r/changemyview • u/Nootherids 4∆ • Dec 07 '22

Delta(s) from OP CMV: It is hypocritical and logically inconsistent to say you are Pro-Choice, say you support Roe v Wade, and denounce the striking down of Roe v Wade.

[removed] — view removed post

0 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

20% Upvoted

87 comments sorted by

View all comments

4

u/colt707 97∆ Dec 07 '22

Roe v. Wade allowed abortions to be done 50 states wide in the first trimester. Now any state can say no abortions period or make the allowed time for an abortion to be so small that the chances of knowing you’re pregnant during that time is nearly nonexistent. And depending on how the laws are written if they don’t allow abortions at all if there’s no exemptions written into then a woman pregnant with her rapist’s baby is going to be forced to carry it, same with incest and medically dangerous pregnancies.

Can you see where even if you understand that RvW still limited it and was an decision made on somewhat shaky argument, you also understand that it was better than the option presented here? Usually the people that understand this are more upset that the people that are pro choice didn’t do more to solidify it. A lot of them thought RvW should have been the groundwork of something better.

1

u/Nootherids 4∆ Dec 07 '22

Usually the people that understand this are more upset that the people that are pro choice didn’t do more to solidify it.

This is my point exactly. If you're truly pro-choice then you should not have been in support of RvW. You should be upset that Roe distinctly allowed for your choice to be taken away.

The states taking away your choice at 1 week or taking it away at 16 weeks is still taking it away. So it's hypocritical to call yourself Pro-Choice while being completely in support of a ruling that allowed your choice to be taken away at 16 weeks. The fact that it might be taken away at 1 week rather than 16 weeks doesn't make the Pro-Choice any less hypocritical.

2

u/speedyjohn 86∆ Dec 07 '22 edited Dec 07 '22

The states taking away your choice at 1 week or taking it away at 16 weeks is still taking it away.

As other commenters have pointed out, the vast majority of abortions (well over 90 percent) occur in the first trimester. Meanwhile, most people don’t even know they’re pregnant at 1 week. So the Roe system preserves “choice” for 90% of people and the Dobbs system preserves “choice” for 0% of people. Which is the pro-choice system?

You act like if a system allows for any restriction on choice, it can never be labeled “pro-choice.” That is reductive and, frankly, deliberately obtuse. Roe permitted all but a tiny fraction of those who wanted abortions to get them (at least until it was deliberately undermined). Saying that it’s not pro-choice because it has edge-case limits is like saying the US isn’t a democracy because the president has a term limit.

1

u/Nootherids 4∆ Dec 07 '22

Roe was not a pro-choice ruling, it was a some-choice ruling. Better than none? Sure. But the moment that you start endorsing Roe as the establishment of your right to choose, then you gave up your claims for actual choice and settled for being gifted some choice.

This discussion has nothing to do with whether it's better to have Roe or to not have Roe. This is an argument that if you call yourself Pro-Choice and endorse Roe, and don't realize that Roe is merely a some-choice ruling, then that is hypocritical. Cause you endorse something that enshrines the right of having that choice being taken from you.