Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: NYer

I didn’t find the “ethicists” arguments outrageous ... at least no more outrageous than the current law-of-the-land.

I disagree with the premise that abortion is ethical. But, given that premise, their logic is sound. I find no moral distinction between a gestating baby, and a born baby. If one can be terminated because it is unable to survive outside the womb, then I don’t see why the other can’t be terminated because it is unable to survive unassisted in the world. If no mother should be forced to birth an unwanted child ... why should one be forced to nurture and raise an unwanted child?

This is merely the logical end of the pro-abortion argument. The pro-life movement is better off with this argument out there. Make the pro-aborters defend it.

SnakeDoc


3 posted on 03/08/2012 2:29:48 PM PST by SnakeDoctor ("I've shot people I like more for less." -- Raylan Givens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: SnakeDoctor

I agree with you, SnakeDoctor. The more the Death Eaters present their “ethical” argument for infanticide, the more opportunity humans have to explain that this is the exact same “ethics” that underpins pre-natal infanticide as well.


4 posted on 03/08/2012 2:43:06 PM PST by Tax-chick (Maybe it IS about contraception. Read "Planned Parenthood v. Casey" decision, 1992.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson