if abortion were illegal. That’s why I spoke of **VESTED** interest, rather than mere interest alone. Unlike Planned Parenthood, the National Right to Life Committee has nothing to gain financially from the abortion issue. If anything, ultimately defeating abortion would put most (if not all) of their people out of work, and so these people are actually working against their own financial interests! With Planned Parenthood, there is a likely financial motive. With the NRLC, their is no clear financial motivation, especially since it is a largely volunteer-run organization. So if we’re going to cast aspersions on the reliability of their assertions, Planned Parenthood fares more poorly in that regard. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/42 "2005-10-19T19:31:06Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Where do you get this stuff from? States will arrest women who have gone to another state to get an abortion? Those women will be executed for having an abortion? I mean…come on. You aren’t serious…are you? 😕 (Hoping this is a whoosh…) > > -XT I think the reasoning is: “If abortion equals murder …” as so many anti-choice folks say … ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/43 "2005-10-19T19:40:17Z")
> [@Miss Violaceous](#): > > I’ve wondered about the constitutionality of a state or the federal government making a law against crossing state lines for the purposes of procuring an abortion. I don’t know about here, but it was forbidden in Ireland to leave the state to obtain an abortion. (see [here](http://www.ifpa.ie/abortion/hist.html) , look down for the X case. Basically the state could forbid someone from leaving the country to get an abortion where it was legal, except, by this case, when there was a risk of suicide. I’m not sure if a state could enforce this ban, but the federal government could, I would guess. Abortion was legal in New York before Roe v Wade. I vaguely remember that there was cross-state line travel for abortions, but I don’t know if there were any laws against this or any court cases. Anyone? ---
**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:** [October 19, 2005, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/44 "2005-10-19T19:40:32Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > I think the reasoning is: “If abortion equals murder …” as so many anti-choice folks say … But even then it makes no sense. I can’t be tried in CA for a “murder” I commit in OR. I must be tried in OR. So, if an abortion is performed in a state where it’s legal, the person cannot be charged with murder in another state. It just can’t be done. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/45 "2005-10-19T19:43:35Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > But even then it makes no sense. I can’t be tried in CA for a “murder” I commit in OR. I must be tried in OR. So, if an abortion is performed in a state where it’s legal, the person cannot be charged with murder in another state. It just can’t be done. It’s not my argument, John. I don’t think the states will try that … political suicide even in the red states. The first time you see an attractive white woman crying as she’s led off to a jail cell for trying to get an abortion, politicians will be thrown out of office in droves. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/46 "2005-10-19T19:45:20Z")
> [@mstay](#): > > I’m puzzled by those thinking the overturning of Roe or the signing of a federal anti-abortion bill would create a backlash. I see this a lot so I’m going to have to ask: a backlash from who? The U.S. is extremely conservative and appears to be growing more so every day. Half the populace doesn’t vote and a member of the GOP isn’t going to vote Democrat in the day and age where the word liberal is a curse word. > > I hope you’re right, though. Look at my post to John. They’re not mad now, but as soon as anti-abortion laws get enforced and start harming attractive young white women, you’ll see a backlash. It’ll be irresistible eye candy for the media. ---
**Author:** ![Anne\_Neville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Anne\_Neville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anne_Neville)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/47 "2005-10-19T19:55:11Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > And yet they spend voluminous amounts of time and effort in producing pro-choice materials and propaganda. They send speakers across the nation, and distribute large quantities of material defending their cause. And National Right to Life does the same thing on the other side of the issue. I’m sorry, **JThunder**. If you honestly believe that National Right to Life has any claim to neutrality in the abortion debate, or is anything like a reasonable and unbiased source for quotations about Planned Parenthood, I don’t think we have enough common ground to argue about it. ---
**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:** [October 19, 2005, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/48 "2005-10-19T19:56:29Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > It’s not my argument, John. I don’t think the states will try that … political suicide even in the red