<shakes hands>
Then you, sir (or madam) have a logically consistent stance which I can understand and respect, even given the fact that mine is very different.
er, that should be “stupefies”
Do you have a cite that a majority of those who are anti-abortion are also against the death penalty? In my experience I have found this to be true of many Catholics but they are not a majority of pro-lifers. It seems to me that most pro-lifers adore the death penalty. GWB comes to mind. Pro-lifers also tend to be found in the same political demographic that favors the Iraq war which kills countless children and opposes social services which would help single mothers or families in need.
Not to say that all pro-lifers are so hypocritical but an awful lot of them are.
To me, short of ancephaly, no, not really. Considering all the people I have met with Down’s syndrome, I especially think that aborting a fetus with trisomy 21 is not moral. Further, I think that it is morally reprehensible to get tests done that could cause miscarriage, unless those tests can reveal a condition that could be treated by some means other than having an abortion.
I am pro choice. I am morally opposed to abortion. I don’t think that just because you were raped makes it automatically moral and ok to abort. That doesn’t mean I can’t understand the desire to do so. I do not wish to compel a woman to carry an infant to term that she does not want. That does not mean I think choosing not to is moral. I also know that I cannot fully know what all the factors in so I cannot judge them accurately. It is their decision to live with, not mine.
To me this as an legal issue is not about whether a fetus is a person. It is about my bodily integrity. Under what circumstances can my body be violated against my will to assist another? I don’t think anyone should be legally required to have their bodily integrity violated to assist another, not even if they are the only one that can help, not even if it won’t harm them long term and it is needed to save another’s life.
I advocate the death penalty and am anti-abortion for one simple reason: a person who is older and knows full well the ramifications of their actions (BS insanity defenses notwithstanding) and does them anyway is considerably different from a child who will never have the chance to do anything. One earns their punishment and the other has no say in theirs.
That’s not hypocritical at all.
I rest my case.
(BTW, what method would you use to insure that the people you kill are actually guilty of anything?)
You rest your case? What case? You haven’t made one.
My case is that “pro-lifers” aren’t really pro-life, they’re just anti-abortion.
I never claimed to be anything but. If you’re looking for hypocrisy, bud, look at someone else.
AD I was just responding to this assertion by crazyjoe:
I was saying that was false and it is false. Whether it’s hypocritical is a matter opinion, but regardless, it was straight up factually incorrect to say that pro-lifers oppose the death penalty. Most of them don’t.
But if you value a life so much so that you would decide for a woman whether or not she could terminate her pregnancy, then surely you would want to be 100% certain that the bad guy you are putting to death is in fact guilty of the crime and not just a party to a travesty of justice. As you probably know, recent DNA tests have exonerated a bundle of folks on death row. Obviously our justice system is not infallible.
Is it that you value the life of a fetus over that of a fully developed human? Are you less concerned over letting a sentient human being die at the hands of a seriously flawed judicial system than you are by the death of a handful of cells?
Would you people please stop putting words in my mouth? Where did I say anything about the certain guilt of people on Death Row? Where did I say that I would decide for a woman on the status of her pregnancy? Where did I say that I valued a fetus over a fully developed human?
I have done no such thing. I have given my opinion. Just to recap yet again: I am in principle against abortion as a form of birth control, I am in principle in favor of the death penalty, and I think that a fetus is equivalent to a human, no better, no worse. I have not asserted any control over any situations, and in fact have repeatedly stated that I would not assert control even if I could. I have done nothing except to say what I think.
Don’t interpret those opinions to mean something else.
Sorry, Doors, I guess I did put words in your mouth.
My questions are still valid if you consider it addressed to the generic “you” as oppose to “you, Airman Doors, USAF”.
Well, if you are implying some kind of contractual relationship to an as yet uncreated set of cells that you will provide it with use of your bodily functions for nine months, then I am not sure you will find anyway to enforce that. I think you are also missing the practicality aspect - if you allow a rape exception, but criminalize abortion in other situations, what requirement are you going to have to demonstrate rape? I think you would see the exception swallowing the rule. As seen in the Republic of Ireland, unless you put a ban on people travelling while pregnant, then an abortion ban in a limited geographic area can be circumvented, at least by those with the economic where-with-all. Limiting abortion to situations of rape will have a similar effect. Nice, middle class girls who had an ‘unfortunate experience’ could still get a termination, and move on with their lives. Minority girls, who the legal system already believes are less likely to have been raped will have to suck it up and face the consequences.
This is yet a whole other can of worms. Will the definition of rape to allow an abortion be the same as the existing rape definition? Will the woman have to prove it in court? What if the trial drags on over 9 months? Will guys start accepting a rape charge on their record just to get their girlfriends an abortion?
I don’t think you can require that, since in the vast majority of rapes, charges are never filed. I know those whose aim is to criminalize all abortion would want that to be the first stepping stone, however.
Let me re-iterate how highly unlikely I would see this scenario AND that I forsee lots of problems for such a scenario (perhaps an increase in the number of “reported” abortions due to rape, for example
[/QUOTE]
Therein lies the critical flaw of such legislation. How much evidence of a rape does a woman seeking an abortion have to present? Is the claim enough? An indictment of the alleged rapist? A conviction? Is the abortion provider require to notify the police? What if the patient prefers not to? Such legislation is at best useless and at worst creates numerous false accusations of rape, thus diminishing the credibility of any woman who claims a real rape. And for what? To save the life of a fetus its own mother doesn’t want?
Originally Posted by WhyNot
Even in this debate, “to save the health or life of the mother” is sacrosanct. Nobody’s really addressed this, but as a culture we practically deify parents who risk their lives to save their children. Most of us, deep down, would feel a little scornful or downright condemn someone who ran out of a burning building but left their kids inside without even attempting to get them out. Yet we allow and even encourage abortion when the mother’s health is at risk. Is this a double standard?
I don’t think that’s really that comparable. An abortion to save the mother is done becaue not having one means that the mother will die with certainty, whereas the parent running into a burning building will not. Who would be mad at a parent who didn’t run into a building he knew would collapse in the next minute if he knew he would be in there for longer? I doubt anyone would.
BTW, Feels good to post on the board again. I know I do it far and few between but I read the threads all the time. You’re all really smart and interesting people. Well, most of you, anyway. :dubious: