# Why aren't pro-lifers more extreme? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 10, 2015, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456 "2015-08-10T15:52:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**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:** [August 10, 2015, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/61 "2015-08-10T23:30:56Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > I’ve always thought that the majority of these so-called pro-life people were just spouting shit. Sure you’ll get the occasional true believers, but if babies were actively getting murdered every day, you’d think most people would do a little bit more than hold up signs. > > There’s also the fact that liberal policies regarding sex education and contraception are proven to work, and if someone actually wanted to reduce abortions, they’d be all over helping Planned Parenthood, passing out condoms, etc. I mean, if they actually think babies are being killed, they’d settle for something a little milder even if it goes against their beliefs that it makes people promiscuous. > > So I don’t believe their shit at all. Most of them are blowing smoke and I have no sympathy for them when they whine about saving babies. They don’t believe it, why should I? People regularly hold contradictory beliefs, or compartmentalize their beliefs so as not to challenge them too closely. How many people do you think actually have a fully consistent set of beliefs, having examined them all to make sure there are no contradictions? I mean, besides you that is. 😉 ---
**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:** [August 10, 2015, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/62 "2015-08-10T23:32:56Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > If you’re willing to call the police sniper a murderer for acting to save lives — to paint him with the same brush as the hostage-taker – then you are holding to an ethical system that is so incredibly foolish and pointless that it doesn’t deserve to be called an ethical system in the first place, a system that has passed being AMORAL and become actively IMMORAL. Not to mention utterly useless. If I paint the two with the same brush? Are both of them killers? I think you’re assuming far more into what my definition of murder is than I have said is included. I haven’t said that murder is always wrong, always a bad idea, always the wrong thing to do - in fact, I’ve disagreed with that notion. You quoted it. With respect, I am not calling the sniper a murderer by\* your\* definition of murder, but by mine. ---
**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:** [August 10, 2015, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/63 "2015-08-10T23:34:03Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > That is the legal definition. You don’t get to make up your own legal definitions. True. Have I suggested that my definition is a legal definition? ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/64 "2015-08-10T23:36:53Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > It’s impossible to prove a hypothetical, but I find it hard to believe that there would not be any number of people and/or groups that would seek a “2nd amendment solution” to the government showing up on their doorstep tomorrow to take 10-year-old Johnny away to the gas chambers. Or that groups would not regularly be trying to blow up the gas chambers themselves. Yes, just as there would be if the current circumstance involved forced abortions. If someone showed up on my doorstep to force my wife to have an abortion, I would likely resort to a second amendment solution as well. But there’s nothing forced about our current circumstance. Am I misundertsanding your hypothetical? ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/65 "2015-08-10T23:41:59Z")
What about fertility clinics, when the couple has their healthy baby, are the clinics required to keep the unused embryos forever? ---
**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:** [August 10, 2015, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/66 "2015-08-10T23:45:21Z")
> [@Stratocaster](#): > > Yes, just as there would be if the current circumstance involved forced abortions. If someone showed up on my doorstep to force my wife to have an abortion, I would likely resort to a second amendment solution as well. But there’s nothing forced about our current circumstance. Am I misundertsanding your hypothetical? The woman is forcing the abortion on the “innocent child”. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/67 "2015-08-10T23:51:50Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > If I paint the two with the same brush? > > Are both of them killers? > > I think you’re assuming far more into what my definition of murder is than I have said is included. I haven’t said that murder is always wrong, always a bad idea, always the wrong thing to do - in fact, I’ve disagreed with that notion. You quoted it. With respect, I am not calling the sniper a murderer by\* your\* definition of murder, but by mine. In that case, your definition of “murder” is incoherent. If any killing of a human being is murder, then the latter term no longer has any moral weight. It’s like calling all hetero sex rape, or all property theft. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/68 "2015-08-10T23:53:09Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > It’s impossible to prove a hypothetical, but I find it hard to believe that there would not be any number of people and/or groups that would seek a “2nd amendment solution” to the government showing up on their doorstep tomorrow to take 10-year-old Johnny away to the gas chambers. Or that groups would not regularly be trying to blow up the gas chambers themselves. This was not your hypothetical, **John**. Your hypothetical involved parents voluntarily surrendering their children to state execution. That scenario is very different from the government executing everyone’s children randomly. Because in this case, there is no advantage to being a good little citizen. The government’s going to fuck you up regardless. Might as well go out in a blaze of glory. But let’s say the government only executes 10-year-old Johnny when his parents are anti-government terroristic thugs. Do you really think there would be a whole lot of people loudly talking about “2nd amendment solutions” then? Of course not. There are a lot of gun-worshippers in this country. They all talk a good game about how they’d go Rambo if the government tried to take away their guns. But 99% of that is just talk. Most of these folks would be the FIRST to hand over their guns, because it wouldn’t be Obama Incarnate who’d be standing in their doorway with the warrant. It would be Deputy Jimbo, their brother-in-law or next-door-neighbor or friend-of-a-friend. Who’s going to go all Rambo on the good ole boy who’s just trying to earn a paycheck like everyone else? Only crazies would do that. And only crazies would try to fight against the mightiest military in the world. People don’t get het up unless it is their own life that’s on the line. And even then, it doesn’t take long for them to back down and try to go about living without making things worse. ---
**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:** [August 11, 2015, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/69 "2015-08-11T00:04:25Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > In that case, your definition of “murder” is incoherent. If any killing of a human being is murder, then the latter term no longer has any moral weight. It’s like calling all hetero sex rape, or all property theft. Certainly it has moral weight to me; it’s the taking of the life of a person who didn’t want their life to be taken. If you mean “the word murder has a lesser inherent moral weight by **Revenant** ’s definition than **Skald** ’s definition”, yes, you’re correct. What about that is “incoherent”? I get that you don’t agree with my term, but “incoherent” seems like a strange word to describe it; I’d use “incoherent” to describe something which was illogical, or gibberish, or self-defeating. I don’t see how my definition of murder is any of those things. So far as I can tell you just disagree with it. Which of course is perfectly fine in and of itself. ---
**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:** [August 11, 2015, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/70 "2015-08-11T00:06:05Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > This was not your hypothetical, **John**. Your hypothetical involved parents voluntarily surrendering their children to state execution. That scenario is very different from the government executing everyone’s children randomly. Because in this case, there is no advantage to being a good little citizen. The government’s going to fuck you up regardless. Might as well go out in a blaze of glory. If you go back and read that post, you’ll find there were TWO scenarios; one of which involved the government picking who is executed. > [@](#): > > But let’s say the government only executes 10-year-old Johnny when his parents are anti-government terroristic thugs. Do you really think there would be a whole lot of people loudly talking about “2nd amendment solutions” then? Of course not. But you’re changing the hypothetical so that it no longer resembles abortion. Abortion is a pretty random event, so it’s important to keep things random. Still, I think it would be hard for the government to find 1M kids of “terrorists” every year without stretching the meaning of the term beyond credibility. > [@](#): > > There are a lot of gun-worshippers in this country. They all talk a good game about how they’d go Rambo if the government tried to take away their guns. But 99% of that is just talk. Most of these folks would be the FIRST to hand over their guns, because it wouldn’t be Obama Incarnate who’d be standing in their doorway with the warrant. It would be Deputy Jimbo, their brother-in-law or next-door-neighbor or friend-of-a-friend. Who’s going to go all Rambo on the good ole boy who’s just trying to earn a paycheck like everyone else? Only crazies would do that. And only crazies would try to fight against the mightiest military in the world. Wait a minute. Is it Deputy Jimbo or General Schwartzcopf who is showing up at the door? You just shifted from the former to the latter without batting an eye. But we’re not talking about taking away guns here, so that’s an analogy that isn’t on point anyway. > [@](#): > > People don’t get het up unless it is their own life that’s on the line. And even then, it doesn’t take long for them to back down and try to go about living without making things worse. Yes and no. Imagine if there were as many people today, proportionately, working to physically sabotage the abortion network as there were people working the underground railroad in the 1850s. We’d be reading about some act of sabotage in the newspapers every week. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/71 "2015-08-11T00:51:51Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > If you go back and read that post, you’ll find there were TWO scenarios; one of which involved the government picking who is executed. But only one is analogous to abortion. > [@](#): > > But you’re changing the hypothetical so that it no longer resembles abortion. Abortion is a pretty random event, so it’s important to keep things random. Um, no it isn’t. The government isn’t randomly executing fetuses regardless of the parent’s wishes. If the government was kidnapping random pregnant women and terminating their pregnancies against their wishes, then you could say that “abortion is a pretty random event”. But this isn’t happening. Not even a little bit. If you’d stick with a hypothetical that halfway resembles current abortion practices, maybe I wouldn’t feel the need to fight it. > [@](#): > > Still, I think it would be hard for the government to find 1M kids of “terrorists” every year without stretching the meaning of the term beyond credibility. Maybe I’m very cynical, but I think people will buy any propaganda message that assures them they are “safe”. “I pay my taxes and don’t break any laws. The government only targets people who don’t do these things. The government doesn’t hurt good people like me. I don’t have anything to worry about it. No need to protest. No need to fight.” If people didn’t have this tendency to rationalize oppression, countries like Cuba, North Korea, and Syria wouldn’t exist. > [@](#): > > Wait a minute. Is it Deputy Jimbo or General Schwartzcopf who is showing up at the door? You just shifted from the former to the latter without batting an eye. But we’re not talking about taking away guns here, so that’s an analogy that isn’t on point anyway. You don’t seem very keen on using an analogy that jibes with abortion. So I don’t see why I should I care either. I’m pro-choice through-and-through. But if the government was aborting fetuses “randomly”, I’d be angry enough to throw a garbage can into a storefront window. If the government was executing children randomly, I’d also be very very angry. I’d probably not go to work for a few days. But if the government was executing children that were, say, profoundly mentally handicapped or terminally ill, and they had parental permission, then I wouldn’t be very very