The Argument for Abortion is the Same as the Argument Against Vaccination

Discussion in 'Abortion' started by Il Ðoge, Nov 21, 2016.

  1. Il Ðoge

    Il Ðoge Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,421
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I just noticed this.

    "It's my body," same argument.

    "so it doesn't matter if it might harm other people," same argument.

    "or if it's potentially harming me," same argument.

    "I get to choose what is done to my body."

    The similarities are in fact so thorough that hardcore abortion advocates compare pregnancy to parasites and disease, which vaccinations are meant to prevent.
     
  2. Diuretic

    Diuretic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    Messages:
    11,481
    Likes Received:
    915
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I think that might be a strawman. Better to actually make an argument.
     
  3. Steady Pie

    Steady Pie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    24,506
    Likes Received:
    7,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I despise it when people just assert "STRAWMAN!!1!" without justifying their claim.

    As far as I can tell, the whole point of the OP was to ask if it is indeed a strawman or not.
     
  4. SillyAmerican

    SillyAmerican Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2016
    Messages:
    3,678
    Likes Received:
    1,285
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Abortion is a complicated issue. You touch on one aspect: the fact that it is the mother who must carry the pregnancy to term. Yes, it is the mother's body that will be impacted by the pregnancy, and it is the mother who is ultimately responsible for caring for the unborn child during pregnancy. That said, other important questions involve such things as the viability of the fetus, at what point personhood is achieved during the process, the responsibilities and concerns of the mother/father/state, the health/wellbeing of the mother and fetus, having access to a safe medical procedure performed by a licensed physician versus other alternatives, etc. etc. As I say, it's a complex, multi-faceted issue. Trying to represent it in one-dimensional terms is neither instructive nor helpful.
     
  5. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,871
    Likes Received:
    73,626
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    There is more stretch in that than in an elastic factory
     
  6. juanvaldez

    juanvaldez Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2016
    Messages:
    2,390
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Let's make abortion illegal. It worked for drugs and alcohol!
     
  7. Junkieturtle

    Junkieturtle Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    15,832
    Likes Received:
    7,344
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Nope.

    Vaccinations are done to prevent the contraction of disease and then the eventual spread of that disease. Abortion is isolated to one single person making choices about their reproductive system. Yes, the arguments are similar, but it is the context in which those arguments are made that matters. Tattoos also use the "It's my body" dreasoning, but does this mean that people who are against abortion are also against tattoos? Of course not. Context matters.
     
    Bowerbird likes this.
  8. FoxHastings

    FoxHastings Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    56,891
    Likes Received:
    21,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So ?

    Did you have a point other than showing the ignorance in thinking there are "abortion advocates"..??
     
  9. Diuretic

    Diuretic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    Messages:
    11,481
    Likes Received:
    915
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I wrote, "I think that might be a strawman," I chose that word "think" carefully. It showed I have some doubt about the validity of my own understanding of the post. I possibly share that doubt with you as you indicate a similar approach when you use the phrase, "as far as I can tell..." Il Doge may clarify it for both of us.
     
  10. Steady Pie

    Steady Pie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    24,506
    Likes Received:
    7,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Fair enough.
     
  11. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The entire point is that abortionists claim their body is theirs and theirs alone and the sanctity of their body cannot be infringed, not even by the baby. For abortionists, the "its my body" argument trumps all other arguments including the right of the baby to live.

    It applies directly to vaccinations. The "its my body" argument trumps all other arguments including forcing someone to have a vaccination in order to protect others from disease.

    In fact it is even more relevant to vaccinations since a persons body is violated for some vaccinations which are not very effective (in 2014 the flu vaccine was only 14% effective, for many other vaccinations the effectiveness decreases for each round of booster vaccinations) and many vaccinations to prevent diseases which are not at all fatal. While abortion results in a certain fatality, many vaccinations are not life & death concerns and do not involve significant health issues.

    And I will go one step further. The pro-vaccination crowd claims there is a "herd immunity" aspect in which only a certain percentage of the population need be vaccinated in order to prevent the spread of a disease. Its not necessary to force everyone (violate every persons body) to be vaccinated to achieve the claimed result.
     
  12. Junkieturtle

    Junkieturtle Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    15,832
    Likes Received:
    7,344
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Vaccinations are required because diseases don't always stay in the person who has them. Considering the myriad of different contagious diseases out there, there is a good likelihood that if one contracts one of those diseases, they will spread it on to others, which only catalyzes the spread of that disease even further. So it's not a situation that is contained to one individual like an abortion is. It's not just "their body", it's potentially other individual's bodies too.

    Again, vaccinations are done not just for the benefit of the person getting them, but also for everyone else that person may be around. That includes people who may have sensitivities to certain conditions because of other conditions, or compromised immune systems from their own diseases or medical treatments.

    Nobody is required by law to have a vaccination just to exist. That only comes into play in situations like schools where you and/or your child are going to be in close proximity to other people. Presumably if you are somebody who opposes vaccinations, you're going to have to make arrangements for an education method for your kids if your school does not allow unvaccinated kids to attend.

    Additionally, nobody is vaccinated against their will. There might be things that require you or your child to be vaccinated to take part in, but that's not the same thing. You can choose to make alternate arrangements instead of taking part in those things.

    Nobody is forced. People can choose not to, it just may mean they have to make alternate arrangements for certain things. That's their choice to make.

    But the important thing to remember when trying to invent a connection between vaccinations and abortion is that with abortion, it is only the mother involved but with vaccinations, it is everyone you may come in contact with. Your actions may cause people to contract diseases that can cause all sorts of harm up to and including death. And it's mostly preventable.
     
