• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Abortion Protesters Who Get Abortions

Puppycow

Penultimate Amazing
Puppycow
Joined
Jan 9, 2003
Messages
32,077
Location
Yokohama, Japan
Via LGF:

This article has an interesting fact about George Tiller.

George told me that in several instances, people who had been picketing his clinic later entered as patients - seeking abortions for themselves or their daughters, sisters, wives. The women obtained their abortions, then returned to the picket line. Apparently they found their own circumstances to be extenuating and compelling - but did not reach to imagine that every patient there had a similarly compelling story.
Click to expand...

Maybe because they didn't want to explain to their pro-life friends why they stopped coming to protests?
 
Abortion is very polarizing.

One male friend is very pro, having taken his 15yo daughter for one.

Another male friend is very anti- seems his wife needed one for a tubal pregnancy. That was her last pregnancy, after a couple daughters, his last chance for a son.

So I could see that receiving the procedure might send a person to further extreme, or even flip them to their opposite extreme.

Though I doubt if George's anecdote can be considered scientific. Or absolute- he wouldn't notice the absence of those patient/picketers who did stop picketing.
 
Last edited:
As a techicality, I am pro-choice. I prefer to say I am pro-abortion for any woman who wants one for any reason she wants it.
 
Well it does depend on the reason one gets one. If someone is getting an abortion because the pregnancy is going to give them a stroke that is different than getting one because of an inconvientient pregnancy.
 
No.

I see no difference.

The fetus is not a human being, and until it becomes one its the woman's choice.

I have often thought that Roe v Wade was decided on the wrong grounds.

The right grounds would be a ruling under the 13th amendment. Because compelling a woman to carry a fetus to term that she does not want to carry is slavery. All an evil person needs to do to control an inconvenient woman is to rape her, or have another do so, and make her pregnant and then she is compelled to carry that baby. If you are lucky, you might even kill her this way. If that is not a form of enslavement, I don't know what is.

Because to think that the fetus has any rights at all you absolutely have to invoke some sort of mystical concept of a soul. And you cannot prove that a soul exists, and we have no reason whatsoever to even entertain the notion that it does.
 
I wasn't able to read the links in the OP, so I don't know if this was addressed in the article or not, however, it seems to me that the people protesting could have only been protesting his performing late-term abortions, not all abortions. If this is the case, I see nothing hypocritical in them getting early-term abortions.

Now, if they were protesting abortions at any stage, then yes, they would be hypocrites in my opinion. I'm sure that my opinion will make them completely ashamed, and totally change their position on the matter.

Now that I've spoken, we can close the thread...
 
I think there are instances of people breaking laws but still thinking the laws should be in place all the time, like;

1. I occationally speed, but still think there should be a speed limit
2. I might jaywalk, but still think there should be jaywalking laws

Obviously, an abortion is a likely a more serious issue than these, but I can see why people might think that it should be illegal, but that they can still do it.

It is like the OP said - they find their circumstances to be more compelling than someone else. They believe they can make an informed, rational choice, while others may not be able to do so.

I don't think that people are being compassionate or rational by minimizing the reasons why other people might get an abortion, but I can sort of sympathize with their position in a way. I guess.
 
Puppycow said:
Via LGF:

This article has an interesting fact about George Tiller.

George told me that in several instances, people who had been picketing his clinic later entered as patients - seeking abortions for themselves or their daughters, sisters, wives. The women obtained their abortions, then returned to the picket line. Apparently they found their own circumstances to be extenuating and compelling - but did not reach to imagine that every patient there had a similarly compelling story.
Click to expand...

Maybe because they didn't want to explain to their pro-life friends why they stopped coming to protests?
Click to expand...
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

This is an easy claim for the reporter (or for Tiller) to make. It's an extremely difficult claim to support, without access to Tillman's medical records, or a "whistleblower" from the picket lines, or both.

Instead of speculating on all the implications that flow from the claim, if it is true, I prefer to remain skeptical until such time as credible corroborating evidence is provided.
 
Last edited:
I've had conversations on this forum with people who are staunchly against abortion - who subsequently listed reasons why they would have one (convenience being among them). Yet they turned right around in the next post and criticized others for justifying an abortion for themselves.

Cognitive dissonance is an amazing thing.
 
MattusMaximus said:
I've had conversations on this forum with people who are staunchly against abortion - who subsequently listed reasons why they would have one (convenience being among them). Yet they turned right around in the next post and criticized others for justifying an abortion for themselves.

Cognitive dissonance is an amazing thing.
Click to expand...
You know what else is an amazing thing? Linking to examples.
 
theprestige said:
You know what else is an amazing thing? Linking to examples.
Click to expand...

I'll look, but a quick search doesn't bring it up. I believe the thread was too long ago, but I'll keep searching.

Btw, try checking your 'tude at the door man.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Few abortion protestors are against people getting abortions if they are going to die with out one.
Click to expand...

Really? I'd like to hear some justification for that, because of the anti-abortion people I know, that rarely is a concession.

"Rape or incest" are the most common exemptions, and, although you hear the "mother's life in danger" caveat on occasion, it is much, much rarer.
 
BenBurch said:
I have often thought that Roe v Wade was decided on the wrong grounds.

The right grounds would be a ruling under the 13th amendment. Because compelling a woman to carry a fetus to term that she does not want to carry is slavery. All an evil person needs to do to control an inconvenient woman is to rape her, or have another do so, and make her pregnant and then she is compelled to carry that baby. If you are lucky, you might even kill her this way. If that is not a form of enslavement, I don't know what is.
Click to expand...

That's pretty compelling, to me. I'm surprised I haven't heard this argument before...

BTW, I always thought this postcard was funny:

http://www.duckboy.com/postcards.htm

See number 404.
 
ponderingturtle said:
The difference is if they are being hypocritical or not.

Few abortion protestors are against people getting abortions if they are going to die with out one.
Click to expand...

How often to these protestors actually ask the patients they are harassing about their situation? It also makes no sense, it's special-pleading their definition of "murdering a baby."
 
JimBenArm said:
I wasn't able to read the links in the OP, so I don't know if this was addressed in the article or not, however, it seems to me that the people protesting could have only been protesting his performing late-term abortions, not all abortions. If this is the case, I see nothing hypocritical in them getting early-term abortions.

Now, if they were protesting abortions at any stage, then yes, they would be hypocrites in my opinion. I'm sure that my opinion will make them completely ashamed, and totally change their position on the matter.

Now that I've spoken, we can close the thread...
Click to expand...

It's hypocritical because they were protesting that Tiller is a baby-killer and that he should be jailed or stopped. Then they turn around, and go to him for help. To me, this shows that Tiller was probably a very nice guy, to set-aside these people's hate against him and still help them out. I don't think I could do the same thing, I'd tell them to go away and find help from Bill O'Reilly.
 
thaiboxerken said:
How often to these protestors actually ask the patients they are harassing about their situation? It also makes no sense, it's special-pleading their definition of "murdering a baby."
Click to expand...

I am sure that they do not, but few people are against protecting the mothers life if not health.
 
ponderingturtle said:
I am sure that they do not, but few people are against protecting the mothers life if not health.
Click to expand...

Stats? I really doubt that the protesters care. Aren't the protesters usually made up of the most fanatic zealots? If they really thought that abortion was ok if the mother's life was in danger, why wouldn't they ask the one's they're harassing the situation? Why would they assume that late-term abortions are done for convenience? The protesters are not rational and I don't think they care about those who have abortions or give abortions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom