10 FALLACIES IN THE ABORTION DEBATE

Conservative Commentary ^ | 8 November 2002 | Peter Cuthbertson

[Godel]

off-the-cuff counterexamples: the modern Chinese ... Nazis. WWII Japanese in China. the Aztecs

These are the people who you think we should emulate morally?

[demosthenes the elder]

No, these are the people you explicitly denied exist.
Accuracy, my son, accuracy. It is ever to be desired. Or don't you agree?
And, hold on, yes. I would like to see us emulate the Spartans, to some extent.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

I think the debate over when life ends is just as important as the debate over when it begins.

Trouble is that, even though as Republicans/Libertarians we can have these heated debates on the topic (they are related), we have to get some public discussion on the national stage without ad hominems or other fallacies of logic. We do need to advance an agenda on this, because we do agree there is a problem with the application of the laws and their affect on politics. We as a society, have allowed too many morons to escape accountability for their own lives and this issue is a major launch point for our enemies on the Left...

We also need to keep our more enthusiastic allies from scaring people away. There is a delicate balancing act and there is no consensus. There is also no room for much compromise since, knowing my personal view, you can also see how important I think the issue is. It relates to a great many other things that are or may become social pathologies nobody is willing to accept...

[Godel]

No, these are the people you explicitly denied exist. Accuracy, my son, accuracy. It is ever to be desired. Or don't you agree? And, hold on, yes. I would like to see us emulate the Spartans, to some extent.

I shall consider myself corrected then, and put you on record as supporting the murder of healthy newborn children. When I said "no-one" I was speaking in the context of rational people of today, obviously when you delve back far enough into history you'll find societies who condoned any number of things that we now consider evil beyond a doubt.

[demosthenes the elder]

Ah, so you are going on record as calling the Israelites and Joshua and, by extension and proxy, the Lord of Hosts YOUR GOD "evil beyond a doubt"?

You have been successfully baited, Godel, and you have fallen into the pit you yourself have digged.

Just try to avoid sloppy use of absolute descriptions.
By the way, master of ignorant judgementalism, absolutism, and overstatement, the Spartans did not advocate the murder of healthy newborns: They advocated and practiced the pragmatic murder of two-year-old children who, after physical examination, were determined unable to grow up to be Spartans. I do not know what reproductive customs the helots of Sparta practiced.
I do not see the killing of severe defectives wrong. On the contrary, I believe forcing parents and doctors to take extreme measures to prolong a life that will never amount to a functional human being to be truly evil.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

You are making a moral decision...

"And from these images it is that one of the faculties of man's nature is called the imagination." (Hobbes)

You keep imagining things. I'm sick of the circular arguments, red herrings, begging the question, and other informal fallacies as excuse to permit this national insanity to continue. The political party in power is one I helped to elect. I will use it as a platform for my ideas.

Your idea is to do nothing and allow the same socialist crap to interweave into the social institutions and culture of the United States. I say no to that and my reasons are quite clear no matter how you try to muddy them. Yes, I am going to force my view upon others, this is politics and my political party has the balance of power on it's side.

Ultimately, I want a legal accounting for other people's behavior that affects my rights as a citizen of the USA. This societal practice of ritual infanticide violates other people's rights with higher taxes, gratuitous corruption of the young, and disrespect for human life.

As I have said, other "men" need to be more responsible for their own penis, I have enough responsibility for my own. Both men and women have no excuse in this modern age not to avail themselves to our technology that prevents this myopic self-centered stupidity.

[Godel]

I do not see the killing of severe defectives wrong. On the contrary, I believe forcing parents and doctors to take extreme measures to prolong a life that will never amount to a functional human being to be truly evil.

I don't disagree. If you look at it from an evolutionary point of view, spending millions of dollars trying to save people who were never meant to live, and then they have children then you spend billions saving their kids, obviously you've removed natural selection from the equation, and the gene pool is going to take a drastic turn for the worse.

But you might want to consider that the average woman in Europe has only 1.4 kids, when you need 2.1 to break even. In Russia there are 225 abortions every 100 live births. Is Western Civilization committing suicide by killing its own children? How does it fit into your system of fitness, that a productive, educated, and intelligent nation like the US kills off a vast majority of its potential children with abortion, or never has them at all due to birth control. Meanwhile, third world nations that have never produced anything of note, have 6-8 children per woman, and begin mass immigration into Western countries.

Birth Control + Abortion = Suicide Pill of the West. Are you implying that Western Civilization that singlehanded invented the entire modern era is somehow unfit and that their extinction due to the current demographic crisis is a good thing?

[demosthenes the elder]

oh, well, this is a purely artificial problem, one stemming from the facts that western culture is basically too eager to be nice, as well as, of course, the various maneuvers of the Cold War. It could be cured in one or two generations by the simple expedient of stopping ALL medical and food assistance to "developing" nations. The same logic which argues against taking extreme measures to prolong the agony of a single life that was not meant to survive can be expanded to apply to non-functional cultures.
I am in favor of allowing the problem of overpopulation to solve itself. It is an ugly way to think, I admit, but it is more defensible than prolonging and extending the problem over further generations. It just doesn't produce a false "feel good" glow the way "feeding the hungry" does.
I dunno about you, but I am not in need of a "feel good" glow.

[Godel]

It could be cured in one or two generations by the simple expedient of stopping ALL medical and food assistance to "developing" nations.

I agree. All our aid to these foreign nations does is tell them they don't need to work to feed themselves. I mean think about it, if they cant feed themselves now, then they each have 6 kids, and 20 years later their population has tripled, how is that going to make the problem any easier? All our good intentions do is make the problem worse and worse every generation, then thy flood into our countries and destroy the hand that is feeding them. And endless train of worthless third world immigrants who flee their hellhole countries to come to ours, then file ACLU discrimination lawsuits calling us a horrible country. If we're so horrible why are they falling over themselves to illegally invade our country. They should be treated just like warlike invaders. I don't really see a difference between third world invaders today, and the Mongols invading eastern europe, or the Moors invading Southern Spain. Hey the Mongols were just looking for a better life too.

[Godel]

You can say it's an artificial problem, but it is a severe problem, and one I don't see being fixed. The Pope recently pleaded with Italians to have more children to help reverse the declining birthrates. I think Italy's birthrate is around 1.2 children per woman, which means every generation the population is essentially being cut in half. Now I ask you, how does abortion, murdering the next generation of our society help that problem? We get leaders blasting on talk shows how we dont have enough workers to do the jobs and thats why we "NEED" illegal immigrants to save us from ourselves. Why can't we just have our own children? Again, Russia has 225 abortions per 100 live births. Imagine how much better off we'd be with all those people living, working, learning, producing, thinking. Maybe the scientist that could have solved Fusion Power was conceived, but subsequently aborted. We're throwing away a massive potential.

[demosthenes the elder]

you are arguing with someone who thinks 6.2 billion living humans is 5.2 billion too many. you are wasting your time.

[Godel]

you are arguing with someone who thinks 6.2 billion living humans is 5.2 billion too many. you are wasting your time.

So your solution is for us to breed ourselves out of existance and surrender the world to third worlders who have 6 children per woman? Sure less people would be great, as long as entire groups of people don't have to go extinct to achieve it, as is happening today.

[demosthenes the elder]

Naahhh... I'm too squeamish for proactive genocide.
I'd prefer to genetically engineer a retrovirus of some sort which would attach to the X chromosome and in some way jack up the natural rate of miscarriage from 33% to somewhere upwards of 85%, then disperse it wery very widely, and then keep the vaccine under very tight wraps. I have heard very quiet rumours from contacts in the world of microbiology that something like this has been developed. That I have heard rumours of it strongly suggests that it has NOT been developed, but also suggests that others are thinking along similar lines.
OK, now that I have admitted to being the antichrist... There is hope: Never forget that lethal infectious microbes are making a comeback.

[Tired of Taxes]

You're the one imagining things and making circular arguments. I didn't say we should "do nothing." I'm merely asking for a policy that is consistent. Your position that a jury should decide whether a pregnant woman can have an abortion is inconsistent. If the unborn is a life that deserves protection, then that life deserves protection no matter what. Whether or not the woman was raped or is underage does not diminish the value of that life.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Your position that a jury should decide whether a pregnant woman can have an abortion is inconsistent. If the unborn is a life that deserves protection, then that life deserves protection no matter what. Whether or not the woman was raped or is underage does not diminish the value of that life.

No one person should decide the taking of human life, no matter how small. The Constitution requires that a jury decides. The woman's life also deserves protection and I will admit that only a victim of rape, has her life taken from her by force.

This does deserve some legal recourse to terminate the impregnation, if the adult victim reports the crime in a timely manner to potentially prevent the assailant from victimizing others and prevents the development of a new life. An adult rape victim does have a social responsibility to report a felony (which I see as a capital offense).

[ I say "conception" is not the beginning of human life. After prophase, the first mitosis (post-anaphase amitosis) is the emergence of a new life with uniquely indentifiable human genetic characteristics. This does not occur immediately and can take up to between 24 and 48 hours. ]

A juvenile is another matter, in that a juvenile is not of consenting age and has no adult responsibilities. This is a murky area as I have said.

[EdReform]

BTTT

[TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!]

There is a up to $500.00 (not to exceed ever $25,000) fine to any one that kills an 'endangered' fox, or upsets/touches certain turtle nest eggs along our shores. Under the detailed listings of the federal Endangered Species Act.

There is a $350.00 to $500.00 'amount due' to kill the human species. (AKA abortion) And in second/third human trimesters; scissors are jabbed into the HUMAN head and the brains are sucked out-In elective surgeries- daily, in the United States, all under the guise of a woman's "right." The only real "right" is the "right" to remain silent.

When will humans become "endangered" and protected?

When will the so called pro-"choicers" realize basic science skills of the food-chain? Human's are NOT at the bottom of the food-chain.

Do they really see what they do, with their political correctness all in the guise of a "woman's right"?

[Coleus]

.

[wagglebee]

Pinged from Terri Dailies