Adolescent Arguments in the Abortion Debate

Association for Interdisciplinary Research in Values and Social Change Vol. 17, No. 3 ^ | July/August 2002 | Wanda Franz, Ph.D.

[Marie Antoinette]

A "Does this sound familiar?" PING

Thought you'd appreciate the labeling of the "debate" tactics of the left :-)

[thoughtomator]

I can think just fine, thank you.

First, I am not defining killing as the same as murder. Perhaps someone else did, but not I. I know the difference.

Killing an enemy in war on the battlefield when he is armed and intends to kill you if he can is not murder, it is self-defense.

The death penalty I agree is state-sanctioned murder. Executions are murder, absolutely.

Now, to the heart of the debate:

A person need not be born to be legally a person. If one were to cut an unborn child out of the belly of a mother, killing the child, but the mother lives, the child has been murdered. There are at least two high-profile cases of prosecution for the murder of unborn children in progress as we speak.

It is a matter of basic biology that the life cycle of a human being begins at conception, not at birth. People are not born spontaneously with no preliminary development. The fact that every fetus has a unique combination of DNA establishes that even before birth it is an individual human being. No amount of talk can eliminate the fact that a child in utero is a human being at the very beginning stages of life.

Malice is a misleading word in this context. A cold-blooded thug might kill without any emotion, including malice, but would still be a murderer.

[XBob]

142 - "Killing an enemy in war on the battlefield when he is armed and intends to kill you if he can is not murder, it is self-defense. "

The majority of the killing in war is not hand to hand 'self defense'. The majority is government sanctioned killing. All Wars start with an 'offense', not with a 'defense'.

"A person need not be born to be legally a person."
Try leaving something in your will to a fetus, and see what happens. A fetus is not a person. It is a potential person.

Look on your 'birth certificate' - it mentions nothing about 'conception' date. You are not legally a person till you are 'born'.

"It is a matter of basic biology that the life cycle of a human being begins at conception, not at birth. "

Sorry - the life cycle begins far before conception. The gametes must be alive prior to conjugating. Life does not begin at conception, it merely changes form.

[XBob]

142 - "The death penalty I agree is state-sanctioned murder. Executions are murder, absolutely. "

So, will you please go arrest all those executioners, and people who enacted the laws for excution, as murder by definition is illegal, and executions are legal.

[M0sby]

So next question to you...when does a "POTENTIAL HUMAN" become a human????
Used to be that BABIES born before a specific week of gestation were almost certainly doomed...
Now, that benchmark is getting earlier and earlier in the gestational calendar.
How do YOU know when it is a human?
How does anyone know?
What if you are wrong?
Its a CHILD not a CHOICE...at some point, even by your own premise...
I'm not swearing or calling names.

I don't have your background in science.

But I DO KNOW that you CANNOT KNOW when a Fetus becomes a "HUMAN" because the criteria you cite changes all of the time...
Used to be 32 weeks, then 28 now I have 2 perfectly developed neighbor girls (5 and 4 years old) who were both born EXTREMELY prematurely (25 and 23 weeks gestationally) and they ARE NOT the exception anymore...

[thoughtomator]

Execution is a legal, but in my opinion morally wrong, method of murder. Were it that I had the power to change what is, I would outlaw execution as a form of punishment as per the 8th Amendment. Because of the injunction against ex post facto law, there would be no legal basis on which to prosecute executions performed before that date. However, if done afterwards, an execution would certainly be prosecuted as murder-one, as it would then be against the law to take another man's life. When I vote for President and my Representatve and Senators, I do take into account this issue.

And for the same reasons, abortion should not be legal. In the end, whatever the justifications given, it boils down to one man taking the life of another. Any line that might be drawn between conception and birth is artificial and ultimately, if based on fact, reduces to the original point of conception. The presence of a unique combination of human DNA proves the existence of another human being. This isn't opinion; this is defined biologically because it is what it is, not what it "is", if you know what I mean. If it turns out that 40% of embryos never make it, that is all the more reason not to kill the 60% that remain. I once felt like you, then I informed myself as to the facts of the matter and the truth, as much as it shocked me and defied my expectations, was undeniable.

[XBob]

145 - "But I DO KNOW that you CANNOT KNOW when a Fetus becomes a "HUMAN" because the criteria you cite changes all of the time...
Used to be 32 weeks, then 28 now I have 2 perfectly developed neighbor girls (5 and 4 years old) who were both born EXTREMELY prematurely (25 and 23 weeks gestationally) and they ARE NOT the exception anymore... "

Congratulations, you are one of the few making any sense on this thread, and congratulations on your children (born people).

If you have followed my comments through the years, which I am sure you haven't, personally I believe the same thing. It is an ongoing process. So personally, just for me, mind you, I have decided that I am against abortion of a 'viable' fetus. And as you rightly note, that changes as science and technology develop.

What I am really against, is all these people, insisting, that the moment a sperm penetrates an egg, they suddenly become alive, and that the sperm and egg weren't alive before, and that 'personhood' is conferred on that single cell made from 2 living gametes.

Most all these people argue that all human life should be preserved, and I argue that they better get busy, and take care of personas that are already born, before they confer personhood on a cell or a clump of cells or a fetus.

And if they insist, they need to stop all methods of birth control, and for all fertile women to screen their menses for fertilized eggs, and give them emergency support measures, to save the lives of these 'persons', 40% of which die naturally.

You, your wife and your children are lucky, youall want each other, and can support the children properly. That is great. (Would you want 10 more? 20 more - or would you consider abortion if she became pregnant with a large number of unborn 'people'?

The reason for abortions is that the potential person is unwanted, as it is too much of a problem to bring the potential person into real personhood, with all the effort, money, risks, and anguish, and resources which are necessary to accomplish the goal of adult 'personhood'.

I have spent too much time in too many underdeveloped, over populated countries to think that bringing more unwanted or more uneconomical people into a mess/morass is a good thing. Wanted children, who can be properly reared are wonderful things. Destroying societies, merely to satisfy hypocritical 'sacredness' is stupid.

I do not think all forms of human life are 'sacred', not with 6 billion of us overflowing this planet - we can't care for those we laready have:

sacred - 1 a : dedicated or set apart for the service or worship of a deity -a tree sacred to the gods- b : devoted exclusively to one service or use (as of a person or purpose) a fund sacred to charity

2 a : worthy of religious veneration : HOLY b : entitled to reverence and respect

[XBob]

146 - So, "Execution is a legal, but in my opinion morally wrong, method of murder." ... "And for the same reasons, abortion should not be legal."

So you wish to legally impose your morality on the rest of us?

I guess it is new to you that most here in Texas (and I think the US), agree with the death penalty, and that most in the US agree with the right to abortion.

Sorry, keep your morals in church, and practice them yourself, and start screening your wife's menses for fertilized eggs to save.

[thoughtomator]

On the contrary, it is you who wish to deny selectively the right to life of your fellow man. Majority opinion does not determine what is right and what is wrong. And one need not a Bible either to figure it out, just an education.

[XBob]

149 - How many of your wife's fertilized eggs have you saved from her menses? Or have you been selectively denying their right to life because you and she are too lazy to attempt it? Have you even checked her menses, or ever tried to save these 'lives'?

Put your efforts where your mouth is, or quit spouting off about your moral superiority.

[thoughtomator]

A discharged egg, fertilized or no, will not develop into a human being. This is so obvious I cannot help but think you are being deliberately dishonest.

[M0sby]

TO 147.
Ok, let's clear a few things up.
First, I am the wife.
Second, My children were not the premies. They are my neighbors.
Third, I cannot agree that an act of nature or biology occuring as a pregnancy terminates itself is the same thing as having an abortion. As a side note, I also don't agree with doctor assisted suicide or personal choice suicide either (and if I were present at either I would do whatever I could to stop it), I do support the death penalalty as it is a sociatal punishment (although I must honestly admit the the DNA evidence that has cleared several on death row has left me scratching my head).

Fourth, You don't have to agree with me or any of these others on this thread. But can you really be mad or frustrated with folks who see what they believe to be a PERSON being killed and are taking measures to prevent this or at least lobby against it? I believe that most of these same people would do much to help the poor, and underpriviledged wherever they saw/see them. It would be horrible if they walked right by a starving or dying child, right? When confronted with what they/I believe is the same kind of tragedy, if they/I did nothing, what kind of person would they/I be.

Fifth, How do you know (I say this respectfully) that they aren't "Getting busy taking care of persons who are already born"? And even if they aren't traveling to other countries to do so, they are doing the best that they can to help here and to prevent what they/I consider the ending of a human life.

Sixth, (Whew) I guess what I have read from you on this thread (not others, as you said, I have not followed you throughout the years) is that you are frustrated by folks who think that life begins at conception?
You beieve (I think) that they/I are wrong or at least hypocritical as they/I
*do nothing to prevent spontaneous abortion (miscarriage), *do not screen their/my menses for fertalized eggs and *don't have the same amout of vehamence against the death of "already born children" (or at least don't do as much to prevent it)?

My answer to these *'d items would be that I do the best I can.
I took care of myself while pregnant and encourage others who are pregnant to do the same. I cry with my girlfriends who have had miscarraiges.

I do not screen my menses.. but I addressed that earlier.

I do try to support those who are underpriviledged or dying in other countries (and here, for that matter). AND if someone was trying to deny me the ability to send support, or keep me from lobbying for support of these children, then they would be contributing to their decline and/or deaths. Also, just because these "already born" children are "unwanted" does not mean they should be killed, right? Maybe you think I/we should do more to help, and I'll tell you what, I agree with you.

