Right Wing Stalls Morning After Pill

yeah, i guess i differ from alot of conservatives on social issues.

i respect and understand the position of the pro lifers, and i think in general their position is more honest than that of the most pro choice people. i just dont agree.

 

I must say that I'm a bit disturbed with myself. When I first read what martin wrote, my reaction was that he was just a wacko. Then I kept reading. I still don't agree with him, but he's making arguments that are rational, unlike most I've heard on the pro-choice side. At least the man has some intellectual honesty about his position.

I've never thought that abortion should be as emotionally charged of an issue as it is. I've also never thought that it had much to do with religion. IMO, the entire abortion debate is about neither whether a woman can do what she wants with her body nor is it about whether it's ok to kill a baby. It's about when life begins. I don't think many people would favor abortion if it were proven that life began at conception; likewise, not many people would be against abortion if it was apparent that life began when the baby was born. The problem is that it's somewhere in between.

Martin, being a utilitarian, is of the belief that it doesn't matter if it's alive, because it's relative value to society is miniscule until it begins to interact with the world. I tend to disagree. Since I don't know when life begins, I have to assume it's as early as possible to avoid the possibility of depriving a life of it's most fundamental freedom - to live. At that point, the life also has all of the other rights associated with being alive in the US. If you want to kill it, you'd better convict it of a capital crime first.

I agree that the pro-life position is more honest than most pro-choice advocates. But I must say that martin just as honest in his position. While I think he's wrong, he's at least respectable in his incorrectness.

Also, I don't know how to do the quote thing right either. Martin and I need instructions.

 

martin must value his life somewhat. He is proud of the fact that he does not want to serve in a war he has no problem with other people fighting it for him. LOL

 

Sheesh...Could you be a tad MORE hypocritical with that one?

You talk about people on the right making assumptions...

Aren't you the guy that talks about "your right wing kooks" and "Duke apologists" and "Duke supporters"?

Who in the WORLD-nevermind this board-other than perhaps a Democratic census taker, has made more assumptions about citizens of this Republic than you have?

You are consistently inconsistent, I give you that much, doophis...

 

martin the question is not whether one life is more valuable than another, obviously this is true, even if looking at it from a religious back ground. the question is who has the right to determine that value? You? a pregnant woman? a couple who could have avoided the situation all together? the state is given rights to put convicted criminals to death by lethal injection by the entire people. One person ultimately makes the aboortion decision on a being which has commited "no crime" to society. it is NOT the worth that of the being you are judging. You KNOW what a killer's worth is from past actions, you have "no clue" what a fetus' actions will be, so there is a potential lose to society.

Remeber this, and although it may seem silly it applys taken from Clint Eastwood aka William Munney in the Unforgivien. " It's a terrible thing to kill a man, you take away everything he has and everything his is gonna have"

Same could be said about what a person will be.
How many great beings of society have already persihed? do you know? yeah hath man suffered because of this? could one of those fetus' been awarded the noble peace prize for curing a cnacer that a dear relative of your's had or has or will have along with 100's of 1000's yeah millions of others?
I guess we will never know. Even if there were NO final judgement as you say, I would hate to support a cause or postion and be known for it, if there was even a small chance some good or great person was hacked up with a surgeon's scapel because it was assumed his/her life had no "value" My friend YOU are not deity and if there was no diety YOU are very far from qualified to make any judgements on what "value" ANY life has on it, yeah even a muderer is tried by at least 12. you might be qualified to give Value on used cars, but beyond that it's a stretch to you're ability to place value on anything. If material things can be "saved" for future value, we as humans should extend that same priveladge to our own form. If it is true we can individually judge the value of a human or fetus then what's to prevent some one like hitler from judging you as "worthless" and of no major contribution to society? Nothing would prevent this but Laws on the books. Abortion should be illegal in "most" cases. There are some occasions where it could be argued. it can be called the ultimate murder because like you said, it effects no one, supposedly, mainly because we have no way of predicting the future.

 

Wow...Not often do I sit and say to myself, "Yeah, what HE said...". I pride myself on never being one to be caught speechless, but martin had me actually believing his was a logical, pragmatic standpoint...The lack of an organized religious philosophy guiding his social views and norms also explained a lot, but JSracingBBF, I am indeed impressed...A very well thought out and mind opening post...

 

I can't imagine you EVER been speechless. Martin's argument is logical and it is pragmatic only from his own point of view. He has no more standing to decide the worth of an individual life than anybody else. I doubt that he has ever experienced the death of a very young person who is close to him. I would be willing to bet that he would be just as distraught over the death of a 1 year old child of his own as he would be if his child died at the age of 30.

 

the flaw in your logic is that you are equating potential human value with actual human value. that is like crying over a lottery ticket you never bought, when you have no idea if the ticket would have won. you can sit and cry to yourself as if you knew the random quickpick would have won, but you dont.

and how many mass murderers?

can we randomly guess that the aborted people who never lived were somehow a net good for the world? it would stand to reason that they would be roughly as good for the world as any other random sampling of people. lets say nobody was ever aborted, and the world had millions more people, why would that be better?

if you really believe that aborting a fetus is similar to killing an adult, then you should be out there blowing up abortion clinics.

since i do not care either way if a kid is born or isnt, i will let the mother decide. i see no reason to assume that random children will add something to the world. if i did, i would encourage people to all have as many babies as they can squeeze out, so we maximize our chance of another jonas salk.

right, it sounds to me like you should take a stand against condoms, birth control pills, celibacy, non alcoholic beer and anything else that stands in the way of maximum child production.

right, we cannot predict that the people aborted would have a net negative or positive effect on society. however we could assume that the people who have been aborted would have been roughly the same in quality to any other random group of people. basically you are arguing that the more people the better.

 

The morning after pill is an abortion pill- plain and simple. In taking the pill, you kill any zygote cells/fertilized eggs that are in your body.

Abortion is murder
How can anyone disagree with this? In killing a fetus, an unborn human being, you are KILLING.

I'm really sorry that you feel this way. Would you feel the same way if you knew that (hypothetically speaking) Mother Theresa could have been aborted, Princess Diana could have been aborted- because their parents were too irresponsible to choose life?

Who are we on this world to judge what children are "good enough to be born" and which ones should just be terminated because they are unwanted?



Please someone show these people pictures of what happens when babies are aborted, seeing the pictures makes it much more realistic. Don't get me wrong- I am not condemming anyone who has had an abortion, people can convert.

At about 6 weeks, the baby has fingers and toes, and is breathing. Pro-choice advocates have called the unborn child a "parasite" because they cannot live on their own. When a child has organs, fingers, and toes, who cannot consider that child a real person?

That's just my $.02 anyway
By the way, I am a devout Roman Catholic, if that helps to clarify anything

 

We have all seen pictures of the development of a fetus, but 2 years ago my wife and I had to go through a very rough pregnancy that ended with us having a still-born baby boy who was at 21 to 22 weeks. The hospital let us have him for awhile. I could not believe how at even that age I saw items that run in our family. Before this my wife had to have the advanced ultra sound a few times because she was having problems. You could see the development then as well as as his struggles because of the very low level of amniotic fluid. I was Pro-Life before, but I could not believe how far he had developed.
We were blessed with a baby boy this past summer. He did not take his brother's place. I still see brothers that are one or two years apart and wonder what could have been. It does not consume me, but I know I will never and could never replace Tanner. Through it all I thought about how, even if by just my will alone, I could somehow find a way for him to make it and am sadden that there are those who fight for the right to terminate a life such as his. I am glad that those like Tanner who make it past 20 weeks get to be treated as humans and by law in Texas have to be buried and such, but I cannot help but think about those who only make it to 19 weeks or earlier, those whose parents live in other states, those who were at 20 weeks but the doctor thought they were at 18 or 19 weeks, or those who are aborted. What is the difference at any age?