Calling abortion murder: Appeal to Pity/Emotion

[Talon-chan]

PBA is no where near as strong an argument as "it's murder."

"It's murder" can be reduced to "I believe it is relevantly similar to murder in some way."

"Partial Birth Abortion" serves no purpose but to invoke images of a 9 month fetus on it's way out of the v****a at which point we kill it moments before the first breath. I felt this way about it upon first hearing, before I was well learned in abortion facts (back when I was still a young teenager), and I see this misconception all the time in younger anti-abortion advocates.

"Partial Birth Abortion" can be reduced to "Dialation and Extraction" but the purpose of calling it PBA serves absolutely no purpose, there is no (and can be no) relevant similarity between the image invoked by PBA and D&E. Whereas murder can be viewed as "unjustified killing of what I believe is a human being," "D&E" can not be viewed as "killing a nearly born neonate that is minutes from birth anyway" no matter how far you stretch it.

There is no basis for saying they are similar and as such it serves no purpose but to invoke emotion. It relies on this emotion as the basis for the argument. As such it is most definately the fallacy of appealing to emotion.  

[Lord Setar]

Talon-chan

PBA is no where near as strong an argument as "it's murder."

"It's murder" can be reduced to "I believe it is relevantly similar to murder in some way."

"Partial Birth Abortion" serves no purpose but to invoke images of a 9 month fetus on it's way out of the v****a at which point we kill it moments before the first breath. I felt this way about it upon first hearing, before I was well learned in abortion facts (back when I was still a young teenager), and I see this misconception all the time in younger anti-abortion advocates.

"Partial Birth Abortion" can be reduced to "Dialation and Extraction" but the purpose of calling it PBA serves absolutely no purpose, there is no (and can be no) relevant similarity between the image invoked by PBA and D&E. Whereas murder can be viewed as "unjustified killing of what I believe is a human being," "D&E" can not be viewed as "killing a nearly born neonate that is minutes from birth anyway" no matter how far you stretch it.

There is no basis for saying they are similar and as such it serves no purpose but to invoke emotion. It relies on this emotion as the basis for the argument. As such it is most definately the fallacy of appealing to emotion.

Actually, don't many misinformed lifers say that PBA is when "the baby gets its head out then the doctor stabs it in the skull with scissors" or something akin to that? I know that most descriptions of it are far from being a medical procedure.  

[Joselle`Stark]

Lord Setar

Talon-chan

PBA is no where near as strong an argument as "it's murder."

"It's murder" can be reduced to "I believe it is relevantly similar to murder in some way."

"Partial Birth Abortion" serves no purpose but to invoke images of a 9 month fetus on it's way out of the v****a at which point we kill it moments before the first breath. I felt this way about it upon first hearing, before I was well learned in abortion facts (back when I was still a young teenager), and I see this misconception all the time in younger anti-abortion advocates.

"Partial Birth Abortion" can be reduced to "Dialation and Extraction" but the purpose of calling it PBA serves absolutely no purpose, there is no (and can be no) relevant similarity between the image invoked by PBA and D&E. Whereas murder can be viewed as "unjustified killing of what I believe is a human being," "D&E" can not be viewed as "killing a nearly born neonate that is minutes from birth anyway" no matter how far you stretch it.

There is no basis for saying they are similar and as such it serves no purpose but to invoke emotion. It relies on this emotion as the basis for the argument. As such it is most definately the fallacy of appealing to emotion.

Actually, don't many misinformed lifers say that PBA is when "the baby gets its head out then the doctor stabs it in the skull with scissors" or something akin to that? I know that most descriptions of it are far from being a medical procedure.

My freshman year of college, someone brought PBA up in an open forum that included several doctors and a pathologist -- every one of them sat there and denied that such a procedure existed. D&E wasn't mentioned. It was simply stated that "Partial Birth Abortion" did NOT exist -- some of the lifers in the audience were getting kind of antsy, because the pathologist and one of the doctors were involved with one of the Christian organizations on campus,lol Kinda signaled a major loss on their side to have someone they considered an expert to completely blow their bullshit argument away  

[PhaedraMcSpiffy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilation_and_extraction

But it IS wikipedia.  

[Talon-chan]

Lord Setar

Talon-chan

PBA is no where near as strong an argument as "it's murder."

"It's murder" can be reduced to "I believe it is relevantly similar to murder in some way."

"Partial Birth Abortion" serves no purpose but to invoke images of a 9 month fetus on it's way out of the v****a at which point we kill it moments before the first breath. I felt this way about it upon first hearing, before I was well learned in abortion facts (back when I was still a young teenager), and I see this misconception all the time in younger anti-abortion advocates.

"Partial Birth Abortion" can be reduced to "Dialation and Extraction" but the purpose of calling it PBA serves absolutely no purpose, there is no (and can be no) relevant similarity between the image invoked by PBA and D&E. Whereas murder can be viewed as "unjustified killing of what I believe is a human being," "D&E" can not be viewed as "killing a nearly born neonate that is minutes from birth anyway" no matter how far you stretch it.

There is no basis for saying they are similar and as such it serves no purpose but to invoke emotion. It relies on this emotion as the basis for the argument. As such it is most definately the fallacy of appealing to emotion.

Actually, don't many misinformed lifers say that PBA is when "the baby gets its head out then the doctor stabs it in the skull with scissors" or something akin to that? I know that most descriptions of it are far from being a medical procedure.

I was intentionally vague with the method by which it is killed "moments before the first breath" because I have heard so many things. When I was much younger and thought it happened this way I had no idea how they killed it as it was coming down the v****a, just that they did kill it before it was out. Some say Scissors, some say a salt solution, some say sucking the brains out and crushing the skull... all that really matters is that they are under the misconception that a perfectly healthy pregnancy is about a minute away from its natural end and then they kill it.

Quote:

My freshman year of college, someone brought PBA up in an open forum that included several doctors and a pathologist -- every one of them sat there and denied that such a procedure existed. D&E wasn't mentioned. It was simply stated that "Partial Birth Abortion" did NOT exist -- some of the lifers in the audience were getting kind of antsy, because the pathologist and one of the doctors were involved with one of the Christian organizations on campus,lol Kinda signaled a major loss on their side to have someone they considered an expert to completely blow their bullshit argument away

It's a shame that these same people, though they were told it no longer exists and have been shown as much by respected peers, probably still go around talking about it like it really happens (sorta like how some prominent pro-lifers in the PLG still insist saline abortions happen, and a few insist PBA is a real procedure though surely the evidence otherwise has been presented to them many times).

Quote:

Opponents of a ban on the procedure have also argued that the definition of such a ban is so vague that the law would have a chilling effect on physicians performing any abortion or other gynecological procedures such as dilation and curettage for various conditions of the uterus unrelated to abortion.

From the wiki article and it's the truth.

Partial birth can be anything from minutely dialating the cervix, all the way up to killing it the moment it is half way down the vaginal canal or crowning. It is so ambiguous, vague, and medically inaccurate that making laws over this urban legend definition has huge ramifications.

As for their description of how it is done... it's as accurate as I've ever heard it.

I found this interesting... it really frames the times in which we live where women's health just isn't a real concern for many people. It demonstrates that a sexist society still exists and that we must fight to get equal rights and protections... to ensure our health is a concern:

Quote:

The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 describes it as "a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary," [18]

Quote:

The procedure may also be used to remove a deceased fetus, resulting from a miscarriage, that is developed enough to require dilation of the cervix for extraction... Though the procedure has an extremely low rate of usage.

(and it doesn't say this: but it is predominantly used because of problems with the fetus that make birth impossible, severely harmful, etc).

There is no reason it can ever be medically necessary? Miscarriages never happen? Severe hydrocephalus can never occur where the fetus completely lacks a brain and the skull is so large that birthing is impossible (deadly) and C-section would require a HUGE debilitating insicion that might permanently make one infertile... for what? A lump of human shaped flesh that has no brain and will die anyway?

If the government cared about women they'd not make such assinine statements as "abortion can never be medically necessary," in the light of all the evidence otherwise.  

[ChemicalSoiree]

That's a very true statement. Often times, the only way someone knows how to debate against abortion is to say it's murder, or it's a sin. I've yet to hear a pro-lifer use any real statement that can convince me that what I did was wrong because they load it up to make it sound so... eternally harming and such. What I mean by that is "you'll always feel guilty beause you murdered someone!", or the good ole "You're going to HELL! God hates you!"