Making anti-choice extremism look reasonable

Tweet

A SYTYCB entry

I recently got into a debate on Facebook with a high school friend who said she found my frequent “sexually-socially-politically liberal” postings “demoralizing and frustrating,” and argued that extreme anti-choice acts like defunding Planned Parenthood in Texas were really “good faith” efforts by lawmakers to make “the best decision possible.”

I know from previous comments she’s made that she bases her anti-choice views on Catholic theology that bestows premature personhood on blastocysts and fetuses at the expense of the well-being of fully developed human beings. As a matter of principle, I refuse to argue reproductive choice (and marriage equality for that matter) with folks who have entrenched beliefs against either that are based in fundamentalist readings of their religious texts. They’re very adept at making irrational arguments that ultimately boil down to “God says, so there!” look logically defensible by painting the secular position as the other extreme on a continuum of views.

ThinkProgress’ Zach Ford posted a great infographic yesterday about this tactic that I found very useful in my choice to not waste my energy on this debate:

If you apply Ford’s framework to the reproductive choice debate, here’s how it stacks out:

Politicians who are trying to ban abortion just want to save women from making a horrible choice they’ll regret.Politicians who are trying to ban abortion are being paternalistic and don’t believe women are smart enough to manage our own lives.See above

So the next time an anti-choice troll tries to goad you into a debate that’s going to boil down to reality-based arguments vs. extreme arguments based in fundy religious dogma, remember this chart. Just like an abusive boyfriend or parent, they’ll use this tactic to gaslight you and make you feel just as nutty as they are.

But unless you’re taking the position in the Extreme #2 column, you really aren’t.

Tweet