Posted on 10/15/2004 5:33:37 PM PDT by RogueIsland
The old back alley coat hanger myth eh? Never happened, it goes down with cow tipping and the rest of the Urban Legends.
Abortion was legal in many states before Roe, and theirs no reason to believe that still wouldn't be true if Roe is overturned.
The answer is that they're neither intelligent, or decent.
But one rationalisation they'll often use is: "It's only a couple of cells!" - unwilling or unable to understand, I guess, that those cells grow into a human being that will eventually pop out of them. You know what I'd like to do to those people... I'd like to go to them and say: "Here. I'm going to give you $1.00. And I'm going to double it every day for 30 days, at which point you'll have over a billion dollars." Then, a week later, when they have $64.00, I'll tell them I changed my mind, and "abort" their pile of money, explaining that it's only a couple of dollars, so what are the whining about?
Maybe they'd get the point, then -- but I doubt it.
A) Laws against abortion will hurt more than help, and;
B) There are alternatives that will reduce abortions without potentially harming women, then
We should pursue alternatives to banning abortion, rather than seeking to make it illegal.
First, let's dispense with "life of the mother" cases. That is clearly dealt with under firm legal self-defense arguments. It has been long established that you may kill even an unwitting party in self defense. I won't argue that one, so let's throw out life-of-the-mother arguments. With that dispensed with, I don't see how requiring a fetus to be carried to term is causing any harm to women, other than disrupting their life plans.
That's too rational for this poster. It's not that they don't get this concept, it's just that they refuse to see things in any other way than they believe. It's ok. But to say "I DON'T UNDERSTAND" is just disengenous.
At least that's *your* position. Millions of other people disagree. How then to decide? That's what makes it a political topic.
Very true. And conversely, I've met quite a few pro-life atheists.
Read my tagline.....MOST abortions are done because the baby is INCONVENIENT to the mother.....OR the boyfriend.
What "nuance" am I missing that these seemingly intelligent people appear to grasp?
In a word? GOD
Okay, this is the best one I've heard so far. I can at least grasp this one from an intellectual standpoint without my head exploding. My problem with that is the arbirtrary line. Why does it magically bacome a human at 6 months? What is the quantifiable nature of the nervous system at this point that make it different at this moment at time from an hour previous?
Having been there, I can't see how it means any less. I know you can say that it means you are not going up to pregnant women and telling them to have an abortion and that it means you probably wouldn't chose it for yourself (or spouse depending on your gender) but if you say you stand up for this as an option, you are giving it your blessing. You are saying that this is an option that you believe should be used by any woman at any time for any reason. Furthermore you are reducing the baby to a slave. You are saying that the baby has no person status other than the one the woman carrying it gives it. If she believes it is not a person, it is not a person. If she believes otherwise and you cause her to abort, you have committed a criminal act.
Of course all sorts of non-human entities such as corporations, old houses, etc. can be granted personhood in order to support and save them.
Fetuses are denied legal personhood in order to justify their murder. Blacks were denied personhood in order to justify slavery. This is why some pro-lifers equate abortion with slavery.
If you can get a pro-abort to agree that its not a question of when a fetus becomes a human being, but instead when a fetus becomes a legal person, then you may be able to make them realize how completely arbitrary the Roe v. Wade decision was.
You might also scare them into ruminating about how easy it would be for governments to declare them as not being legal persons in some nightmarish fascist fantasy liberals have from time-to-time.
According to liberals, we are supposed to be very concerned about the rights of the terrorists being held at Guantanamo because we could be treated like that in a future Bush administration. But what if aborting fetuses todays is used later as a justification for post-birth-abortions of enemies of the state?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.