To ask about anti-abortionists in the US

[MaiaRindell]

There's lots in the press just now about the nominee of Brett Kavanaugh to the US supreme court. He's a conservative, and it's feared he could vote against abortion rights in the US, which could lead to the Wade v Roe ruling being overturned.
So AIBU to ask why abortions are objected to?

The US constitution separates church and state, so assuming the grounds are non-religious and that abortions are medically safe, what are the objections?
I'm genuinely curious. I believe that the only person entitled to an opinion is the woman making a choice.

Ah come on, this one is easy surely. I'm pro choice, but it's not hard for me to see that some people believe abortion is killing - whether that be a life or a potential life.

I don't think they're right, but I do see why they are upset by it.

They believe it's murder, obvs.

It's possible to be pro-life for irreligious reasons. They're highly correlated, but can be logically separated. Separation of church and state is irrelevant.

America has a very religious section of society, with conservative values that reach terrifying levels. They are pro-life, consider abortion to be murder and many believe that the Roe vs Wade judgement has no constitutional justification. Ironically, some of these anti-abortionists will kill to support their view (one who was subsequently executed believed that he was carrying out God's holy work - nope, you're just a domestic terrorist!).

There are very real concerns that if the political balance of the Supreme court tilt towards conservative Republican (note, not all republicans are this bad) that abortion could become much tougher to access. What astounds me is that many of the very conservative, highly religious Republicans who consider abortion to be murder, seem to lose their memory of 'thou shalt not kill' when supporting the death penalty...Huh?

Northern Ireland has stricter abortion laws than the US.

There is an extraordinary chapter in a book- I think it might be Freakononics- where economists have made a direct link between abortion being made more accessible and a decrease in crime levels 20 years later. I don’t know what to make of that, but that is another discussion.

I think that there is a seam of US society that doesn’t think women ought to have this degree of agency over their own bodies - using religion is a bit of an excuse for these people, I think.

There is an extraordinary chapter in a book- I think it might be Freakononics- where economists have made a direct link between abortion being made more accessible and a decrease in crime levels 20 years later. I don’t know what to make of that, but that is another discussion.

Yep, Freakonomics.

I think that there is a seam of US society that doesn’t think women ought to have this degree of agency over their own bodies - using religion is a bit of an excuse for these people, I think.

See also, Northern Ireland. It’s not just in the US, folks. There are plenty of misogynists everywhere including gasp London. Don’t you need 2 doctors to sign off on abortion here? No need to clutch your pearls at what’s happening in other countries when it’s already happening in your own.

There is a perfectly reasonable argument against abortion, it shouldn't be hard to understand it whether you agree with it or not.

I have seen abortion described from a feminist perspective as the male choice - a 'quick solution' to sexual permissiveness which largely benefits men, performed at the expense of women and babies. Another argument i don't agree with but it exists.

Remember as well that the different states have very different laws and provision for women.

A factor is the increase in Catholic hospitals in some areas - buying up non Catholic hospitals and creating bigger networks where provision of abortion is harder and harder to obtain.

The anti-abortionist in the USA are bloody hypocrites. All about the foetus but don't give a fuck after birth, the treatment of children/babies in detention centres proves that.

The anti-abortion movement in the US is pretty regional too. Mostly southern/conservatives states. What Roe says is that states can't ban abortions as it is a constitutional right (privacy) - but many states (texas/missouri etc) try to put as many restrictions in place as they can get away with. Abortion will always be freely available in states like Massachusetts and New York even if Roe is overturned.

It is more likely that the new SC will chip away at availability of abortions - upholding lower court rulings on states rules about ultrasounds/latest date/medical facilities - rather than "the rifle shot" approach of absolutely overturning it. Roberts is strong on precedent.

I find the catholic church's stance on abortion at least makes sense - they also vehemently oppose the death penalty. Many conservative catholics don't seem to feel as strongly, if at all, about the death penalty. And the conservative envagelical churches certainly don't.

You haven't returned to the thread, OP.

Do you really not understand why anyone would have a problem with abortion - like, you really don't have a notion? I'm genuinely curious.

I think those in favour of the death penalty (I'm not) see it as a deterrent to those who may murder in the future. So it is upholding the 'do not murder' command, IFSYIM. Something that is regrettable but necessary to strongly discourage murder.

I can understand why they don't equate the life of a murderer with the life of an innocent baby.

What's more interesting about Trump's pick of Kavanaugh is not that he's anti abortion (they're ten a penny in the US) but that he's on record as saying sitting presidents should have immunity from prosecution.

That's the real reason he's Trump's pick.

Of course I understand that some people believe it's murder!

What I don't understand is why, even for potential fatal foetal abnormalities, rape or incest, do people feel so passionately that it's wrong, why a woman forced to go through with a pregnancy and birth she doesn't want doesn't get a say, why any man anywhere feels he has a right to an opinion on this and why a foetus/embryo which must remain in the womb to survive counts as a life.

I think thewernethwife sums up lots of things wrong with the situation too.

Not just immunity from prosecution; immunity from investigation.

Nice, huh?

Absolutely Fermats NPR is having a discussion right now and this is their focus.

What I don't understand is why, even for potential fatal foetal abnormalities, rape or incest, do people feel so passionately that it's wrong

Because they believe it's a baby.

The rape exception has never made any sense to me for this reason.

Asking why abortions are objected to in circumstances such as incest, rape and murder is very different from simply asking why they're objected to, isn't it?

I think you'd find that many people who strongly object to abortion as a form of birth control (where the moral argument rests entirely on a woman's right to choose whether or not to have a baby given she is already pregnant) would have a different opinion in the circumstances you describe (where there may well be exponentially greater suffering for both woman and baby if abortion is not available). You might think that's a bit hypocritical - to say abortion isn't acceptable because it's murder in one breath, only to say there are circumstances in which it is acceptable the next. But that problem exists on both sides of the argument - many people in favour of access to abortion would not feel it was morally right to abort a baby who could have survived outside the uterus, despite the woman's rights to her own body still existing for the full nine months of pregnancy.

Having grown up with campaigners against abortion, I don't think they are misogynists on this issue. Hypocritical yes and likely to be misogynists in other ways, yes. In these cultures, pregnancy is seen as a gift (of a baby) from God. For them, it is more about the sanctity of life and the importance of protecting the most vulnerable members of society. IMO, they haven't remotely earned the right to their position though since the care for orphans, disabled people and single parents is nowhere to be seen.

@kitchenrollinrollinrollin I am asking why in all circumstances.
I am curious how non-religious objections extend to the worst cirsumstances such as incest, rape and foetal abnormalities

@kitchenrollinrollinrollin I'm genuinely curious. I don't know anyone is RL who is pro-life so it's a debate I have never had. It makes no sense to me.

Growing up with hardcore catholic parents really ‘helps’ you understand the mentality. I understand it and I hate it. Religion has warped the views of some while others to me in terms of being anti abortion would simply be misogynistic. I get it, they think it’s murder because the fairy in the sky granted them the gift of a baby but don’t impose that shit on anyone else.

When I read The Handmaiden’s tale the draconian laws and treatment of women reminded me so much of NI (home), albeit extreme incredibly so. There is such a culture here of how women should be and act, it’s sickening. My grandmother was told by a priest when she was young that if she took a contraceptive she would be going to Hell, this woman had 5 children with only a year between each. She was exhausted but felt like it was her duty to have children. My aunts an uncles were raised to believe that abortion is killing a ‘baby’ and not a ‘foetus’. 🙄

OP, the non-religious argument is very interesting but I don't know why they extend it to all circumstances - I haven't met anyone who would do that.