Anti Abortion Is A Game Of Let’s Pretend

The game starts out by pretending one fertilized cell is a human being. Everyone knows it has no resemblance to a human being but religion demands we pretend.

Once we pass a no abortion law, a law that one cell is a human being, it has to be enforced. Another game of let’s pretend starts. When an abortion happens, a woman has made the decision and hired a clinic to carry it out. A law against all abortions means she is now guilty of first degree murder.

However, anti abortion operatives tell us law enforcement will pretend she did not know the abortion was a murder. We are all to pretend, they say, she had no role in the abortion. By pretending all of this, anti abortion operatives can further pretend a women will not go to prison for murder if she has an abortion.

These child-like games of let’s pretend are so silly they are beyond the pale. The legal system is different than the religious system.  The religious system with its invisible gods and spirits is all about “let’s pretend.” The legal system is not.

Let’s say there was a politically power class of bank robbers we did not want to offend. To keep them from going to prison we could pretend they did not know going into a bank with guns and taking its money was against the law.

When the public comes to understand a law against abortion means prisons full of women, the let’s pretend game and anti abortion will end.

48 Responses

  1. mark anthony

    Bad logic there old chap. Bank robbers generally know full well what they are doing. Quite hard for them to plead ignorance. In the abortion business, quite the opposite. The woman may be told that it” is just a mass of cells, etc. She may not know a lot about fetal development so she believes what’s she’s told. BTW, I think that maybe deep down that you know that your one cell litany is BS.

    1. mark 6:07 The woman may be told it’s just a mass of cells.

      As I told Henry when he tried that ridiculous line with me, ONTFLMAO (on the floor laughing my ass off). She has just walked by the harassment goons that camp out next to the sidewalk where women walk to enter the clinic. The harassers tell the woman ” You are murdering you baby.” If she doesn’t hear them she sees their signs. They are shouting prayers about babies.

      Honestly, I didn’t think you would be playing “let’s pretend.”

  2. Brandon

    This is the worst agrument I have ever heard. There is no pretending, stoping a beating human heart is murder, no matter which way you try and make it sound. Kinda like 2+2 will always equal 4.

    1. Bradon 7:08 stoping a beating human heart is murder..

      Whoops, forgot about that pretend. The National Right to Life says it is at the moment of the fertilized cell. If you’d like to pretend it is the heart beat thingy that is popular just now do so. I’ve heard it is when the fingers can be counted.

      If preference is for the beating heart the result is the same. Women will be sent to prison for murder. To pretending otherwise is what the anti abortion political operatives do.

  3. Catcher

    Jon; You really should study the timelines and sequences which happen at the instant the sperm cell penetrates the egg cell. Your foolish use of a “one fertilized cell” is dishonest at best.

    We’ve covered this before, yet you persist, without a rebuttal.

    1. Catcher 7:16 Your foolish use of a one fertilized cell i dishonest at best

      What is wrong with you? I have explained over and over and over and over it is the Catholic position that the human being begins at the fertilized cell. I am referring to the Catholic position and that of the National Right to Life Association. Please explain how I am not representing their position correctly. If you cannot, stop bringing it up.

      https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/a-person-from-the-moment-of-conception

      1. BONNIE

        Yes, it absolutely is the Catholic teaching that life begins with the fertilized cell. The problem that Catcher is having with your argument is that the “one fertilize fertilized cell” only exists for 24 hours. By the time a woman gets a positive pregnancy test, that “one cell” is now hundreds of cells, growing and differentiating. By the time she has her abortion appointments, that “one cell” has developed hands, feet, a head, a beating heart.

        1. Bonnie 7:14 Thanks for posting. I understand Catcher’s issue. It has nothing to do with the issue at hand which is, as you state, Catholic belief is that one fertilized cell is a human being.

          The issue I’m trying to get anti abortion people to address is what is their solution to the thousands of illegal abortions that will occur after it is illegal. I’ve been trying here for a couple of days to get someone to give me a solution. The only final result I know of is that thousands and thousands of women will go to prison.

          If abortions were cut in half by an abortion prohibition law that would mean about 300,000 abortions and 300,000 women candidates for prison. I’m wondering if you have any solution.

  4. dean

    For the anti-choice crowd, life begins at conception and ends at birth. Those same people don’t seem to care at all about people who are already living. They cheer as we bomb the hell out of some third world country or deny food to disadvantaged people. Is there a pattern to their hypocrisy?

    1. Jinx II

      You hit the nail on the head Dean! Lets not forget that a number of anti-choicers also promote the Death Penalty, go figure.

  5. Vince

    So what you are saying then is that when a young couple takes a pregnancy test and the result is positive they should wait to celebrate until the non human child is born and receives a legal certificate of live birth and becomes an officially recognized member of the human race?

  6. Catcher

    Jon; I’m forced to used Google Chrome instead of Explorer as navigation is almost impossible here. You have an incoming there with my original e-mail address, so you may have to personally approve it, as before.

    1. Pure evil

      This post from Josh came in a couple of days ago and I tossed in the trash. But, today I fished it out. I put it up because it summarizes in two words the dilemma of anti abortionism. What if the fate of women who have illegal abortions is brought up, like I am doing here? “Pure evil.” It will bring down the entire anti abortion industry. There are millions of people giving money and many thousands employed around saving the fetus. Bringing up the prospect of women in prison brings it all down.

  7. Joe

    I’ve always wondered if proabortionists who defend abortion by saying it’s my body I have a right to do what I want to it so if I want to have an abortion that is OK; if they also support and defend suicide with the same thinking, it is my body I can do what I want with it; if someone is proabortion/choice does that make them prosuicide/choice? I should have a right to commit suicide and nothing is wrong with that because it is my body so my choice. I hope that is not how people think, but have always wondered that.

    1. mark anthony

      Most certainly, the pro-suicide, pro-euthanasia movement flows directly from the philosophy that undergirds the pro-abortion mentality. An atomistic and radical personal autonomy, utilitarian avoidance of pain and suffering at all costs, population control, a self-referenced and a relativistic morality coupled with a utopian worldview. These people really see the world thru an ideological lens which combines views such as these. So nothing much one can do to change their minds. But you can annoy them.

      1. mark — I trashed your response to my invitation to engage in a discussion of what to do about women who have illegal abortions after a no abortion law is passed. You made no effort to address the issue. Then, you made a statement the Catholic theological position dogma which maintains a human being is present in one fertilized cell is based on evidence. You gave no evidence. Please don’t make statements about evidence if you have none.

        1. mark anthony

          As I told you, I commented on only one aspect of your post, namely your penchant for inverted thinking. Guess you didn’t want to touch that issue. As to women in prison, I think that is just a club that you use to beat up people who disagree with you. In formal logic it’s called the ad baculum fallacy.

          1. mark 9:39 I didn’t comment on inverted thinking because I don’t understand what you mean. I did look up “ad baculum fallacy” and my pointing out the consequences of women being accused of murder and put in prison does not apply to this term.

            Making women guilty of murder for have abortions has been in legislation in, as I recall, two states. In neither case did it pass. President Trump mentioned offhandedly that women should pay some consequences for abortions. He was quickly told he could not say that and walked it back.

            I admit making women guilty of murder is not part of bills to outlaw abortion. When I bring this up here I expect posters to come up with good reasons why it cannot happen after abortion is outlawed. The only response so far is it will not happen because men understand that an abortion is taking a human life but women do not. Therefore, women are not guilty. Hmmm. I think the majority of abortion doctors are women. They cannot be charged with murder either.

            The idea of charging women with murder is floating around out there. Because it has been brought up before in governmental bodies I am confident it will be brought up again. Instead of being legislated it could be introduced by the courts. It might be argued that two kinds of 1st degree murder must be treated equally under the law. Anti abortion political operatives are trying to keep is under wraps until they have some success in banning abortions.

            Anti abortion people enjoy playing in a make believe world of let’s pretend. You are one of them.

          2. mark anthony

            Come, come now. How many women were cast into prison when abortion was illegal? If anyone would go to prison it should be the abortionist: he or she pulled the trigger so to speak. Moreover, all your speculation rests on the assumption that abortion would become a capital crime if and only if abortion were illegal once again, something not likely to happen anytime soon (or maybe only after 20 weeks only). As to guilt, any human being should feel some guilt after doing something egregiously wrong. hope this transmits.

          3. mark anthony

            tried to explain inverted reasoning: ineligible security token ate the post. So again. Inverted reasoning (at least in my definition) occurs when causal relationships are said to flow in one direction when, in fact, they flow in the opposite direction As in A causes B, when, in fact, B causes A. When the RCC opposes abortion not because R makes A wrong but because A is wrong and R responds to A. PS, AV RIP

      2. Joe

        If that is true and that is their way of thinking I wonder why they don’t stand up for the hundreds/thousands of teens and adults who commit suicide daily by saying that it is totally fine, no one should grieve or be upset about them committing suicide because it is their body and their choice.

        1. mark anthony

          damn good question. the Death With Dignity folks have established a principle, Why not follow thru as they have done in several European countries.

  8. Jon’s list of abortion beliefs.

    1. Abortion should be legal up until birth at the sole discretion of the pregnant woman for any reason or no reason at all.

    2. Babies don’t become babies until they have been extracted from the womb. Prior to that, they are “products of conception’ or a single fertilized human egg.

    3. Abortion is not killing because there is nothing alive to kill. Therefore, it surely can’t be murder.

    4. Personhood is a religious dogma. Therefore, the State can decide who is a person at any stage of life. Life is not an inalienable right and certainly not from God.

    5. Anyone who believes abortion is not alright does so only on religious grounds, i.e. science is irrelevant.

    6. Men are irrelevant in the abortion debate unless they are in favor of abortion.

    7. Science knows nothing of when a human heartbeat starts in the womb, when pain is felt in the womb, when unique DNA is present in the womb (unique from the mother or father (sorry those 2 words just slipped)).

    8. The fact that Down’s Syndrome children are extremely rare is just coincidence and has nothing to do with pre-natal testing and abortion.

    9. Planned Parenthood is not a racist, money-hungry killing machine.

  9. Kae Wagner

    I find it very interesting that this debate is being conducted only between men who honestly have no dog in this fight. Women live with the consequences of carrying a fetus to term. Not men. When men are held responsible and shamed according to their decision, they can certainly be a part of the discussion. When society can debate what the males of the species do with their sperm and genitalia, such as when they can have themselves sterilized, then men can be part of the discussion. Pregnancy is not physically hard on the father. Not in the least. When all men take full responsibility for a pregnancy, birth, and raising of a child, then they can have a say in what a woman does with her body. Until men realize that this debate is not a man’s issue, no good can come from men debating it. It is simply mental masturbation for all of you until you can stand up and take the punishment, ridicule, and shame a 16yo girl takes when she discovers she is pregnant. No one blames the boy. It is nearly always the girl’s fault for not keeping her legs closed.

    As a woman, I am sick to death of men telling me what I can and cannot do with my uterus. Talk to women who decide before the age of 40 that they would prefer to choose a surgical solution when it comes to birth control. Doctors do not believe women are capable of deciding to have themselves sterilized before the age of 40. If men don’t believe when can make this decision for themselves, how can they believe we are capable of raising a child? I believe in a woman’s right to choose. I believe in a person’s right to die with dignity. I believe in the death penalty. But, most importantly, I believe no one can make a choice for someone else’s life. I believe it is my responsibility to support other people and the choice’s they make for their own life. Who am I to think I know the right answer for everyone?

    Who do you think you are for thinking your beliefs are the only beliefs that matter in this world?

  10. FargoRedd

    I’m actually begrudgingly “pro-choice” (for reasons I won’t go into here) . . . But, as a Catholic, I can state this articke’s view/understanding understanding of abortion and the concern regarding the sanctity and sacredness of human life – is an extreme misunderstanding. I would suggest the “Freethinkers” do some basic research on Church’s position, how it came to be, Catholic philosophy, etc . . . Real research – not repeating the tired, usually untrue, lazy mantras of “religion has killed more people than any other institution” or “the New Testament is just a reliving and incorporation of other Pagan religions”, etc. etc.

    1. FargoRedd 7:05 But, as a Catholic, I can state the article’s view/understanding of abortion and the concern regarding the sanctity and sacredness of human life–is an extreme misunderstanding.

      Thanks for your writing. I don’t understand how the blog misstates the Catholic view of “the sanctity and sacredness of human life.” I recognize that to be its religious view. And, that’s the point, it is a religious view that anti abortion people want to put into our laws. I have no objection to people following whatever their religious they might hold. I do object when those views are put into law so everyone is required to follow them.

  11. Catcher

    @ 9;43; It is a centuries old yet forgotten fact that the news paper editor controls content, or the outcome of content. Many are the times have I seen good solid discussions stifled, even shut down because the editor disagrees with the contributors to his column. Reducing that section of the paper to nothing more than a billboard for the publisher’s favorite slant.
    Such is the case today..

    1. Catcher 7:09 Reducing that section of the paper to nothing more than a billboard for the publisher’s slant.

      My goal is to keep this back page discussion moving along in a way that speed readers can look over quickly and follow. I use the term “one fertilized cell” because it encapsulates the anti abortion political phrase “moment of conception”. As you correctly point out, by the time what we would normally consider fertilization complete there is more than one cell. Also, there is not a “moment of conception”, it takes place over a period of time. I am taking down your lectures on this because they have nothing to do with argument. The argument is the same whether I say “one cell” or “a tiny number of cells which can only be seen with a microscope.” Neither is a human being. I’ll say it slowly. Neither one cell nor several cells which can only be seen under a microscope are human beings.

