Abortion/profit/debate

From Issuepedia
< Abortion‎ | profit
Revision as of 16:31, 24 July 2011 by Woozle (talk | contribs) (1st attempt to turn this into a structured debate)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This mapped debate is based on text which is archived here. It has not been fully normalized; at this point it's still more of a person-to-person debate than a position-mapping debate.

right-arrow debaticon It's all about the money, and the damage (physical and mental) is ignored.

down-arrow debaticon How many rich abortion doctors do you know? How many money-hungry people take jobs where they are likely to get shot at and killed, have their businesses vandalized and destroyed, and face angry right-wing protesters on a regular basis?
up-arrow debaticon 7 abortion doctors killed in 15 years, while tragic, does not make the job any more dangerous than bus driver.
down-arrow debaticon Some numbers for this, please?
down-arrow debaticon How many abortion doctors are there, how many murders, and what is the fatality rate for bus drivers?
down-arrow debaticon How does the murder rate of abortion doctors compare with the rate of abortions vs. live births? (If it's the same or higher, then you could say the same of abortions: tragic, but not any worse than bus driver fatalities.)
up-arrow debaticon Most recent statistics I can find: [1] states 4 [abortion doctor murders] since 1993. Every death is tragic, yet this does not make the job more dangerous than policemen (150 deaths per year [2]). While the chance of death is something to think about when deciding your profession, it seems obvious monetary gain overwhelms that decision.
down-arrow debaticon The comparison with police fatalities is somewhat more valid than bus-driver deaths, but all that this shows is that abortion doctors do not face greater mortal danger than policemen (...which is probably false, as far as personal risk: there are far fewer abortion doctors than police -- and I suspect the numbers go down another order of magnitude if you look only at late-term abortion doctors). Quite aside from the fact that a doctor living in a civilized country should never be in danger from anything but her/his patients and their illnesses, abortion clinic doctors and workers face much more frequent incidents of vandalism, picketing, and other implied threats which are bound to be extremely stressful – and which may even target their homes and loved ones, rather than being restricted to the workplace.
down-arrow debaticon More to the point, though: How does this lead you to the conclusion that monetary gain is the primary factor in deciding to become an abortion doctor? None of the information you have presented relates to this. Do you have data on the salaries of abortion doctors? How do they compare with similarly-skilled doctors who do not perform adoptions? Take recently-murdered George Tiller as an example: "In addition to protests outside his clinic, his house and his church, Dr. Tiller had once seen his clinic bombed; in 1993, an abortion opponent shot him in both arms. He was also the defendant in a series of legal challenges intended to shut down his operations..." If he was only in it for the money, don't you think he would have changed specialties over a decade ago? I'd be very surprised indeed if you can come up with a single example of an abortion doctor who wouldn't do better materially by staying out of abortions.
down-arrow debaticon This comparison is not valid; a murder is far more tragic than an accidental death in the line of duty, and that comparison also does not take into account the regular threat of harm and actual material vandalism committed.
down-arrow debaticon Presuming your comparison is accurate, my point still stands: abortion doctors are not in it for the money.
up-arrow debaticon So why do they do what they know is permanently damaging to both the developing human and the mother when there are far better options available for 99% of the cases?
down-arrow debaticon How do you know there are far better options available in 99% of the cases? (And what are those options?)
down-arrow debaticon What physical and mental damage?
Note: the article posted does talk about Post Abortion Syndrome, but does not define it and offers only one person's hearsay evidence for it.
down-arrow debaticon If you argue against some abortions on the basis of physical/mental damage to the mother, then you must also support abortions when they are done to preserve the mother's physical or mental health.
down-arrow debaticon Obviously. This isn't about ideology, but about the ACTUAL well-being of fellow humans, both walking, and gestating.
down-arrow debaticon Post-abortion depression occurs in the majority who undergo abortion. While not as common, the inability to conceive after an abortion is another known side effect.
down-arrow debaticon My understanding is that women seeking abortions are warned of these side-effects, and still consider them preferable to the side-effects of attempting to carry the child to term.
"i" debaticon The article is an interview with Eric Harrah, purportedly a former "abortion clinic chain operator" (is there really such a thing as an "abortion clinic chain"?) and now a Christian. (which of course makes his testimony highly suspect, "reformed" Christians being notorious for making stuff up).
up-arrow debaticon His Chritianity is in doubt, he currently professes to no longer follow Christ, however, his abortion stance is the same: Pro-life after having been a planter of many abortion clinics in the Northeast.
"i" debaticon AbortionFacts.com is a project of an organization called Heritage House 76 (web site), ostensibly a pro-life organization (mission statement.)