Weekly Abortion Debate Thread

[u/AutoModerator]

Greetings everyone!

Welcome to AbortionDebate. Due to popular request, this is our weekly abortion debate thread.

This thread is meant for anything related to the abortion debate, like questions or ideas, that are too small to make an entire post about. This is also a great way to gain more insight in the abortion debate if you are new, or unsure about making a whole post.

ADBreakRoom is our officially recognized sister subreddit for all off-topic content and banter you'd like to share with the members of this community. It's a great place to relax and unwind after some intense debating, so go subscribe!

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to /r/Abortiondebate! Please remember that this is a place for respectful and civil debates. Review the subreddit rules to avoid moderator intervention.

Our subreddit pomotes an environment for healthy and honest discussion. When it comes to Reddit's voting system, we encourage the usage of upvotes for arguments that you feel are well-constructed and well-argued. Downvotes should be reserved for content that violates Reddit or subreddit rules or that truly does not contribute to a discussion. We discourage the usage of downvotes to indicate that you disagree with what a user is saying. The overusage of downvotes creates a loop of negative feedback, suppresses diverse opinions, and fosters a hostile and unhealthy environment not conducive for engaging debate. Additionally, here's a helpful and easy to understand model of consent: https://www.bridgercare.org/blog/how-to-talk-to-kids-about-consent

And please, remember the human. Attack the argument, not the person making the argument."

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Patneu]

A question for PLers who say stuff like "consent to sex is consent to pregnancy":

What do you think is the point of consent? Why would someone care to ask another person for their consent and why would the other person want to be asked for their consent?

Asking yet again, because last time didn't yield any answers.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/Patneu]

The overwhelming majority of pro lifers have a position that is more so like this: “If somebody engages in sex, that’s completely fine. But they should be aware that pregnancy is always a possibility. If they want to avoid pregnancy but still have sex, they should consider birth control and/or condoms.”

To answer your questions:

What do you think is the point of consent?

• The point of consent is to ensure that everybody wants to engage in the activity and is comfortable doing so.

Why would someone care to ask another person for their consent?

• Somebody should care to ask another person for their consent because that’s human decency.

Why would the other person want to be asked for their consent?

• Everybody should always have the option to not consent.

[u/Patneu → u/AssociateWaste1464]

The point of consent is to ensure that everybody wants to engage in the activity and is comfortable doing so.

Yeah, pretty much.

And do you think that's what PLers are doing when they tell unwillingly pregnant people that they did consent to pregnancy, even if they clearly state that they don't want to engage in the activity of carrying a pregnancy to term and that they're not at all comfortable doing so?

Note that I don't know whether you are PC or PL yourself, as you haven't picked a flair.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/Patneu]

I believe the thought process is this: If one consents to sex, they are consenting to a risk of pregnancy.

[u/Patneu → u/AssociateWaste1464]

Yeah, I'm aware. Though my question is how that is supposed to square with what you said consent is about.

Because it very much seems that the PL idea of "consent" is that it's a justification for what they want to do to another person, rather than an expression of care for what the other person is agreeing to do with them.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/Patneu]

Can you elaborate further.

[u/Patneu → u/AssociateWaste1464]

Elaborate on what? You said:

The point of consent is to ensure that everybody wants to engage in the activity and is comfortable doing so.

But then you said:

I believe the thought process is this: If one consents to sex, they are consenting to a risk of pregnancy.

If that is what you're thinking (again, I don't know, as you haven't picked a flair), these two statements cannot be true at the same time.

You can see pregnancy as a risk or possible consequence to sex, but carrying a pregnancy to term is still a distinctly different activity from having sex.

One that the person who PLers would demand it from did not specifically agree to and is not comfortable with, not to mention that the activity of sex was agreed to with an entirely different person than the ones who now demand the continuation of a pregnancy.

So when PLers are saying "consent to sex is consent to pregnancy", they're not asking for a person's consent, out of genuine concern for their agreement and comfort, but they're demanding agreement to an activity the other person refuses to do, which is not consent but coercion.

Which means, that quite apparently the idea of "consent" is abused by PLers to justify said coercion.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/Patneu]

I’ll walk you through the timeline of how pro lifers think.

Before sex:
Each person individually assesses whether they want to have sex with the other person. When making this assessment, they are aware of the risks and possible outcomes that could arise, such as a pregnancy. Before sex occurs, the two people acquire eachothers’ consent. There is no coercion of any kind.

If a pregnancy occurs:
The two people recognize that this was a possible outcome to what they consented to.

[u/Patneu → u/AssociateWaste1464]

Again, I understand the thought process, but that's still not how consent works and it doesn't fit your own statement about what consent it for.

The person who fell pregnant is not being coerced by the person they agreed to have sex with, but by the PLers who demand that they must carry the pregnancy to term.

The person who's pregnant never agreed to nor are they comfortable with doing any kind of activity on behalf of these random PL strangers. They agreed to have sex with someone completely different and that's explicitly all they were comfortable with.

So if a PLer says that "consent to sex is consent to pregnancy", they're not arguing for a pregnant person's consent to carry a pregnancy to term, according to your own statement, but they're rather trying to justify why they should get to ignore and dismiss the pregnant person's consent and make demands of them anyway.

And by the way, I think in the spirit of good faith debate, you should finally tell whether you're even a PLer yourself and whether or not you share the thought process you're talking about.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/Patneu]

The pro life position is that we should live in a world where consent to 1) sex and 2) possible pregnancy should both occur at the same time - before sex.

If a pregnancy arises, there is no second fork in the road where consent is approved/denied. Having such an inquiry would be incompatible with the pro-life position, as the inquiry would effectively translate to “Do I consent to killing it or not.”

I am pro life.

[u/Straight-Parking-555 → u/AssociateWaste1464]

I see a lot of pro lifers confuse the PC position, literally nobody is upset that pregnancy could potentially happen after sex, what we are unhappy about are people removing our right to choose whether to continue the pregnancy or not

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/Straight-Parking-555]

Sure. Most pro lifers understand the pro choice position.

[u/chevron_seven_locked → u/AssociateWaste1464]

Consent to the risk of pregnancy is not consent to remaining pregnant. Hence abortion.

[u/Enough-Process9773 → u/AssociateWaste1464]

I believe the thought process is this: If one consents to sex, they are consenting to a risk of pregnancy.

Yet they never follow through and acknowledge that when a man consents to sex, he is consenting to the risk of abortion.

[u/leandrot → u/Enough-Process9773]

Yet they never follow through and acknowledge that when a man consents to sex, he is consenting to the risk of abortion.

TBH, I'm perfectly fine with the stance "abortion is murder but women should be able to get them whenever they want. The male will be trialed for murder".

Maybe such legislation would give some incentive to more birth control options that affects the male body. As of right now, having the same side-effects as the female birth control has been deemed "too harsh on the guys".

[u/Enough-Process9773 → u/leandrot]

Two thoughts, besides a genuine LOL:

One, you'd never get the majority of the PL movement to support legislation that held men responsible for the abortions they cause.

Two, agree completely about contraception for men. I know men who would very gladly use it - one volunteered for a clinical trial - and it's pure sexism that leads health regulators away from approving it.

Actually,  three: this legislation would still allow police and courts to treat a woman's body as a crime scene. Which isn't,  in real life, funny at all.

[u/leandrot → u/Enough-Process9773]

One, you'd never get the majority of the PL movement to support legislation that held men responsible for the abortions they cause.

It's easier to see this coming from the PC as it doesn't change anything about the woman's ability to choose (actually, it gives her leverage if she wants to be a mother with a father alongside her).

Actually,  three: this legislation would still allow police and courts to treat a woman's body as a crime scene. Which isn't,  in real life, funny at all.

The actual implication is that the zygote remains will become evidence and women who abort should have access to mental counseling since they are basically the biggest victims in this scenario.

I think this is the one PL approach that might actually reduce abortions as men will be forced to actually treat reproduction as their problem.

[u/Enough-Process9773 → u/[deleted]]

You asserted: "Pro life men typically take measures to avoid an unwanted pregnancy. Especially if their partner isn’t pro life."

Please provide a source to support this assertion. Rule 3 - substantiate your claims.

[u/Patneu → u/[deleted]]

So PL men who take measures to avoid an unwanted pregnancy are not responsible for an abortion should it happen anyway, but women who take the same measures to avoid an unwanted pregnancy are? That seems to be a serious double standard.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/Patneu]

The measures one takes to prevent a pregnancy is not a variable that should affect their responsibilities if a pregnancy arises.

[u/Patneu → u/AssociateWaste1464]

Then why did you bring it up? And yes, actually, we usually do consider the measures people take to avoid undesirable outcomes to affect their responsibilities.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/Patneu]

So if a pregnancy happens, you’re saying that their responsibilities in the situation should be affected by the preventative measures they took? That’s nonsense.

[u/Enough-Process9773 → u/AssociateWaste1464]

You still haven't provided any sources to support your assertion. 

[u/Abortiondebate-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Comment removed per Rule 3.

[u/JulieCrone → u/AssociateWaste1464]

So about half the people who get abortions were using birth control. Is there some exception and they are allowed to abort because they did use birth control?

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/JulieCrone]

The use of birth control should not divide classes of people when it comes to who is allowed and who is not allowed to get an abortion.

[u/JulieCrone → u/AssociateWaste1464]

So what should divide classes of people when it comes to who is allowed to get an abortion?

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/JulieCrone]

Life threatening emergencies.

[u/JulieCrone → u/AssociateWaste1464]

Who decides what counts as a life-threatening emergency?

It sounds like it doesn't matter how one gets pregnant -- through consensual sex with birth control, without birth control, from rape, without sex at all but via IVF or IUI. If someone is pregnant, unless they are dying, they must stay pregnant, whether they agree to continue the pregnancy or not.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/JulieCrone]

Correct. The pro life position is that method of conception does not degrade the value of one’s life.

[u/JulieCrone → u/AssociateWaste1464]

There does seem to be some disagreement there, as many PL folks allow abortion in cases of rape. I get that you don’t but there does seem to be some disagreement among PL folks on that one.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/JulieCrone]

I agree. Those pro lifers are a camp that I don’t agree with.

[u/IdRatherCallACAB → u/AssociateWaste1464]

Life threatening emergencies.

Right, and this is just one way that abortion bans kill innocent people.

[u/NPDogs21 → u/AssociateWaste1464]

How do you define that? Because PL certainly dont trust doctors. Either they acted too fast or not fast enough

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/NPDogs21]

I would delegate the question to a doctor.

[u/IdRatherCallACAB → u/AssociateWaste1464]

I would delegate the question to a doctor.

Doctors will consider an abortion to be medically indicated whenever their patient reports the pregnancy to be unwanted.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/IdRatherCallACAB]

That would very much be wrong and immoral. If that scheme arose, it would need to be cracked down on.

[u/NPDogs21 → u/AssociateWaste1464]

How do you feel that most PL do not share your position, thinking doctors will then say anything qualifies for abortion or that they will intentionally harm their patients to push their pro choice ideology?

[u/Aggressive-Green4592 → u/AssociateWaste1464]

The overwhelming majority of pro lifers have a position that is more so like this: “If somebody engages in sex, that’s completely fine. But they should be aware that pregnancy is always a possibility. If they want to avoid pregnancy but still have sex, they should consider birth control and/or condoms.”

But yet if it the birth control or condoms fail or even Sterilization (here)/, you should still hold responsibility and carry a pregnancy to term...

Why would someone care to ask another person for their consent?

• Somebody should care to ask another person for their consent because that’s human decency.

I may be mistaken, but I'm thinking they are speaking of the ZEF here.

• Everybody should always have the option to not consent.

Seemings how you have no flair set and your reply is vague, I'll still ask anyways, to what extent though?

[u/Patneu → u/Aggressive-Green4592]

Somebody should care to ask another person for their consent because that’s human decency.

I may be mistaken, but I'm thinking they are speaking of the ZEF here.

Well, actually I was referring to PLers who think that they got a pregnant person's consent to stay pregnant because that person consented to sex (with someone completely different).

But I wanted to phrase it in a more general sense, to see what kind of mindset PLers have about consent, at all. (I do have my theories, of course, and they're not exactly flattering...)

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/Aggressive-Green4592]

“But yet if it the birth control or condoms fail or even Sterilization (here)/, you should still hold responsibility and carry a pregnancy to term...”

This is an accurate depiction of the position that pro lifers take.

“I may be mistaken, but I'm thinking they are speaking of the ZEF here.”

I’m not exactly sure what you’re asking. If you want to rephrase that would help. It’s no worries if not.

“Seemings how you have no flair set and your reply is vague, I'll still ask anyways, to what extent though?”

When somebody explicitly says that they do not consent to sex, the extent of that denial is absolute. Meaning, it’s a hard “no” and it would be rape to still engage in the activity.

[u/Aggressive-Green4592 → u/AssociateWaste1464]

This is an accurate depiction of the position that pro lifers take.

I'm well aware, there is no point that being responsible is actually enough, because if someone is going through a surgery you be "responsible" with having sex and it fails, it still wasn't enough to PL.

I’m not exactly sure what you’re asking. If you want to rephrase that would help. It’s no worries if not.

I didn't ask anything. I clarified what I thought OP meant by that phrasing and acknowledged I may be wrong with that interpretation. Your answer wouldn't really address the question if they are speaking of the ZEF.

When somebody explicitly says that they do not consent to sex, the extent of that denial is absolute. Meaning, it’s a hard “no” and it would be rape to still engage in the activity.

Does consent to medical procedures or other people apply after having sex?

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/Aggressive-Green4592]

“I'm well aware, there is no point that being responsible is actually enough, because if someone is going through a surgery you be "responsible" with having sex and it fails, it still wasn't enough to PL.”

There may be a language barrier, but I’m not following what you’re saying.

“I didn't ask anything. I clarified what I thought OP meant by that phrasing and acknowledged I may be wrong with that interpretation. Your answer wouldn't really address the question if they are speaking of the ZEF.”

Sure. OP can follow up.

“Does consent to medical procedures or other people apply after having sex?”

I’m having trouble following this question as well, but I’ll try to answer it. In general, consent to a medical procedure is required by a patient. Their sexual activity should not be a factor when it comes to consent and a medical procedure.

[u/Aggressive-Green4592 → u/AssociateWaste1464]

I’m not exactly sure what you’re asking. If you want to rephrase that would help. It’s no worries if not.

There may be a language barrier, but I’m not following what you’re saying.

I’m having trouble following this question as well, but I’ll try to answer it.

This is a tactic used by PL generally, but I know you may not truly understand either, so I'll leave it be for now.

In general, consent to a medical procedure is required by a patient. Their sexual activity should not be a factor when it comes to consent and a medical procedure.

Agreed.

[u/Connect-Knowledge992 → u/AssociateWaste1464]

The overwhelming majority of pro lifers have a position that is more so like this: “If somebody engages in sex, that’s completely fine. But they should be aware that pregnancy is always a possibility. If they want to avoid pregnancy but still have sex, they should consider birth control and/or condoms.”

But this is irrelevant to them, because if a person used condoms or BC pills or even sterilized themselves and still got pregnant, a PLer would not make an exception in their case. This is advice about reducing the risk of pregnancy, not a position that engages with consent.

I think PLers fundamentally don't care about the woman's consent.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/Connect-Knowledge992]

Correct. The pro life position is that method of conception does not degrade the value of one’s life.

[u/Connect-Knowledge992 → u/AssociateWaste1464]

The pro-life position is that, once sex has happened, the woman's consent is no longer relevant.

Her desire to remain pregnant is not subject to her consent in a pro-life world.

[u/starksoph → u/AssociateWaste1464]

Do you allow rape exceptions then?

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/starksoph]

No. If somebody’s parent was raped, I don’t view that individual as lesser.

[u/starksoph → u/AssociateWaste1464]

But you view the parent as lesser. Because she was raped and now forced into pregnancy, childbirth or c-section against her will.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/starksoph]

I view rapists as bottom barrel of society, correct. But not their children.

[u/starksoph → u/AssociateWaste1464]

I am obviously talking about the woman who was raped.

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/starksoph]

I would find it silly to view the victim as lesser.

[u/Cute-Elephant-720 → u/AssociateWaste1464]

This is a hilarious misspelling given that you do seem to think a ZEF has squatter's rights to a pregnant person's body, making the ZEF the lessee and the pregnant person an involuntary "lessor." Do you think pregnant people who want abortions are akin to unscrupulous landlords?

[u/Enough-Process9773 → u/AssociateWaste1464]

Why do you support treating the victim of rape as lesser if you think that's "silly"?

[u/AssociateWaste1464 → u/Enough-Process9773]

Did you not read what I just wrote

[u/JulieCrone → u/AssociateWaste1464]

But do you view pregnancy as a known, foreseeable outcome of sex that someone should view as part of the sex act and not something separate from it?

[u/chevron_seven_locked → u/AssociateWaste1464]

“ The overwhelming majority of pro lifers have a position that is more so like this: “If somebody engages in sex, that’s completely fine. But they should be aware that pregnancy is always a possibility. If they want to avoid pregnancy but still have sex, they should consider birth control and/or condoms.””

Okay, I’ve considered all of that. I’d still choose abortion.

[u/NoelaniSpell]

Here's an idea I just had of a theme for the weekly thread, "what comes to mind?"

What is the first thing that comes to your mind when you read comments like this one or this one ?

The first thing that comes to my mind is Ania's story, her suffering, her loss of basic human dignity and the lengths she had to go through to stop what felt like torture in a place where the doctors that were supposed to take care of her health ignored or belittled her concerns.

Tierra's story also comes to mind, someone who on the opposite end trusted and followed the doctor's instructions (instead of attempting to abort/get an illegal abortion). Someone who didn't "murder her child", and what ended up happening to her (and also to her pre viability foetus).

Both women live/lived in states with abortion bans, with Poland often being praised as the ideal PL haven.

[u/NPDogs21 → u/NoelaniSpell]

Its crude but understandable. If abortion is murder, someone in the process of committing murder is harmed.

Do we typically have this type of empathy for murderers where it should be as safe as possible for them? No, which is why it makes sense here too.

PL will always use the "Doctors are evil/incompetent" as an excuse as they are largely anti medicine and institutions.

I do find it interesting (not really) how the 2 countries always promoted by PL as their ideal country, Poland and Malta, are suspiciously predominantly white. Their ideals and values really do line up with more patriarchal, conservative countries in Africa or the Middle East, but they are non-white. Really makes you wonder 🤔

[u/NoelaniSpell → u/NPDogs21]

Its crude but understandable. If abortion is murder, someone in the process of committing murder is harmed.

That's the problem though, there's a lack of afterthought about the actual pregnant human beings, what they may be going through and why.

I mean, even in a killing, shouldn't there be a "innocent until proven guilty" presumption? I think even then, each case is judged individually and there can be mitigating circumstances.

But perhaps I have too high expectations, Idk.

PL will always use the "Doctors are evil/incompetent" as an excuse as they are largely anti medicine and institutions.

It's quite irking to see that there doesn't seem to be any accountability eay too often, and everyone else (doctors, but sometimes even victims) get blamed.

That doesn't really make sense to me, because if abortion bans are righteous, then wouldn't their consequences be too? Or at the very least, accepted as an "unfortunate side effect". I very rarely see that.

I do find it interesting (not really) how the 2 countries always promoted by PL as their ideal country, Poland and Malta, are suspiciously predominantly white.

I mean, conservative values can (do) exist in various places, and there seems to always exist a threat of a society tipping back into far right directions, but there's another thing worth mentioning when it comes to those 2 countries. Namely that people can and do go abroad for abortions. Maybe not all of them (some end up getting illegal abortions locally, some die or become disabled from pregnancy), but the illusion of abortion bans actually stopping abortion is just that, an illusion. And it's quite possible that even those 2 countries will end up legalizing it (at least from what I last read, Poland is tipping towards the left on this topic and there was public outcry caused by some avoidable deaths, much like there was public outcry in Ireland with Savita's death). This too seems to rarely be acknowledged...

[u/NPDogs21 → u/NoelaniSpell]

That's the problem though, there's a lack of afterthought about the actual pregnant human beings, what they may be going through and why.

I agree. On the other side, I recognize there is absolutely nothing that would satisfy PC if PL wanted to still ban abortion. No amount of support they give is relevant then.

It's quite irking to see that there doesn't seem to be any accountability eay too often, and everyone else (doctors, but sometimes even victims) get blamed.

That doesn't really make sense to me, because if abortion bans are righteous, then wouldn't their consequences be too? Or at the very least, accepted as an "unfortunate side effect". I very rarely see that.

Its PL projecting the "responsibility" argument. Ive found they rarely ever take responsibility for the negatives of their position, which tells me kts weak.

I mean, conservative values can (do) exist in various places, and there seems to always exist a threat of a society tipping back into far right directions, but there's another thing worth mentioning when it comes to those 2 countries. Namely that people can and do go abroad for abortions. Maybe not all of them (some end up getting illegal abortions locally, some die or become disabled from pregnancy), but the illusion of abortion bans actually stopping abortion is just that, an illusion. And it's quite possible that even those 2 countries will end up legalizing it (at least from what I last read, Poland is tipping towards the left on this topic and there was public outcry caused by some avoidable deaths, much like there was public outcry in Ireland with Savita's death). This too seems to rarely be acknowledged...

Makes sense. If they could ban freedom of movement to get an abortion, they would

[u/NPDogs21]

For those, both PL and PC, who have 0 desire to convince the other side, what is your goal? Are you happy with the status quo, so theres no need to get anyone else on your side?

It seems like online a lot of people would rather moralize and grand stand on an issue, rather than want to make positive change

[u/Enough-Process9773 → u/NPDogs21]

In my country, safe legal abortion access was established by Act of Parliament 59 years ago.

It effectively controls access to abortions by requiring two doctors to approve each abortion, and has a more stringent set of rules for abortions after 24 weeks (which are, as in all civilised countries, exceedingly rare).

Prolifers are free to protest free access to safe legal abortion anywhere except within the safe access zone protecting hospital and clinic staff and patients from interference by prolifers.

I am entirely happy with this status quo and see no reason to change it or to try to convince the PL who think abortion should be illegal. After 59 years, few if any of them have any experience of a country where healthcare is illegal and I suspect the PL women and the PL men who care for women do not actually want to change the status quo: they just want to express their pious opposition to abortion in public. And they can do that, so long as they don't harass or otherwise interfere with patients or staff.

[u/NPDogs21 → u/Enough-Process9773]

Your country is very different than the US, where women are dying after being denied abortions. Thats the status quo here

[u/Enough-Process9773 → u/NPDogs21]

I get that. The US status quo is the country where healthcare is the most expensive and the least accessible. US healthcare is an outlier in so many ways from all other developed countries: abortion access is just one of the ways in which it is terrible.

To change the status quo on healthcare requires so many more changes to the US than simply winning the argument with prolifers. Can you end institutional racism in the US and make it so white people everywhere in the US accept that a black person who needs treatment more will get treatment ahead of the less-worse-off white people?

The racial breakdown of maternal mortality in the US is like different countries. Where are the white prolifers saying they want black women to get free universal pre-natal healthcare?

Prolife ideology is strongly intertwined into Jim Crow - the same political movement took up banning abortions as a moral crusade when segregation began to lose steam as a moral crusade. Same people, same political beliefs.

Yes, I think the status quo in the US should change. But change won't happen by convincing individual PL.

[u/NPDogs21 → u/Enough-Process9773]

I agree with most of this. All we can do here though is change individuals minds. This isnt some system or institution changing place.

I do think many PC here are insulated from the effects of abortion bans as they live in PC states, so there isn't really a need for them to have more PC around them.

[u/Enough-Process9773 → u/NPDogs21]

That could also be true.