So, I guess to wrap it up, (and I know you will not be swayed by my agruements) if I walked by as a "person" was being murdered, and did nothing, I would be doing something wrong, as I believe the killing of a person is wrong (yes, I also rescue little kittens and would rather not see WHERE my dinner comes from).
So, since I believe that when women are pregnant, they are pregnant with a little person, and if they, or anyone else, is trying to end the life of that person, I and I do NOTHING, I am wrong. (No, I would not shoot the doctor or burn down the clinic, but sometimes I think this is hypocritical)
You might want to take that into account as you disagree with folks/me about their absolute unwillingness to bend on this issue. They/I really believe that we are talking about a PERSON! I think I/we should do MORE to keep these "little ones" alive, not less.

I have tried to lay out my thoughts here without interjecting any religion as I think that might make you discount my entire stance...
Yes, in my family, we all want each other, and for that we are lucky! (plus, we planned it that way).
Yes, their are masses of children who are unwanted/ unplanned and dying because of it...
But that does not mean that since I can't help everyone, I should help no one!
Just remember when you get so frustrated with
"THESE PEOPLE" that they /I TRULY believe that this is a PERSON we are talking about... and what would you think of them/me if knowing this, I/WE did NOTHING?

Just a thought (or a few thoughts).. I tried to address each of your points from my point of view, if I missed any BIG ones, I apologise. Also sorry for any huge spelling errors, I am trying to be quick and I am a spelling disaster!

[XBob]

151 - "A discharged egg, fertilized or no, will not develop into a human being. This is so obvious I cannot help but think you are being deliberately dishonest."

My goodness, 'it is so obvious' that a fertilized egg is not a human being. I am glad we agree.

[XBob]

152 - you made a thoughtful reply. Thankyou. I will review it more carefully and reply later.

[thoughtomator]

This insincere picking at details is getting tiring. The natural process includes the fertilized egg establishing itself in the uterus so that it may draw nutrients and develop. Regardless of how Darwinian the test of which egg it may be that starts that process, it does not change the fact that that process marks the beginning of a human life. Nature - God - Biology - Chance; whatever you want to call it, it is that which determines whether a new human life is started.

Once that is understood, the self-respecting man is compelled to defend the ultimate innocent, the unborn child. The child cannot speak for itself or even know that its existence hangs in the balance. What man could, after all, defend his own life and leave the defenseless to die? We would be properly disgusted at a man who let his children die rather than defend them. And so we should be at a society that does the same. And thus, as a man, I am compelled to do what can be done to persuade this society to see the truth and change its ways.

This can all be supported by religious argument (injunctions against child sacrifice primarily), but no holy book is necessary. We have discovered all of this to be true with science.

[XBob]

You can't have it both ways - either a fertilized egg is a human being, or it will develop into a human being. MEANING IT IS NOT YET A HUMAN BEING/PERSON - IT'S A FLIPPIN EGG.

I am getting tired of all the inconsistent arguments of youall who both defend doing nothing (when it comes to yourselves - not saving your fertilized eggs) and imposing your moral values (FORCING THE bringing unwanted children into the world) on the rest of us.

START SAVING YOUR OWN FERTILIZED EGGS AND BRINGING UP YOUR OWN UNWANTED CHILDREN.

[thoughtomator]

The pro-life stance is thoroughly consistent. Once the natural process of human life has started, it is wrong to end it. Discharged eggs have not begun that process. An egg properly implanted in the uterus has.

Nobody is forcing anyone to bring children into the world. There is no forced-pregnancy campaign, and never will be.

You do get the point, and on this I think we agree, that the purpose of legal abortion is to divorce sex from its consequences. One possible consequence of having sex is the beginning of a new human life. That's fact, that's reality, and it's not the government's job to eliminate the consequences of having sex.

Well, sex does have consequences, and if a person can't face those consequences, nobody is forcing them to have sex.

So be honest, and state straightforwardly that you support sex without consequence, and you are indifferent to the murder of children that makes this possible.

[XBob]

157 - start monitoring every egg, and making sure it is fertilized and implanted then.

You are 'murdering' all those 'children' which don't get born.

Monitor the hormones and temperature, every egg drop can be determined, every month - get busy - youall are dropping eggs without consequences.

And keep your liberal government grabbing hands off our bodies. ABORTION IS LEGAL - GET OVER IT, AND START SAVING YOUALL'S OWN EGGS. YOUALL HAVE THE ABILITY/CAPABILITY, SO GET OFF YOUR LAZY BUTTS AND DO IT, IT IS IN YOUR CONTROL.

[XBob]

YOUALL CAN TAKE EVERY ONE OF YOUR FEMALE EGGS AND FERTILIZE THEM AND IMPLANT THEM AND 'SAVE' THEM - GET BUSY AND DO IT.

[thoughtomator]

Well your now clearly dishonest argument, while intellectually useless and morally indifferent, does help to illustrate the article which started the thread.

Ten. Simply restating without defending the merit of the position.

Let me know when you grow up if you want some answers.