states. The first time you see an attractive white woman crying as she’s led off to a jail cell for trying to get an abortion, politicians will be thrown out of office in droves. I didn’t mean to imply that it was. Sorry if it came off that way… As fractured as this nation is on the issue of abortion, we’ve made a very comfortable peace wtih the status quo. _Roe V Wade_ being overturned would be the best thing for the Democrats short of Bush admitting he lied about Iraq! ---
**Author:** ![Raging\_Catfish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/74df32/32.png) [@Raging\_Catfish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raging_Catfish)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/49 "2005-10-19T19:59:55Z")
Even if 50% of people support choice, I think a far fewer amount of people would actually be pissed off if abortion were illegal. Polls tend to be ideals, theoreticals and not necessarily how people would react in real life. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/50 "2005-10-19T20:02:09Z")
> [@LaurAnge](#): > > Not to mention that what the Planned Parenthood people said was contingent upon the time, and may not hold true in future. What they said was that illegal abortions, on the whole, weren’t dangerous because most were performed by physicians acting illegally, not shmoes on the street. > > But what if the new state laws made it harder for physicians to do it (which, in theory, they would)? It was “harder for physicians to do it” before _Roe v. Wade_, when, as you admit, most illegal abortions weren’t dangerous because they were performed by . . . physicians. I’m not following your logic. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/51 "2005-10-19T20:04:08Z")
I’ll add that before _Roe v. Wade_, a physician could lose his state license and be subject to criminal prosecution. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/52 "2005-10-19T20:04:40Z")
> [@Anne Neville](#): > > And National Right to Life does the same thing on the other side of the issue. > > I’m sorry, **JThunder**. If you honestly believe that National Right to Life has any claim to neutrality in the abortion debate, or is anything like a reasonable and unbiased source for quotations about Planned Parenthood, I don’t think we have enough common ground to argue about it. I never said that they were NEUTRAL. What I said is that they have no VESTED INTEREST. There is a world of difference between the two. A US factory worker may have a vested interest in opposing offshoring, for example, whereas a doctor or attorney generally would not. The doctor or attorney may take a stand on that matter-- in other words, be non-neutral – without having any particular vested interest in the outcome. Please learn to grasp the difference. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/53 "2005-10-19T20:05:14Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > Planned Parenthood has had decades to dispute that claim. In all that time, I have yet to find a single reference in which Planned Parenthood stated, “No, we never said such a thing!” Well, she’s dead, It was probably before the internet was big, and she was known to be a controversial figure. Hardky a group making a claim, more like an individual. Also, it looks like **Anne Neville** is following Mary Calderone’s example. > [@Jeffrey P. Moran](#): > > (She) found herself roundly abused, and one opponent even dug up the information–damning in the eyes of conservatives–that in her first marriage she had gone to the altar pregnant. By the end of 1969 Calderone was guaranteed to be picketed at almost every speech. > > She refused to debate her attackers. “I just won’t stoop to an interchange,” she told an interviewer in 1970. “I don’t go on platforms with liars, deliberate liars.” Calderone was perhaps too genteel for gutter politics. “She seemed to speak not with the voice of a person but with the voice of a class,” remembered one interviewer, “a voice that had been bred in generations of parlor and salon gatherings.” > > When Calderone finally deigned to answer her opponents, she chose to write an article in the Vassar Quarterly. No doubt she gained numerous new supporters among her fellow alumnae, but this did little to refute the conservatives’ charges. Playboy magazine undertook the major task of refuting conservative charges against sex education, without Calderone’s help. > > Calderone stepped down as executive director of SIECUS shortly after the controversies subsided, but continued on as president from 1975 to 1982. [Linky](http://www.aavc.vassar.edu/vq/winter2000/Calderone.html) ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/54 "2005-10-19T20:08:21Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > The first time you see an attractive white woman crying as she’s led off to a jail cell for trying to get an abortion, politicians will be thrown out of office in droves. Please see post #29. ---
**Author:** ![Anne\_Neville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Anne\_Neville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anne_Neville)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/55 "2005-10-19T20:11:41Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > I never said that they were NEUTRAL. What I said is that they have no VESTED INTEREST. There is a world of difference between the two. I realize that. But what I am saying is that there are reasons other than financial reasons why someone might support a particular view. Religious belief, for example, can be a very powerful example of a non-financial reason to have a particular view on a subject. People often do have beliefs that work against their own financial interests- wealthy Democrats who oppose Bush’s tax cuts, for example. Regardless of _why_ someone has a particular viewpoint, an organization dedicated to promoting that viewpoint is _not_ likely to be a neutral and unbiased source for information about an organization with the opposing viewpoint. _That’s_ my point. I wouldn’t uncritically accept a quote from the Democratic National Committee about what Republicans do or don’t believe, either, regardless of whether the Republicans had or hadn’t rebutted that specific quote. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/56 "2005-10-19T20:11:44Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > I’ll add that before _Roe v. Wade_, a physician could lose his state license and be subject to criminal prosecution. Which is exactly what could happen in states that ban abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned. States could pass laws making the pregnant woman subject to prosection. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/57 "2005-10-19T20:16:23Z")
You too — post #29, now. States could also make jaywalking a capital offense. Well, they could! ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/58 "2005-10-19T20:24:13Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > Please see post #29. yes, you seem to be in agreement with me. I was just explaining why it happened that state laws never went after the pregnant woman. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/59 "2005-10-19T21:10:12Z")
> [@Miss Violaceous](#): > > I’ve wondered about the constitutionality of a state or the federal government making a law against crossing state lines for the purposes of procuring an abortion. Doctors performin Abortions for money certainly meets the standard of substantially affecting interstate commerce. I’d say it has much more effect, by orders of magnitude, than a very small number of people growing a very small amount of marijuana. By that reasoning abortion falls under the powers of Congress and can be regulated as they see fit. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2005, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921/60 "2005-10-19T21:11:17Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > In your view, what would be the outcome of Roe being overturned on strict constructionist view and the gutting of Substantive Due Process? Don’t know about gutting of SDP - it would depend on the decision. Overturning Roe v. Wade would return the regulation of abortion to the states, as I mentioned. > [@Hamlet](#): > > Would we lose the right to use contraception, the right to marry, the right to choose how to raise our children, or any of the rights not specifically enshrined in words in the Constitution? Could we go back to segregation, illegalizing sexual conduct, and perhaps have a China one child rule? Segregation, no. I would have thought that was obvious. The rest? I suppose we could, but I doubt if such things are going to get very far. In general, any right not in the Constitution could only be established by the states, or the people, as the Tenth Amendment states. I think you are assuming that unjust laws can **only** be addressed by having the courts overturn them. Obviously this is not the case - a legislature can rescind a law, and is more responsive to the popular will than an unelected judge. So if you wanted to have a China One Child law, you would have to convince 51% of the Senate and House. The ideal is that the Constitution explicitly establishes certain of the basic rights of the people. Laws not in conflict with those basic rights are passed by the legislature. If the people decide they want to recognize another right, they amend the Constitution, or merely have their representatives pass laws establishing that newly recognized right. You may be making the same mistake a lot of folks make talking about Roe v. Wade. Overturning Roe v. Wade (insert gasps of horror at the thought here :D) would not “make abortion illegal”. It is not a simple binary, where the Court turns that faucet on and off. Roe v. Wade made it illegal for states to regulate abortion. Allowing them to do so again would free the differing regions of the country to make different decisions based on the will of the people of their state. Which would be fine with me. “Let a thousand flowers bloom, let a hundred schools of thought contend” as Mao supposedly said. This would be (IMO) the solution least offensive to the basic notion of limited government, especially limited federal government. The Constitution doesn’t address abortion. Therefore it seems to me illicit for the Supremes to pretend it does. Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-would-really-happen-if-abortion-was-banned/326921.md?page=4)