  13. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You miss the point, so I will restate it.

    The abortionist claims the woman's body is inviolate to the point she can kill a baby.

    A person refusing a vaccination believes her body is inviolate to the point that she can cause someone else to be infected with a disease.

    The logic is the same - a person is in total control of her own body, and she cannot be forced to do something to her body even if that "something" benefits other people.

    ***

    Vaccinations are required for many activities, the claim that they are optional and people can choose not to get them is false. The rules are designed to make refusal of vaccinations so burdensome that vaccinations are effectively required. People in medical professions are required to receive vaccinations, military personnel are required, college students are often required, if you want your children to attend public school a series of vaccinations are often required.

    The idea that its a choice is ridiculous - in many places its a choice only if you want to remove yourself from society.
     
  14. flagrant_foul

    flagrant_foul New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    211
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I thought the argument is about whether the state has an interest in protecting a fertilized egg, and if a woman should be charged with murder for being on the pill.
     
  15. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,871
    Likes Received:
    73,626
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    "CLAIM". Dost mine ears deceive me or art thou questioning well established science?
     
  16. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,871
    Likes Received:
    73,626
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    And they have every right to refuse vaccinations. So long as they subsequently go live where they no longer have contact with the rest of mankind And this is where your argument,such as it is, falls flat on its fundament. Although you have a right to say what happens to your own body you have no right to endanger other people and it is people plural and multiple. You do not have a right to blow smokers in another persons face, you do not have a right to perform a procedure without consent (except in very special circumstances) and you do not have a right to infect others.

    How does early abortion endanger society as a whole?
     
  17. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    14,838
    Likes Received:
    4,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Most people who accept abortion don’t make that argument for it, certainly not as stridently as you imagine. It’s also not been established whether people who say that are also in favour of mandatory vaccination.

    Essentially, this might be an argument against one of the reasons for abortion presented by some people.
     
  18. Junkieturtle

    Junkieturtle Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    15,832
    Likes Received:
    7,344
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No, I didn't miss your point at all. It's the same one being made by the OP. What I'm telling you is that the same argument does not work in two entirely separate and different situations because the effects of the two different acts are vastly different in scope. Abortion is limited to you and you alone, in every circumstance. Infectious diseases can jump to other people. Those are the people who truly don't get a choice in the matter.

    It is a choice. You don't have to do those activities. You can homeschool, or perhaps find some religious private school that doesn't require vaccinations. When you make the choice to do any activity or belong to any institution that may require vaccinations, you're also choosing to comply with vaccinating. And if you don't want to comply, you don't take part. It's always your choice.

    Don't be a doctor, don't join the military, and don't go to a college that requires you to have vaccinations. These are all choices. Not a single one of them is compulsory. My claim that vaccinations are voluntary is as true as the sun. You DO get a choice, and there are more than a few institutions that will allow you to opt-out of vaccinations, although thankfully that is recently being clamped down on.
     
  19. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, you do not get the point yet.

    The point is that the "its my body" argument puts the sanctity of the your body above all others, it means a person cannot be forced to violate their body for the welfare of any other person. You cannot force a person to "donate" an organ, have an abortion, keep a pregnancy to term, get a vaccination, participate in a medical study, be raped, be forced into slavery - they are all violations of a persons body.

    At what point does the benefit to society outweigh violating a persons body?

    You claim its all about "scope" - a purely subjective term. You claim abortion is a choice because it only kills one person, its scope is one person. But vaccinations are mandatory because it might result in many people being infected with a disease.

    Remember the Guatamalan program to infect prisoners with syphilis http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/02/health/research/02infect.html, followed by the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment ?

    Its "scope" was 1300 people, a lot of valuable medical information was collected , does the benefit to society outweigh the violations of 1300 peoples bodies?




    To claim its a "choice" is a farce, its a "choice" only if you want to be removed from society. Read your own words above to see how ridiculous such a claim is - and you end with the thanks that the opt-out "choice" is being removed.
     
  20. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113

    That's true, abortion and vaccination are both issues with multiple facets. But in this OP only one aspect is being discussed.
     
  21. juanvaldez

    juanvaldez Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2016
    Messages:
    2,390
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Tuskegee experiment preceded the Guatamala experiment.
     
  22. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    14,838
    Likes Received:
    4,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The thread title suggests it's about "The Argument for Abortion..." and as I said, we've still not established that anybody actually holds the two positions laid out in the OP that it claims are contradictory.
     
  23. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,370
    Likes Received:
    9,297
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    One would hope you understand that Vaccination is something a parent does for their children and your rather interesting analogy thus makes no sense.
     
  24. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When did the forum add the rule that there has to be a person with legal standing in order to discuss a subject?

    Surely with regard to abortion you have heard abortionists claim that its their body and nobody can force them to carry a pregnancy to term. That's been stated repeatedly in this forum (just ask Fugazi or Fox Hastings).

    And I believe (as well as many, many others) that forced vaccination is a violation of a persons Constitutional rights. If a person's physical body can be violated for something as vague and subjective as "the greater good of society" then there is no right to privacy as interpreted by Roe v Wade, there is no right to informed consent, there is no right to personal property (which is what your body is).
     
  25. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    14,838
    Likes Received:
    4,814
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Where did you get “rules” or “legal standing” from what I said? I’m just pointing out a moral principle against strawman arguments.

    Of course. What I’ve not seen is any of those people advocating mandatory vaccinations without addressing those same bodily rights aspects. The contradiction laid out by the OP can only be relevant if anyone exists who holds both positions and even then only in relation to them. This is an argument against an argument (and currently a hypothetical one at that), not an argument against abortion.
     

Share This Page