E.g. abortion rights, anti-LGBTQ, contempt for atheism, Christian nationalism, etc.

  • Throwaway@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Let’s replace some words. I think that abortion is murder. So it becomes:

    “Banning murder doesn’t stop murder”

    Do you see the point I’m trying to make?

    • enki@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You can equate the two, but they’re not functionally the same in reality. There is statistical evidence that banning abortion does not work and in fact has the opposite effect, so swapping the words makes no sense. A better comparison would be Prohibition in the US in the 1920s - banning alcohol didn’t stop the production or use of it, it just made it exceedingly dangerous, lots of people got sick, went blind, and died from homemade liquor that contained too much methanol.

      If you truly care about the life of the child at conception and after its birth, you’d choose the option where there is never an unwanted or accidental pregnancy. Most unwanted pregnancies result in children suffering abuse, entering the foster system, and eventually aging out without ever having a permanent or stable family. Many of these kids live a life where they’ve NEVER been loved.

      There are nearly 400,000 children in the foster system in the US right now and the number grows every day. There’s no one to adopt these babies. Forcing women to have children does not work. No child should ever be unwanted, every child deserves loving parents. This is the world that abortion bans create.

      Nobody is pro-abortion. Nobody likes or wants women to have abortions, especially the women getting the procedure…it is NOT pleasant. Pro-choice supporters would be thrilled if there’s never another abortion again, as long there were no unwanted pregnancies.

      The best, statistically proven method to prevent abortions is education and easy access to contraception. Full stop.

      • Aa!@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        The point behind this is that your argument boils down to essentially “people still break laws, so why have laws?” That is a poor argument that isn’t going to convince anybody who believes that abortion is murder. Particularly if you are saying that the “murderers” in this case are just putting themselves at risk.

        I say this as someone who agrees with you, that the best way reduce the number of abortions is to provide better sex education and access to birth control.

        My mother has been an anti abortion activist for as long as I can remember, so I’m familiar with the thought process.

        • enki@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          We have laws that regulate abortion, alcohol, etc already. I said nothing about “why have laws?” in any part of my argument. I said banning abortion will not reduce abortions, much less stop them. That statement is a proven fact.

          You and others seem to be applying my belief that abortion should not be illegal to all other laws, which is not the case. That is my opinion on a singular issue. I never stated nor implied other laws shouldn’t exist.

          • Aa!@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You’re still missing the point.

            When a person sees abortion as murder, the view of abortion laws is the same as those of murder. If you say “making murder illegal doesn’t reduce the number of murders” anyone with any sort of a moral center will say “I don’t care, murder should still be illegal.” And that’s the perspective will not be changed no matter what the murder rates are. That’s how the argument gets reduced to “Why have laws?” To them, it’s basically saying “It doesn’t help enough, so why even draw that line at all?”

            That said, let’s look at your proven fact for a moment. I don’t believe the data will help, because when you narrow the focus to the US, and look at reaction to legal changes, you see a very clear drastic rise in abortions in the 70’s, which didn’t begin to fall until the 90’s, and it fell at a much slower rate, and is still higher than it was in the 70s. ( source )

            Which makes logical sense, if you increase access to the service, of course more people will be able to use it. At the same time, since Roe vs. Wade was repealed, there have already been multiple news stories showing that the strict abortion laws did prevent some (often medically necessary life-saving) abortions.

            You may say these numbers aren’t statistically significant, but to a person who sees abortion as murder, preventing even one is better than not preventing it.

            Anyway, all of this misses the major point of the abortion rights side to begin with. Which is that sometimes abortions are medically necessary and that should be between you and your doctor to decide when that is.

            I want to say that the most effective argument is to show just how drastically the abortion rates fell in the areas where they increased access to birth control and sex education. However, when I showed my mother, she responded with a Youtube video that tells me how Planned Parenthood eats babies.

            • enki@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              You’re missing the point. If you conflate abortion and murder, you’re either being willfully ignorant or exceedingly simple. Just because some people equate two things, doesn’t make them the same in reality. Whether you like it or not they are different, and applying the same standards to them makes no sense.

              Your argument is like saying “Advil and heroin are both pain relieving drugs, so the law should apply equally.” They are not the same, and we should not treat them the same, even if some people mistakenly equate them.

              • Aa!@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I completely agree. This is a much better argument to make. For example, I generally concede that abortion = killing, but not murder. In the same way that killing a person is justified (for example, self-defense applies here), sometimes it’s justified to have an abortion, even if that is killing a baby. And because it involves such personal, sometimes traumatic territory, that should be between you and your doctor only.

                But that’s a different argument than what you began with.

    • Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      More like banning any medical procedures during pregnancy will force people to get then somewhere else. Also killing someone who is using our body without your consent is self defense.

    • Eldritch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Aborting a non viable pregnancy isn’t and never will be murder. In fact, stopping women with non-viable pregnancies from getting an abortion often can be murder itself. Therefore abortion != murder

    • money_loo@1337lemmy.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I see you lack basic understanding in science and human development, and it’s unfortunately infected your opinions, feelings, and thoughts on the matter to the point you’re too far gone down the rabbit hole to ever come back to reality.

      Good luck down there!