Opposition to abortion doesn't necessarily make someone a bigot.

[AsariCommando]

Posted this as a CMV on Reddit and nobody's presented a strong enough argument to counter it yet, at least in my eyes, so here goes nothing. I'm pretty pro-choice and recognize that access to abortion is better than the alternative from a personal liberty perspective, from a societal perspective and from a healthcare (of the mother) perspective.

With that being said, I think that the progressive left is wrong to assume that anyone who disagrees with them on this, including other women, are bigots or that they hate women. In a way it's in the progressive left's best interest to accuse any detractors of being bigoted misogynists, because it helps them control the national dialogue and shut down their opponents, rather than engaging in debate and dialogue. It's an effective, albeit nefarious means of berating and defeating one's opposition.

However, from a societal perspective, I think it would be best if pro-choice argued the merits of our position, instead of shouting down our opponents as terrible human beings. And I would go a step further argue that opposition to abortion doesn't necessarily make someone a terrible human being.

A few years ago I probably would have told you that these people were all just bigots. And while some of them probably do hold negative views of women, I don't think that's a fair representation of their beliefs. A couple of semesters ago I met a few conservative Christians who held some pretty strong 'pro-life' views. And while we never agreed on such topics, I don't think they were coming from a place of hatred or bigotry.

The most vocal member of the group was a female engineering student who was probably far better equipped to succeed in the workforce than the vast majority of people, regardless of gender. And these were the type of people who wouldn't stand for someone they associate with expressing bigoted or hateful views of women or minorities; they even worked with the Muslim club on campus. Most of them seem to legitimately believe that life begins at conception and aren't just trying to oppress women.

In closing, while I realize my experience is anecdotal, I think it speaks to a broader point. A point that opposition to abortion doesn't automatically make someone a bigot or a terrible person, it just makes them misguided. It would be best to argue why their ideas are wrong, rather than to demonize them.

[Celista]

I don't know many people who think that being pro-life is necessarily anti-woman 100% of the time. Most people I know who are pro-life are religious and base their pro-life views on their belief that life begins at conception.

I think it *is* anti-woman and anti-children when people refuse to acknowledge that the negative consequences for making abortion illegal far outweighs the loss of life from abortion. Unwanted children are oftentimes neglected or abused, and end up wards of the state. We have thousands of children in foster homes or group homes because they have not yet been adopted; some of them might not ever be because of their physical/intellectual disabilities and/or behavioral problems due to abuse or neglect. Early neglect or abuse can screw a child up in ways that can last a lifetime; watch some videos on neglected children in orphanages and some of the odd behavior that they exhibit.

I am understanding of people who believe that abortion is morally wrong but I can't condone those who are actively working towards removing the right to choose. Luckily the Supreme Court agrees and Texas' movement at the state level to restrict abortion access has been decimated due to federal ruling.

[AsariCommando]

I am understanding of people who believe that abortion is morally wrong but I can't condone those who are actively working towards removing the right to choose.

This is more or less my position as well.

[I Push Buttons]

I am all for the right to choose, but I am also of the opinion that if you have an unwanted pregnancy and have an abortion without having used contraceptives, that you are human filth. But its still your choice, regardless of what I think of you.

[sheggaro]

I think it should be outlawed, not because I'm overly religious but because I think children are precious gifts, not burdens. And that pregnant women in distress are tricked into believing an abortion is in their best interests when in reality they'll regret it for the rest of their lives.

It's like convincing a starving man to swallow poison to sate his hunger. We need to protect women from falling for it.

And before someone calls me a sexist, there are countless women out there who agree. My wife included. As a matter of the fact she changed my mind on the issue.

[Deathcries]

I don't know many people who think that being pro-life is necessarily anti-woman 100% of the time. Most people I know who are pro-life are religious and base their pro-life views on their belief that life begins at conception.

I think it *is* anti-woman and anti-children when people refuse to acknowledge that the negative consequences for making abortion illegal far outweighs the loss of life from abortion. Unwanted children are oftentimes neglected or abused, and end up wards of the state. We have thousands of children in foster homes or group homes because they have not yet been adopted; some of them might not ever be because of their physical/intellectual disabilities and/or behavioral problems due to abuse or neglect. Early neglect or abuse can screw a child up in ways that can last a lifetime; watch some videos on neglected children in orphanages and some of the odd behavior that they exhibit.

I am understanding of people who believe that abortion is morally wrong but I can't condone those who are actively working towards removing the right to choose. Luckily the Supreme Court agrees and Texas' movement at the state level to restrict abortion access has been decimated due to federal ruling.

I'm as pro-life as they come. I don't use religious beliefs at all in any of my political socio-beliefs. I believe in science which is what I use in something that shouldn't even be in a debate.

If I stick a human zygote on the planet Mars, and a group of scientist found said zygote on Mars, what would the scientist say they found on Mars....?

Now I know people who disregard science and say "but mah rights to kill that human life..." I know. I understand. People have been killing innocent life for thousands of years and especially when said human life is a burden in their own life. Look at Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin, and others in the last century who all had burdens of human life that was in their way. People love to kill innocent people, and find ways to justify it, like I'm sure you'll do.

Trust me. You don't have to convince me that human beings love genocide.

Anyways I really don't care about rebuttals because there's nothing worth arguing about. Science is what it is. Human life is what it is. Human beings killing other human beings is been a past time that humans love to do.

[Celista]

And that pregnant women in distress are tricked into believing an abortion is in their best interests when in reality they'll regret it for the rest of their lives.

And before someone calls me a sexist, there are countless women out there who agree. My wife included. As a matter of the fact she changed my mind on the issue.

I'm sure there are women who have had abortions who feel that way, but not all of them do. Many of them feel relief, have no regrets, and/or feel as though they made the best possible decision at the time.

People who feel shame about abortion tend to do so because they are around people who make them feel that way about their decision. No one enters into the decision to have an abortion lightly (or at least, those who do are likely a very, very small minority).

[Speaknoevil]

I think it should be outlawed, not because I'm overly religious but because I think children are precious gifts, not burdens. And that pregnant women in distress are tricked into believing an abortion is in their best interests when in reality they'll regret it for the rest of their lives.

It's like convincing a starving man to swallow poison to sate his hunger. We need to protect women from falling for it.

And before someone calls me a sexist, there are countless women out there who agree. My wife included. As a matter of the fact she changed my mind on the issue.

I don't regret mine at all. Contraceptives failed and I'm so glad there was a backup solution. I hate kids, I hate caregiving. I am an academic and career oriented.

The only reason some women feel regret is because they are shamed by a huge swath of our culture into believing it is murder.

[Masark]

And before someone calls me a sexist, there are countless women out there who agree.

And anti-suffragettes existed also.

[Bushtuckrman]

Bigot is just one of many buzzwords that the far left like to hurl at people to stifle opposition. Just ignore it for the person screaming it at you is an idiot anyway.

[Endus]

I'm as pro-life as they come. I don't use religious beliefs at all in any of my political socio-beliefs. I believe in science which is what I use in something that shouldn't even be in a debate.

If I stick a human zygote on the planet Mars, and a group of scientist found said zygote on Mars, what would the scientist say they found on Mars....?

"Evidence of life, in the form of human tissue".

Not "a person".

Also a lot of questions about why you're flying zygotes to Mars.

Now I know people who disregard science and say "but mah rights to kill that human life..." I know. I understand. People have been killing innocent life for thousands of years and especially when said human life is a burden in their own life. Look at Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin, and others in the last century who all had burdens of human life that was in their way. People love to kill innocent people, and find ways to justify it, like I'm sure you'll do.

Trust me. You don't have to convince me that human beings love genocide.

See, this is where you leave science completely behind, and start in with irrational and emotional appeals. Nothing you said here is in any way based in science. A zygote at these stages is not a "human life". It isn't a person, like you or I. It's something that may develop into a person, with the right conditions and support, but so are unfertilized ova and sperm, and we certainly don't give those this treatment.