      1. Vince

        Jon, thanks for taking the time to put this board out there, even if I don’t agree with you on most every point you try to make, but I have to agree with you on this. If comments become too long, people tend to lose interest quickly. No disrespect to you catcher but maybe this an opportunity for you to start your own blog.

        On your conception point I disagree with you again, no surprise. It is no secret to me what is inside a Mother’s womb when she is pregnant. I would be the one pretending if I said it was something other than what it is.

        1. Vince 9:26 On your conception point I disagree with you again, no surprise. It is no secret to me what is inside the Mother’s womb..I would be pretending if I said it was something other than what it is.

          Good post. That gets to the crux of the issue. What is inside the womb of a pregnant woman is in competition with the woman in some circumstances. The majority of women who get abortions already are rising children. Probably the woman sees what is in her womb as competition for her children. If those who oppose abortion would get off the high horses and start trying to resolve this competition we might get somewhere. They refuse to acknowledge the dilemma and, further, refuse to deal with what I think is a certainty women will go to prison for murder if no abortions are legal.

          From what we know, the number or percentage of pregnancies when abortion is illegal is about the same as when they are legal. So to pretend abortions will go away if there is a law against them is, as I pointed out in the blog, playing let’s pretend.

          Let’s think out of the box. If every woman who was about to walk into an abortion clinic was offered $100,000 if she gave birth instead would many keep on walking?? Perhaps none would. The clinic would go broke.

          But, you will not see anti abortion people buy into this because their agenda is bigger. It is controlling women. And, stopping “sin”. If every woman was given $100,000 they would have more sex, and sex is sin.

          1. mark anthony

            Jon, one thing that I must say: it’s a pity that you can’t get behind/beyond your ideology, your inverted thinking, your ingrained biases. Look at your views from another perspective. Maybe sit down and talk at length to an intelligent, informed pro-life leader.

          2. mark 10:52 Maybe sit down and talk at length to an intelligent pro-life leader.

            Good idea. We could start a productive discussion like that right here. Let’s start with what we know about abortion and the law:
            Abortions continue even when they are not legal

            This being the case our discussion must focus on what happens when illegal abortions take place. What you refer to as “an intelligent pro-life leader” would want to talk about this. Why not you, an intelligent person. I’ll let you start. (Or, any of the other anti abortion people can start. If there is no discussion, there has been none so far, I have to assume I am correct, anti abortion people have no solution.)

          3. Vince

            Jon 9:54 am To say it comes down to someone wanting to control someone else’s behavior because they believe sex is a sin is oversimplifying the issue. Pro-life people I know actually care about women and men as well as the unborn. They contribute to clinics that offer alternatives to women other than abortion. And contrary to what you might think, there are atheists that are pro-life as well.

            Unfortunately these discussions seem to go off the rails fast and people really need to take time to discuss these issues with a little more respect for one another. That seems to be a problem whenever divisive topics are discussed. So again, thanks for taking the time to get people together even if it gets a little silly. I actually learned some things I hadn’t considered before.

          4. Vince 10:23 Thanks for the post. My hangup is that anti abortion folks just cannot get themselves to think about the implications for women. I think lawmakers in DC have thought about it but there is no talk about it. It is simply that there will be abortions after an anti abortion law is passed. It is widely thought the number of abortions before Roe was about the same as after Roe. But, let’s say the number was cut in half. That would leave 300,000 women sentenced to prison. It is so frustrating no anti abortion people will discuss this.

        2. Catcher

          @ 9;26; Re. “conception point”, I said nothing about conception.
          As for the remainder, I will now be silent, as Jon prohibits a reasoned response.

    2. Rob

      @Catcher- isn’t it funny how he won’t allow what you post, calling it too long for his “speed readers” and calling it a ‘lecture’, because he doesn’t agree with you. While at the same time he compliments another poster on her quite long “essay”, because he agrees with her. Calling this site “freethinking” is first rate comedy.

    1. Jill 8:26 Is there ever a time in you free thinking when abortion is wrong?

      I don’t have an opinion on when abortion is wrong. That decision is not mine to make because I’m a male. I believe women are very capable of making that decision after consulting with doctors and others.

      I do have an opinion on a law making all abortions not legal. This will inevitably result in thousands of women going to prison and will not, as the blog explains, reduce the number of abortions.

      1. To blog readers, I hope these comments are showing up on your page. On the admin page there is a little sign that says “Awaiting spam check.” It’s ever on my own posts. I’ve never seen it before and don’t know what it means.

        What is left of Area Voices might be going downhill just a bit. I hope it hangs on. 🙂

Leave a Reply