Thread by @AndyRowell

I hear a lot of "I cannot vote for a Democrat. Abortion is murder. I am conveying that message!"
When pressed about why, they say: "I want Roe v Wade overturned and abortion to be illegal so there will be less of it!"
But this indicates to me they have not thought this through.👇

Their reasoning:
1. Abortion is murder.
2. Make abortions illegal.

For example:

https://twitter.com/KSPrior/status/1315445418231312391

cites

https://twitter.com/between2worlds/status/1313535856616116224

who cites

https://twitter.com/RobertAJGagnon1/status/1313564266054782977

No reflection on what happens when abortion is illegal.

1. Alcoholism is bad.
2. Make alcohol illegal.

Their assumptions:
- The law is a moral teacher. If you tell people it is illegal, that is another way of teaching them it is wrong.
- Supply and demand. If you make it harder to get by making it illegal, there will be less of it.

Make bad things illegal and they will go away.

The problem is that criminalizing behavior does not necessarily make it go away and may cause other problems.

If people want it enough and don't think it is wrong, they will get it: alcohol, marijuana, sex, an abortion.

It is impractical for a society to make illegal something that many people do not consider wrong because it is difficult to enforce:
- speakeasies during Prohibition.
- marijuana possession under war on drugs.
- sex.
- abortion pills by mail in countries where it is illegal.

Abortion is legal in almost every developed country. It was legal in Ireland starting January 1, 2019.

Poland is developed and it is illegal there but there are 150,000 abortions a year.
theguardian.com/world/2019/dec…

If abortions were made illegal in the United States, women would receive abortion pills (under 12 weeks pregnancy) in the mail

https://twitter.com/sarahmccammon/status/1314571672394100736?s=19

and would not care that it was illegal.
vox.com/science-and-he…
(91.0% of abortions are at ≤13 weeks currently).

If this is your reasoning for voting for a "pro-life" candidate, your argument is:
"I want the government to persuade people that abortion is wrong by making it difficult for them to get an abortion. Force is the best persuasion. Let's make it hard for women to get abortions."

It is entirely different to be "pro-life" *personally* and try to persuade men and women that life is precious and that life begins at conception and that adoption is a good option and that you will invest in helping them have what they need to be a good parent.

Though counterintuitive, if you want to reduce the number of abortions, you should vote for Democrats. Why? Because they provide access to long-term contraceptives, which is the key factor in reducing the number of abortions.

https://twitter.com/AndyRowell/status/1215759492547133441

and

https://twitter.com/AndyRowell/status/1215759493415358464

If you want to reduce the 1.2% of abortions after 21 weeks, address the cause. Those women often have faced logistical delays; or are raising children alone, are young, depressed, using illicit substances, or experiencing domestic violence.
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.13…

I understand the concern that devaluing of human life in abortion could lead to the devaluing of infants, the disabled and elderly. However, slippery slope arguments often hide immoral decisions! "We could do the clear wise thing now. But if, if, if (catastrophizing), then, no!"

Pro-life people think the slippery slope is abortion ⤵️ euthanasia ⤵️ infanticide.

But what if the slippery slope is: criminalizing abortion (cruel treatment of women)⤵️cruel treatment of illegal immigrants, ⤵️ cruel treatment of political opponents and whistle-blowers?

So it *is* coherent to be personally against abortion and think abortion should not be illegal.

"Don't have an unintended pregnancy. Life is precious. Don't get an abortion. Consider adoption."

is coherent with

"We should not have a law that says all abortions are illegal."

It is more disturbing to have rich politicians who are personally for abortion when they get women pregnant. But who are in favor of restricting poor women from being able to get abortions while having no compassionate vision for what that would look like.

45% of pro-choice, 44% of Democrats, 43 states, Roe & Casey decisions say restrictions on abortion after viability (21 weeks) is okay. (Only 1.2% of abortions occur after 21 weeks).

https://twitter.com/AndyRowell/status/1215759488650600450

https://twitter.com/AndyRowell/status/1223312160496877568

https://twitter.com/AndyRowell/status/1223313505014562816

https://twitter.com/AndyRowell/status/1223314255073533954

A fetus that could live outside the womb should not be aborted. Out of the 1.2% of abortions that occur after 21 weeks, I don't know how many are like that. But likely these women have many troubles.

79% approve of some restrictions.
news.gallup.com/poll/1576/Abor…

It has worked since Roe v Wade in 1973 to restrict later term abortion (after viability since the Casey decision in 1992). This is what other countries do too.
It would be impossible to stop the 91.0% of abortions under 12 weeks because of how cheap and accessible the pills are.

There have been bipartisan broad agreement since 1973 that there should be some restrictions on the 1.2% of abortions after 21 weeks. That will not change.
It will be impossible to ban abortion under 13 weeks because of the worldwide accessibility of mifepristone and misoprostol.

So don't use your vote or political energy for candidates who say they will ban abortion or overturn Roe v Wade.

Support candidates who will nurture the conditions where less women will choose to have abortions.

1.2% of abortions are after 20 weeks.

A third-trimester abortion (between 26-40 weeks) is more rare. Rebecca Shrader says they are all in her experience because of the fetus being unable to survive.

https://twitter.com/AndyRowell/status/1223314255073533954?s=20

,

https://twitter.com/Bec_Shrader/status/1315664201101213698?s=20

,

https://twitter.com/Bec_Shrader/status/1315663355831558144?s=19

Do social conservatives really want contraceptives, abortion, and gay marriage made illegal? A few may—envisioning the USA as a city on a hill where immorality is outlawed. But most realize that is unrealistic and would be a mess.

https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1315671724084649984?s=19

Social conservatives have what they want now on the Supreme Court.
- Will they end up liking what they have wrought?
- Many have a hard time justifying another term of Trump.

https://twitter.com/MJGerson/status/1315270690036166658?s=20

,

https://twitter.com/crampell/status/1307484665641607168?s=20

,

https://twitter.com/emmaogreen/status/1315653457307529219?s=20

,

https://twitter.com/bonniekristian/status/1315652675770384385?s=19

Skye Jethani's video makes a similar argument to the one in the thread above. He addresses some angles that I don't include. And I address some issues above that he does not address.

https://twitter.com/SkyeJethani/status/1317518771549065218