This is where you introduce an argument that, if not religious, is at the least based on nothing but emotion. That you resort to trying to imply that pro-choice people are pro-genocide just makes it clear how deeply emotional and irrational your argument here is.


There are no science-based arguments against the availability of abortion procedures. Worse, even if you could find some way to rationalize a single-cell zygote as being equivalent to a living human being, that wouldn't really change anything. At best, you'd be calling for non-destructive abortion techniques to be used, expelling the zygote/fetus otherwise unharmed, to live or die on its own. Because the right to control the use of one's own body is paramount. The same right is why you can't be forced to donate a kidney to save a life. Same argument, except there the target is indisputably a living human being whose life is forfeit unless you allow the use of your body in that way.

Plus, if you're claiming a zygote's a human being from conception, and that abortion is equivalent to "murder" (since the practice of abortion is, according to you, "genocide"), then explain to my what your opinion is on the widespread negligent homicide that is miscarriages caused by the mother's behaviour, whether she knew she was pregnant or not? Because if you're being consistent in this emotional position, those miscarriages are negligent manslaughter just as much as abortions are murder. Whether she knew she was pregnant or not; ignorance isn't a defense, under the law. Lack of intent is what downgrades the homicide from murder to manslaughter. Sure, in many cases, they may not be found culpable (many miscarriages aren't caused by anything the pregnant woman did). But some of them won't be. So why not campaign to have women who miscarry investigated to determine if they're guilty of manslaughter? That's how you can be consistent in your position.

[Stacyrect]

I'm pretty opposed to women who use abortion as a form of birth control. Aside from that being mostly pro life, I'm fine with the way abortion laws are. People do need a choice but human life does need to be respected

- - - Updated - - -

"Evidence of life, in the form of human tissue".

Not "a person".

Also a lot of questions about why you're flying zygotes to Mars.



See, this is where you leave science completely behind, and start in with irrational and emotional appeals. Nothing you said here is in any way based in science. A zygote at these stages is not a "human life". It isn't a person, like you or I. It's something that may develop into a person, with the right conditions and support, but so are unfertilized ova and sperm, and we certainly don't give those this treatment.

This is where you introduce an argument that, if not religious, is at the least based on nothing but emotion. That you resort to trying to imply that pro-choice people are pro-genocide just makes it clear how deeply emotional and irrational your argument here is.


There are no science-based arguments against the availability of abortion procedures. Worse, even if you could find some way to rationalize a single-cell zygote as being equivalent to a living human being, that wouldn't really change anything. At best, you'd be calling for non-destructive abortion techniques to be used, expelling the zygote/fetus otherwise unharmed, to live or die on its own. Because the right to control the use of one's own body is paramount. The same right is why you can't be forced to donate a kidney to save a life. Same argument, except there the target is indisputably a living human being whose life is forfeit unless you allow the use of your body in that way.

Plus, if you're claiming a zygote's a human being from conception, and that abortion is equivalent to "murder" (since the practice of abortion is, according to you, "genocide"), then explain to my what your opinion is on the widespread negligent homicide that is miscarriages caused by the mother's behaviour, whether she knew she was pregnant or not? Because if you're being consistent in this emotional position, those miscarriages are negligent manslaughter just as much as abortions are murder. Whether she knew she was pregnant or not; ignorance isn't a defense, under the law. Lack of intent is what downgrades the homicide from murder to manslaughter. Sure, in many cases, they may not be found culpable (many miscarriages aren't caused by anything the pregnant woman did). But some of them won't be. So why not campaign to have women who miscarry investigated to determine if they're guilty of manslaughter? That's how you can be consistent in your position.

You are over complicating the reproductive process

[dubious_doomhammer]

If the pro-lifers decided to care and pay for the unwanted children, there might be a debate - until then, they don't have a leg to stand on in my opinion.

[Endus]

You are over complicating the reproductive process

Not really. I'm just opposing the introduction of magical thinking.

We all agree there's a point at which a human being comes into existence. Saying you can't draw that line so you want to draw it at conception is drawing that line, at a relatively indefensible point. It's a refusal to have that discussion, when it's a discussion we have to be able to have. Getting uncomfortable about it and refusing to play ball isn't an argument, it's trying to take the ball and go home and declare victory by default.

And before anyone says they disagree with my claim that "at some point a human being comes into existence", feel free to explain how you justify that all people who will ever exist all exist today, right now, without calling on some religious concept like the human soul. That's not what we're talking about.

[s_bushido]

I think it would be best if pro-choice argued the merits of our position, instead of shouting down our opponents as terrible human beings.

Talking to the people who think women who have abortions (and/or the doctors who perform them) are committing murder? Good luck with that.

Yes, the "bigot" accusation gets thrown around too much. However, when a person is arguing that a group of people should not have control over their lives/bodies, that person doesn't get to hide behind "it's just my opinion, bro!" Especially not when combined with the "you should have just kept your legs shut, and you wouldn't be in this position, whore" implication.

[Deleted]

You are over complicating the reproductive process

No he isn't at all. A zygote isn't a human life. It doesn't have a personality or a mind. Just cause he spent 2 paragraphs explaining it, doesn't mean he's wrong.

[Theodarzna]

I don't morally like abortion but I don't feel like a ban is the right tactic to go about making a meaningful change away from the practice.

[shakiena]

I don't regret mine at all. Contraceptives failed and I'm so glad there was a backup solution. I hate kids, I hate caregiving. I am an academic and career oriented.

The only reason some women feel regret is because they are shamed by a huge swath of our culture into believing it is murder.

Yep, my sister doesn't regret her decision to abort at all either. The pill failed, she took it on time every evening. I don't trust the pill alone anymore. Believe me abortion was a last resort and is not pleasant at all but she was glad it was a option and didn't have to shelve her education at a young age.

Sick part is when the boyfriend found out she was pregnant he ran off real fast.

[CuchuCachu]

I don't know many people who think that being pro-life is necessarily anti-woman 100% of the time. Most people I know who are pro-life are religious and base their pro-life views on their belief that life begins at conception.

I think it *is* anti-woman and anti-children when people refuse to acknowledge that the negative consequences for making abortion illegal far outweighs the loss of life from abortion. Unwanted children are oftentimes neglected or abused, and end up wards of the state. We have thousands of children in foster homes or group homes because they have not yet been adopted; some of them might not ever be because of their physical/intellectual disabilities and/or behavioral problems due to abuse or neglect. Early neglect or abuse can screw a child up in ways that can last a lifetime; watch some videos on neglected children in orphanages and some of the odd behavior that they exhibit.

I am understanding of people who believe that abortion is morally wrong but I can't condone those who are actively working towards removing the right to choose. Luckily the Supreme Court agrees and Texas' movement at the state level to restrict abortion access has been decimated due to federal ruling.

I also think that the people who are most against abortion tend to be women as well, even if the majority are pro-choice.

- - - Updated - - -

Personally I think people who get abortions shouldnt have kids. And I havent been wrong yet

[Endus]

No he isn't at all. A zygote isn't a human life. It doesn't have a personality or a mind. Just cause he spent 2 paragraphs explaining it, doesn't mean he's wrong.

I don't think this is something we can use too few words on. Like here, we need to be really careful about what we mean by "a human life";

A zygote is human tissue, genetically. So are tumours, or fingernails.
It's living tissue. So is my finger, and also those tumours again.

So it's "human", and "alive", but those shouldn't be distinctions that really mean anything, legally speaking. Cutting out living human tissue in the form of a tumor or cyst isn't "genocide", right? We can agree on that, right?

That's why I use phrases like "a living human being". Because we need to make it clear we're talking about a person. Not human tissue, not that said tissue is alive, that it has become a person unto itself.

That is the line we're concerned about. I've gone back-and-forth with too many pro-choice types who say "it's human, because it's not a rutabaga, and it's alive, ergo it's a human being", and that's just incorrect. Not a matter of opinion, it's objectively false. It's an attempt to misconstrue what the words we're using mean, and conflate "human" as an adjective with the use of it as a noun.