angry. I’d only be concerned. I might be persuaded to sign a petition. But I wouldn’t be lobbing any bombs. I seriously doubt most people would be much different. > [@](#): > > Yes and no. Imagine if there were as many people today, proportionately, working to physically sabotage the abortion network as there were people working the underground railroad in the 1850s. We’d be reading about some act of sabotage in the newspapers every week. I think the difference is that a lot of the conductors of the Underground Railroad were directly affected by slavery. They had been previously enslaved and/or had family members/significant others who were enslaved. Slavery wasn’t just a theoretical abstraction for them. But none of the conductors were under the delusion that helping a few thousand slaves find freedom was going to dismantle the institution alone. I liken the Underground Railroad to crisis pregnancy centers. I think those places receive a lot more funding than an Eric Rudolph would. I’m guessing Harriet Tubman had a lot more support than John Brown did. ---
**Author:** ![Grotonian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c2a13f/32.png) [@Grotonian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grotonian)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/72 "2015-08-11T01:42:31Z")
I don’t understand the leap from believing someone is a murderer to believing that I have to kill him. I believe OJ is a murderer (don’t we all?) but why would I kill him? Perhaps the argument is that abortionists are GOING to murder, but how does killing an abortionist stop a single murder? Does killing a dentist stop root canals? Any pregnant woman intent on killing her baby can do it; how does my killing the local abortionist stop a pregnant girl from throwing herself down the stairs? The OP’s underlying premise is ludicrous. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/73 "2015-08-11T01:49:36Z")
If the ultimate motive of pro-lifers is to save lives, and we’ve established shooting doctors isn’t something even a staunch activist could morally do, why aren’t they seeking to promote the best proven methods of birth control? There is an assumption here that vigorous pro-lifers are logical and calculated but nonetheless stymied by the law and so reserve themselves to picketing clinics and other ineffective methods. There is incontrovertible proof sex education works in reducing unwanted pregnancy, there is proof readily available contraceptives reduce pregnancy. And yet Pro-lifers evidently don’t care enough about dead babies to do even that. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/74 "2015-08-11T02:29:15Z")
> [@Sitnam](#): > > . . . why aren’t they seeking to promote the best proven methods of birth control? . . . To their vast credit, some of them do. There actually are a handful of Christian Protestant churches that have swung about and come to a supportive stance of contraception. Some of these still disapprove, but are willing to take the course of the lesser evil. Some few of them actually approve of “family planning.” Almost all secular opponents of abortion are in favor of contraception. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/75 "2015-08-11T03:36:13Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > To their vast credit, some of them do. There actually are a handful of Christian Protestant churches that have swung about and come to a supportive stance of contraception. Some of these still disapprove, but are willing to take the course of the lesser evil. Some few of them actually approve of “family planning.” > > Almost all secular opponents of abortion are in favor of contraception. Yep, a handful of liberal church groups and let’s not pretend secular opposition makes up the bulk of even this group. VAST credit, huh? The bar is pretty low for what constitutes religious sacrifice in this country. ---
**Author:** ![Tread](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/53a042/32.png) [@Tread](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tread)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/76 "2015-08-11T04:45:51Z")
SO…if they are really Pro-LIFE,… they’d be out killing … :smack:😕:dubious: ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 11:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/77 "2015-08-11T11:03:11Z")
How do the PETA “meat is murder” people keep from going on murderous McDonalds rampages? ---
**Author:** ![thirdname](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/d07c76/32.png) [@thirdname](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thirdname)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/78 "2015-08-11T12:40:53Z")
> [@kayaker](#): > > How do the PETA “meat is murder” people keep from going on murderous McDonalds rampages? Protein deficiency renders them incapable of carrying enough weapons and ammo for a proper massacre. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/79 "2015-08-11T16:42:09Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > People regularly hold contradictory beliefs, or compartmentalize their beliefs so as not to challenge them too closely. How many people do you think actually have a fully consistent set of beliefs, having examined them all to make sure there are no contradictions? I mean, besides you that is. 😉 Its not about contradictory beliefs but the severity of those beliefs. I can accept that deep down, people outwardly spout nonsense about abortions being murder but inwardly they know its not that bad. I think most pro-lifers are in that camp. What I have a problem with is true believers who don’t do what they really believe. You can say its cognitive dissonance, but I can’t read their minds, I see them simply as being insincere hypocrites If I were a mad scientist, I’d experiment on unwilling subjects to prove it. I’d create a situation where 2 real live birthed humans are in danger, and one pregnant mother and see how often they try to save the 2 people vs. the mother ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2015, 10:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456/80 "2015-08-13T10:56:33Z")
Some are. They go to prison and are put to death. Many, many more, far too cowardly to ever take up arms for the cause themselves, seem to approve but don’t participate. Or they “disapprove,” because “murder is wrong,” but kind of see it as “killers killing killers.” One mix that weirds me out is how some people are insistently “pro-life” when it’s their own people but extremely callous about the lives of foreigners. Like, is that even “pro-life” or just nationalistic natalism? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-arent-pro-lifers-more-extreme/727456.md?page=5)