On abortion

[Jeff Lebowski]

I appreciate you actually stating your position. This debate gets lost all the time in people screaming "baby murderers," "women haters," etc. It gets lost in the debate over when a embryo/fetus counts as a life, which to me is a red herring in this debate.

To me, the debate is this: how do we balance the rights of the mother against the rights of the embryo/fetus.

For me there are parts of pregnancy where the rights of the mother win. There are parts of the pregnancy when the embryo/fetus wins.

For me it all comes down to this, abortion without restrict in the first 12-16 weeks. Not sure on the cutoff line. Up to 20 weeks, it is still available if there is health and safety concerns, rape, and incest. After 20 weeks, it still is allowed for health and safety of the mother.

Funk, thank you for framing the discussion in an honest and fair manner. I really respect that.

[Applejack]

Your proposal is eminently reasonable. Sure, politicians and activists could quibble about where the cutoff lines are drawn but your proposal is ultimately a practical solution that only extremists on both sides would oppose. Where can I contribute to the Funk for President 2024 campaign?

I could also state my position on gay marriage (both in general and in the context of TCOJCOLDS ), transkids/transadults, immigration, critical race theory, racism in general, universal basic income, student loan forgiveness, homelessness, and any number of oft-debated topics.

Unfortunately, I expect I would receive significant backlash because of some of those positions, including from you when the position touches one of your hot buttons (e.g. LGBTQIA+). I'm not afraid to "own" my positions, but it's mostly not worth the hassle of stating them in a pseudonymous forum, even a forum that is a relatively "safe space" such as this one. I find it interesting that my position on abortion is probably one of the least likely to generate backlash from average non-activist folks.

uh...isn't that proposal kind of like what Roe said the law should be? No abortion restrictions allowed during the first trimester (12 weeks), then narrowly tailored restrictions only in the second trimester (12-24)?

Careful, BFM, you might be a liberal.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Funk, thank you for framing the discussion in an honest and fair manner. I really respect that.

Amen. Would that all discussions of abortion could be civil, but way too often they degenerate into, as Funk notes, people screaming "baby murderers," "women haters," etc.

I've written before about Arthur Brooks' Love Your Enemies--How Decent People Can Save America From the Culture of Contempt which is filled with great insights about why we disagree. One of the key factors is Motive Attribution Asymmetry, where people ascribe impure or evil motives to those who disagree with them, unwilling to accept that the person on the other side of the argument has legitimate reasons for their beliefs.

BTW, Brooks loves BYU (he's a devout Catholic) and tells an entertaining and insightful story about a fine gift that BYU gave him after one of his several speaking engagements in Provo.

[The_Tick]

I always wonder why the father of the fetus is never factored into the situation. Should he be? I mean what if the dad wants the kid? He has no say. If they dad doesn't want the kid, but the mom does, he has no say. I'm not sure how to take into account all parties involved. I mean the dad is financially responsible up to the age of 24...but he gets no say in any of it.

[BigFatMeanie]

uh...isn't that proposal kind of like what Roe said the law should be? No abortion restrictions allowed during the first trimester (12 weeks), then narrowly tailored restrictions only in the second trimester (12-24)?

Careful, BFM, you might be a liberal.

No idea. I'm neither a lawyer nor a constitutional law scholar. Although, based on my 9th grade civics class, it's my understanding that the Supreme Court can't say what laws should be, they can only determine whether a given law is constitutional or not.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Amen. Would that all discussions of abortion could be civil, but way too often they degenerate into, as Funk notes, people screaming "baby murderers," "women haters," etc.

I've written before about Arthur Brooks' Love Your Enemies--How Decent People Can Save America From the Culture of Contempt which is filled with great insights about why we disagree. One of the key factors is Motive Attribution Asymmetry, where people ascribe impure or evil motives to those who disagree with them, unwilling to accept that the person on the other side of the argument has legitimate reasons for their beliefs.

BTW, Brooks loves BYU (he's a devout Catholic) and tells an entertaining and insightful story about a fine gift that BYU gave him after one of his several speaking engagements in Provo.

Brooks is awesome. I’m a big fan. He spoke at BYU commencement two or three years ago.

[Non Sequitur]

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Millions upon millions of aborted babies as a matter of convenience are the excesses of that came from Roe v. Wade. While I think the Oklahoma bill (if characterized correctly by the article you linked, which I haven't read) is bad, I still don't think it is worse than millions than the excesses that came from Roe v. Wade.

I have a problem with the characterization of an aborted fetus being called a baby. A fetus is not a baby. My mother had two miscarriages. Names weren't assigned. Death certificates weren't signed. No funerals were held. There were no additions to the family tree. I've never mourned the loss of my two dead siblings. That's because, though sad and unfortunate, the product of those miscarriages were not babies, just as the product of abortions are not babies.

[Moliere]

I have a problem with the characterization of an aborted fetus being called a baby. A fetus is not a baby. My mother had two miscarriages. Names weren't assigned. Death certificates weren't signed. No funerals were held. There were no additions to the family tree. I've never mourned the loss of my two dead siblings. That's because, though sad and unfortunate, the product of those miscarriages were not babies, just as the product of abortions are not babies.

I think this is thin ice you are skating on. I’ve seen a lot of mourning over miscarriages, which tend to run in my family (mom and sisters have had more than their fair share). While we haven’t had funerals for them in our family, I’ve seen that done among friends.

[Moliere]

I always wonder why the father of the fetus is never factored into the situation. Should he be? I mean what if the dad wants the kid? He has no say. If they dad doesn't want the kid, but the mom does, he has no say. I'm not sure how to take into account all parties involved. I mean the dad is financially responsible up to the age of 24...but he gets no say in any of it.

If the mother has a right (coupled with unfettered access) to abortion the. The father should have the right to give up his identity as the father and not have any financial responsibility. That’s only fair.

[Bo Diddley]

I have a problem with the characterization of an aborted fetus being called a baby. A fetus is not a baby. My mother had two miscarriages. Names weren't assigned. Death certificates weren't signed. No funerals were held. There were no additions to the family tree. I've never mourned the loss of my two dead siblings. That's because, though sad and unfortunate, the product of those miscarriages were not babies, just as the product of abortions are not babies.

How many weeks? Where do you draw the line? Bo Jr was seven weeks premature. Certainly before that, right? I've known people who were born weeks earlier than that as well.

And you're going to have strong disagreement from people like my sister who had a miscarriage of a boy. Her mourning was very real.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I have a problem with the characterization of an aborted fetus being called a baby. A fetus is not a baby. My mother had two miscarriages. Names weren't assigned. Death certificates weren't signed. No funerals were held. There were no additions to the family tree. I've never mourned the loss of my two dead siblings. That's because, though sad and unfortunate, the product of those miscarriages were not babies, just as the product of abortions are not babies.

Yeesh. That’s a terrible way to make your point.

[Pelado]

I have a problem with the characterization of an aborted fetus being called a baby. A fetus is not a baby. My mother had two miscarriages. Names weren't assigned. Death certificates weren't signed. No funerals were held. There were no additions to the family tree. I've never mourned the loss of my two dead siblings. That's because, though sad and unfortunate, the product of those miscarriages were not babies, just as the product of abortions are not babies.

My eldest sister had difficulty conceiving. With the aid of a fertility center, she got pregnant...with triplets. They named each of their offspring and, after her miscarriage, had some type of memorial service for them as well.

She and her husband have since adopted twice. Their eldest is now on a mission in South Africa.

[Jeff Lebowski]

This week's Ezra Klein podcast is a deep dive into the ethical foundations of the ab0rtion debate. Balanced and very well done. Check it out.

------

I have evolving thoughts on abortion. However, I am repulsed by arguments like the following:

Embedded Tweet

Abortion is increasingly seen an essential element of living the good life. The vast majority of abortions are for convenience and this person seems to see zero guilt or shame in this line of thinking. She couches it in almost virtuous terms. A jesuit priest I admire replied with a (now deleted) tweet saying:

The road to self-actualization is paved with millions of tiny human corpses.

We are at a turning point in American history where the birthrate is now below the replacement rate and dropping more rapidly than ever. I have seen people on twitter use the term "natalist" as a pejorative mocking people who advocate parenthood. I can't help but believe Roe v. Wade played a role in building this culture.

[Northwestcoug]

This isn't in response to any post in particular. But here's some good information from the CDC. The latest date I could find is 2019:

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/...1.htm#T14_down

A couple of pertinent statistics:

For those states that report on abortions, in 2019, 92% of all abortions occurred in the first trimester. Almost half of these happened at 6 weeks or less, which indicates that a significant proportion of all abortion are chemically induced. 1% occurred at 21 weeks or greater (the data doesn't give any more detail about fetal age after 21 weeks).

About 60% of abortions in 2019 occurred in women who had 1 or more previous live births.

The total number of abortions, abortion rate (per 1000 women of child-bearing age), and ratio (per 1000 live births) has been gradually decreasing since 2010. They are 625K, 11.4%, and 195 in 2019.

At least according to the CDC, the current abortion rate is a lot lower than some other published statistics I've seen online. According to the link, about 19% of abortions in the US were not reported to the CDC in 2019 (this includes California). However, at least in 2017 when another large survey that included California was done, the abortion rate was estimated at 13.5. This seems like the more commonly reported rate of 20+ I've seen online to be based on bad data. For comparison, 13.5 would put the US a little lower than the world average.

[USUC]

Moving away from the decision SCOTUS itself, what does the political fight look like now? I think this will be the classic dog that caught the car scenario for pro lifers. It's going to be nearly impossible to enforce what they want.

For Utah in particular, how does this shake out? Is Plan B access in danger now? Will they attempt to prosecute residents who go to other states for abortions? I kind of think Cox will prevent a Texas or Louisiana sitation hsppening here, but who knows now.