Monday, April 12, 2010

The Ultimate Failure of Abortion Arguments

I don't spend much time arguing with trolls or other liberals anymore about issues like abortion because it's fairly obvious what their opinions are and that they aren't willing to be persuaded by logic. Take this post which gives the tired old argument that by wanting to get rid of abortion, pro-lifers are actually encouraging abortion.

The argument goes that being against killing babies legally means that you don't mind killing babies illegally because everybody's going to have sex anyway (since they can't control themselves) and that's going to mean pregnancy.

Now, it's true that sex leads to pregnancy (even though people like Amanda Marcotte argue that it doesn't), even though every individual sex act doesn't result in a pregnancy. The idea that, somehow, sex is simply for fun is nonsense, and anyone who approaches intercourse without considering the consequences of the act probably shouldn't be doin' the dirty anyway. If you know you have to drive home and you decide to go on a bender at the bar, you're responsible for the wrecks you may have on the way home. The fact that you don't always have one while driving drunk doesn't make it in any way less your fault when it does occur.

Because the consequences of having sex can be both dire (AIDS) and long-lasting (raising children), it's simply moronic to argue that it's "unfair" that women bear the burden of sex's consequences. Regardless of whether it is "fair," women are, indeed, the ones who become pregnant, which is why they have to be more concerned about whom they have sex with and when.

When pro-lifers argue that they want to end abortion on demand, it's not because they want more abortions (illegally). It's because killing babies en utero is still killing and having the sanction of the state to do it doesn't make it the morally right thing to do.

I don't think Roe v. Wade will be overturned simply because the Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision made it clear that the Supreme Court considered this beastly procedure to be a fundamental right (although, with the changing makeup of the court, I could be wrong). But even if the SCOTUS overturned Roe, it would simply leave the decision about legalizing abortion up to the individual states. If California and New York want to be the abortion capitals of the United States, I'm ok with that. But if Utah and Texas don't want to support women's right to kill babies up to birth, that's ok, too.

For the pro-aborts, however, such democracy must be fought any way possible, which is why they argue hard cases (such as rape), as if those are the only times women get abortions.