My Position On Abortion

[zunshynn]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='20 November 2009 - 11:17 AM' timestamp='1258741069' post='2006265']
Recently I've found that the scariest, but most effective and consistent pro abortion argument is accepting that the fetus is a person, accepting that you're killing it, but arguing on the value of human life and whether or not the infant's life is worth as much as ours.
[/quote]

Isn't it ironic that the same people that usually think a baby's life is worth less than ours also think that monkeys, trees and dogs are worth more than us?



Don't get me wrong, I think dogs and monkeys and trees are great. I just wonder where those priorities come from...

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='zunshynn' date='20 November 2009 - 12:26 PM' timestamp='1258741570' post='2006272']
Isn't it ironic that the same people that usually think a baby's life is worth less than ours also think that monkeys, trees and dogs are worth more than us?



Don't get me wrong, I think dogs and monkeys and trees are great. I just wonder where those priorities come from...
[/quote]
They're the extra crazy ones. They're not even the ones I'm talking about though. I'm talking about intelligent people....... whose positions are consistently evil.

I went to a talk last night from the president of Priests for Life Canada. Great guy. He was talking about a suicide advocate that he was to debate with once. First thing when he sat down, this woman said "right off the bat I want to say that I'll accept that assisted suicide is killing. I want to debate about whether it's worth it to society." How do you argue with someone who is fully prepared to reduce life to a question of money and superficial 'happiness'? This, in my opinion, is where willful ignorance crosses over into blatant evil.
Same experience in my philosophy class. Some of the best pro abort debaters will accept that the fetus is alive, accept that it's a person, and accept that it's a human, but are willing to argue that it's not worth as much as a fully grown adult, and also willing at the other end to argue that an old sick person isn't worth as much as a healthy young adult.

[philothea]

[quote name='rkwright' date='20 November 2009 - 01:03 PM' timestamp='1258740202' post='2006260']
From my understanding, it is a much harder argument to make that the fetus is indeed a human at the moment of conception, but not a constitutional person. This leads too all sorts of problems. Most pro-choice advocates do not argue this point because it is simply too difficult. Its much eaiser for them to just say its not a human.

Try telling a young mother that the thing inside her is a human, its just not a "person" as protected by the constitution so you can kill the human-non-person.

To me, the pro-choice argument is mostly based on emotion - I want to be free to do anything I want with my body!
[/quote]
I always found the constitutional argument beyond crazy. Still find it hard to believe that was what Roe v. Wade was based on. I mean, okay, citizenship granted at birth, so abortion is legal... does that mean it's legal to kill foreigners too?

In my experience, the fundamental motivation behind ardent pro-abortion (and pro-BC) people is anger at the difference between men and women. It's not fair that women can't have sex without consequences like men can. Any method to to balance the issue is justified.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='20 November 2009 - 12:17 PM' timestamp='1258741069' post='2006265']
Recently I've found that the scariest, but most effective and consistent pro abortion argument is accepting that the fetus is a person, accepting that you're killing it, but arguing on the value of human life and whether or not the infant's life is worth as much as ours.
[/quote]
+J.M.J.+
that's Camile Paglia's argument.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='zunshynn' date='20 November 2009 - 01:26 PM' timestamp='1258741570' post='2006272']
I just wonder where those priorities come from...
[/quote]

Selfishness.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Lil Red' date='20 November 2009 - 12:58 PM' timestamp='1258743535' post='2006297']
+J.M.J.+
that's Camile Paglia's argument.
[/quote]
Luckily one of the most famous pro-abort philosophers ever, Judith Thomson, is pretty much an idiot when it comes to good arguments. Her 'analogies' are sometimes laughably far fetched and just surreally weird. She actually made an analogy about little "people seeds" which float around, and when they land, they grow into a baby...... and you have to suppose that one drifts into your house and starts growing in your living room (even though you put up screens on your windows to keep them out)... and she has the gall to compare this to voluntary intercourse with birth control.
We're lucky she's one of the most famous they've got. Lol.

Edited November 20, 2009 by Nihil Obstat

[King's Rook's Pawn]

[quote]I am pro-choice: you have to choice to have sex, you have the choice to have a baby. You do not have the choice to terminate a pregnancy, however. You made your choice when you decided to have sex. After that, you've made the choice and have to live with it.[/quote]

This still seems to justify abortion in cases of rape, though.

[King's Rook's Pawn]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='20 November 2009 - 02:17 PM' timestamp='1258741069' post='2006265']
Recently I've found that the scariest, but most effective and consistent pro abortion argument is accepting that the fetus is a person, accepting that you're killing it, but arguing on the value of human life and whether or not the infant's life is worth as much as ours.
[/quote]

I think the most sophisticated pro-choice argument is the one that says even though the fetus is a person with rights equal to those of the mother, abortion is still justifiable because the fetus still has no right to invade the mother's body. The mother has the legal right to evict the fetus as a trespasser, even though fetus's death will result. On the other hand, if the fetus is viable, abortion is illegal because the fetus can be evicted without killing it. It's a matter of self-defense in other words. This is the argument of the economist, Walter Block, who I generally greatly respect as a thinker. I disagree without, however, because I do not believe it is proportional justice to cause someone's death because of property trespass. For example, it is unjustifiable to throw a stowaway on your ship overboard. Also, of course, the stowaway in this case has no culpability being such.

[add]

[quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='21 November 2009 - 11:30 AM' timestamp='1258817416' post='2006842']
This still seems to justify abortion in cases of rape, though.
[/quote]

Is or are statics available that indicate the percentage of abortions that are the result of rape, incest, drug (crack-babies etc) or due the healthof the mother (life in danger, kind of thing)?

My guess is that an overwhelming majority of cases are [b][size="3"][color="#000080"]none of the above[/color][/size][/b]. I have no real idea, I'm guessing.

[Nihil Obstat]

I've heard 99% and 99.5% (not involving rape or danger to the mother) tossed around, but I don't know if it was an accurate statistic or not.

[King's Rook's Pawn]

[quote name='apparently' date='21 November 2009 - 02:24 PM' timestamp='1258827895' post='2006913']
Is or are statics available that indicate the percentage of abortions that are the result of rape, incest, drug (crack-babies etc) or due the healthof the mother (life in danger, kind of thing)?[/quote]

It's a very small percentage, but doesn't matter to me because I don't think that abortion is justified in cases of rape, so I think its the wrong move to build an argument around that. The Church also teaches that abortion is not justifiable in cases of rape.

Edited November 21, 2009 by King's Rook's Pawn

[add]

[quote name='King's Rook's Pawn' date='21 November 2009 - 02:43 PM' timestamp='1258829032' post='2006930']
It's a very small percentage, but doesn't matter to me because I don't think that abortion is justified in cases of rape, so I think its the wrong move to build an argument around that. The Church also teaches that abortion is not justifiable in cases of rape.
[/quote]

It may be a very small fraction but this excuse is the chief example or argument used by abortion advocates to push their agenda.

It is ironic that our democratic fair minded, equal rights, liberal politicians are proposing to provide universal health care that in effect will encourage and promote the extermination the poor ( I.E. abortion).

Edited November 22, 2009 by apparently

[elizabeth09]

fidei defensor, I have to disagree with you. Being a For-Life person, and coming from a coming from a For-Life family, I think that every baby have the same right as any human. Will you kill a 2 year old child, fidei defensor, because that child does not belong on this earth?

[Arpy]

Er, with what are you disagreeing? His views on abortion are quite similar to pro-lifers', and he's not said anything in support of killing two-year-olds.

[add]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='20 November 2009 - 12:32 PM' timestamp='1258734748' post='2006230']
I am pro-choice in that you can choose whether or not you want to have a baby. You do not have a choice to end a life, though.
[/quote]

This is no place for semantics, however your statement does point out the obvious truth and an aspect often overlooked in birth control. It also further emphasizes the role or relationship (pardon the pun) of the male.

The birth control mentality or attitude to just take a pill if something happens is the crux of the matter.

I apologize in my earlier statement where you pointed out that I must not have read your opening statement of this tread. However, Casual sex is essentially pro-death not pro-life, if brought to its ultimate conclusion.
again i apologize.