3 ms·
> Preventing abortions brings unwanted children into the world and pushes abortion underground, where they’ll just be less safe abortions. If someone believes
by TheFreim 4y ago
> Preventing abortions brings unwanted children into the world and pushes abortion underground, where they’ll just be less safe abortions.
If someone believes that abortion is killing an innocent human being, and thus immoral worthy of being illegal, this line of argument won't do anything. It would be like saying, "if we ban murder for hire that will push all of the hitmen under ground!". I understand you don't believe that is what abortion is, but I think if you look at it from the pro-life point of view it will show why this line of reasoning doesn't seem convincing.
> Do you know how unwanted children are treated? I volunteer as a guardian ad litem for children who need a court appointed advocate, and I support abortion fully having seen the alternative suffering, not to mention anti abortion proponents supporting life right up until birth, and then it’s “good luck champ, this is America, find those bootstraps.”
This isn't an argument for abortion, its an argument for better child care services and child protection. Most pro-lifers are very supportive of giving support to children and parents who are in tough situations, just recently a local community raised a large amount of money and materials to provide support.
> Anti abortion in America isn’t about pro life, it’s about giving a certain political subset control over womens’ reproductive rights.
This is a false characterization. The difference in view between pro-life and pro-choice is not "womans rights vs. no womans rights" or something like that, its a difference philosophical and moral view of what the unborn /are/.
Does what I say make sense? Please let me know if you need clarifications, I am typing quickly and can't proof read as much as I would like to.
- toomuchtodo 4y agoWhat you say makes sense, and I believe it’s a fundamental gap that can’t be closed. I simply cannot put myself in the shoes and mental model of someone who is pro life (and I’ve tried; otherwise how can I have a reasonable debate with the opposition), and I’m sure the feeling is mutual. Therefore, both sides are to remain in tension until a point comes where democracy overrides through cohort turnover [1] (but at a cost of suffering between now and then). [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/ https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/fact-sheet/public-opini...
- TheFreim 4y ago> I believe it’s a fundamental gap that can’t be closed. For you, maybe, but not for all. Many/most people believe that there should be _at least_ /some/ restrictions on abortion (abortion/infanticide at 9 months is not supported by the average voter, for example). The gap might not be closeable /in principle/, but for many people who don't think everything through with a first-principles approach there are things they are willing to change on.
- fzeroracer 4y agoI can fully understand why they take the pro-life point of view, and it's wrong. The end result of a pro-life view is what you see happening in this thread: People arguing that birth control should be made illegal. They want to erode freedom of individuals to decide for themselves in favor of their own religious zeal. As toomuchtodo has said, the gap has become impossible to bridge, mainly because any concessions to pro-life individuals simply results in demands for further concessions until the above becomes true.
- spoils19 4y agoThe Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision.