"David Hall" wrote in message
...
Abortion.
It has been a consistant stand of the Republican party that is has the
moral obligation to oppose the use of abortion in almost every case-
the argument is not based on science, but on a religious belief that a
fertilized egg is a human being with a soul. When they make this
argument, it is based on a moral code which is not shared by the
people they hope to prevent from engaging in this activity. Trying to
ban abortion is using their concept of morality to control the life of
another. While the idea of abortion is personally disgusting to me, I
do not and can not claim the right to tell another person what they
must or must not do with their progeny, especially when it is still
inside their body.
I don't understand that position. If abortion is simply removing a
non-sentient
mass of cells (kind of like removing an appendix) then why is this simple
procedure "personally disgusting" to you? Also, why did you feel the need
to
add "especially when it is still inside their body" to the statement that
you
"can not claim the right to tell another person what they
must or must not do with their progeny" unless you are saying that we
shouldn't be able to keep people from destroying their "progeny" after
they are
born (for a few days, weeks or until they are 18 - what is the limit?)
On the other hand, if you did by chance believe that that mass of cells is
a
human being as individual as any other human being inside or outside of
another
person's body, I can understnd how abortion would be "personally
disgusting" to
you. However, if that is the case I can't understand your cavalier
attitude
towards it any more than if you were suggesting that we should be able to
kill
fully born humans (assuming you didn't actually mean to say that you do
believe
that above). Abortion comes down to one question and one question only.
Either
the fetus is (at some point) a human being or it is not. If it is not then
how
can there be any restriction on that medical procedure and why would it be
disgusting to you or anyone else who believed that way. If, on the other
hand,
the fetus is a human being then there cannot be ANY reason to allow ANY
abortion unless it is done in self defense because the fetus was killing
the
mother. If you believe that the fetus is a human being how on earth can
you
find any justification for allowing the destruction of millions every year
under your very nose. You would have to feel a little like a German in
1945 or
one of millions of Americans in the early 1800s who didn't think slavery
was
right, but they weren't going to anything to stop the southern slave
owners
from maintaining that "peculiar institution".
Dave Hall
I have to agree with you, Dave. I honestly don't understand the thinking of
most people who are pro-abortion. For example, Kerry's stated position was
that life begins at conception, but he supports the right to an abortion.
So, he believes that an innocent life is destroyed when an unborn child is
aborted. I don't know what he calls that, but I call the purposeful taking
of an innocent human life murder. There's at least a little more logic in
the "it's not a human being until...". But even then, I wonder...until
what? Is it not a human being until there are 10 cells? 1000? 1,000,000?
1,000,000,000? When does the "fetus" magically become a human being in
their eyes? At birth? An hour before it's just a mass of cells and
presto!, an hour later it's human? Where do they draw the line? At 6
weeks, there is a beating heart. Do any of these people have children?
Have they seen ultrasounds of children in the womb? I just don't understand
how they could see that tiny little human being in the womb and be able to
kill it. I guess if they just keep thinking of themselves long enough, they
can convince themselves that it's OK. I also wonder how women who have had
abortions live with themselves in the years afterwards. Don't they think
every year when their child's birthday would have come "what on Earth did I
do"? If they don't, I don't see how they could have a conscience.
Let's look at it this way. Consider for the moment that no one knows when
life begins. Let's weigh each side. For the sake of argument, let's say
that life begins at birth. The ramification of making abortion illegal is
that millions of women are forced to live with the consequence of consenting
to sex (excluding women who are raped). Now let's imagine that life begins
at conception. The ramification of making abortion legal is that millions
of innocent children are murdered every year. Now, I don't know where
living with the consequences of your actions falls against murder on your
moral scale, but I know where it does on mine.
todd
|