Question For Pro-Choice People

[BFritz21]

(05-15-2019, 10:27 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I never once insulted you.

A strawman argument is when someone attributes beliefs or values to a person/group of people that misrepresents their view to an extreme degree and makes debate virtually impossible.

For example:
Pro-choice person: I don't want abortion to be illegal because it only adds further stigma to an extremely stressful situation that only 1 gender can possibly be exposed to. The laws, whether intentionally or not, are designed to control women and their bodies and force them to go through a life altering situation rather than undergoing a safe procedure, especially early on in the process. It also encourages unsafe procedures to be done if the safe ones are made illegal. Prior to abortion being legalized many women died, injured themselves or unintentionally neutered themselves through induced termination methods. banning abortion will only increase these unnecessary losses.

Strawmanning Pro-life person: So, you really get off on the idea of breaking a fetus' legs too, I imagine?

In short, what do you want as a "real answer"?

You presented an absurd scenario (breaking a fetus's legs) as a means to try to delegitimize your opponent's argument, rather than try to debate it earnestly.

As close to a real answer I can provide for you is: No, it would not be okay to break a fetus' legs because that's psychotic behavior. A fetus does not need to have full legal rights for bystanders to recognize that a certain behavior regarding them is psychotic.

Killing a baby isn't psychotic?

Maybe the mom didn't have legs and wanted the baby to be born without legs so it could experience what she did and have people look up to it or experience hardships.

Not a strawman argument.