It isn’t a good analogy.

To elaborate, abortion relates to life and death. The vasectomy comparison relates to looks which is a more subjective matter. Plenty of women don’t mind being impregnated by a man most women don’t find attractive. Many posters here are prime examples of this. The laws of attraction would actually suggest that most women only find about 10% or less of men to be attractive. However, if this were to be the sole criteria for procreation, most men (and women) would never have sex as there wouldn’t be enough men perceived as attractive enough to go around.

Another critical piece to consider is that children in the womb can feel pain around 24 weeks. This is roughly the same time as a fetus is determined to be viable outside of the womb as defined by Roe vs Wade. If it is viable outside of the womb, without question at that point it is considered a human life, therefore has rights. The argument of before 20 weeks can be made, but the argument of after doesn’t hold water. Inflicting pain on a human life in the womb is battery. Intentional killing of a human life in the womb is murder. Democrats are okay with murdering humans in the womb and even after coming out of the womb during botched abortions.

Roe vs Wade established a minimum threshold based upon what is known to scientifically be true. Beyond that is more of a philosophical argument, but isn’t the role of the federal government to decide such things as this power belongs to the states.


Streamer