Pro-Life, you claim? Willing to ACT on it?

Great Debates
21

Sign waving won’t make a difference to one individual person, unless they can personally identify with it, and that isn’t likely. I’m not going to be dissuaded from my point of view by someone holding a sign and chanting slogans. But tacit approval of one aspect of a “conflicting” view tends to lend credibility to the other side.

It’s annoying to hear these anti-choice people insist that other people should not be permitted to make a choice according to the dictates of their own ethical construct. Yet, they won’t back that up by ameliorating the consequence of the choice they insist must be made.

To use an analogy, that’s like a group of people insisting that nobody may use their personal car in the city, but won’t support a referendum to fund the local public transportation systems.
Scopata Fuori
“Bad Cat!”

22

And what magical technology did you use to determine their mindset?

Besides, it’s not as though sign waving is the only means at their disposal. Sonographer Shari Richard has managed to dissuade a great many abortion-minded women by showing them live, high-quality ultrasound images of their unborn fetuses. This helps the women realize that the unborn is not just a “lump of cells,” as we’ve been hearing for decades.

Then you have groups like Care Net, which actively assist the women both before and after birth, with service such as shelter, food, clothing, education, support groups, job services training and more.

Again, how does that necessarily make their stance wrong? Do you seriously believe that you should not object to child abuse unless you are personally willing to adopt the abused children in question?

So is your object that these people are wrong, or merely that they’re “annoying”? (As an aside, I find your objections to be weak and rather annoying too. I also see that I’m not alone in that regard.)

Besides, DirkGntly and I have already cited examples of how pro-lifers DO actively get involve in supporting pregnant women in crisis. Admittedly, not all pro-lifers are engaged in such efforts; however, I daresay that most pro-choicers are not, either. When it comes to any controversial issue, you can expect the vast majority to sit back quietly while others do the work.

23

An admirable example in favor of your cause. And if only education and prevention were the primary focus, and after-the-fact care a close second. These are positive actions that no one will find fault with. Unfortunately, you know as well as I do, that there’s plenty of folks who are quite willing to yelp about someone else’s reproductive choice, yet are not willing to take responsibility and support those ends. I personally support anyone’s right to make that choice whether it is in accordance with my own beliefs or not. I may silently disagree with a particular choice, in a given situation, but am quite thankful the choice was there.

If you’re religious, I’ll skip pointing out the obvious, if flippant, answer to that.

These eight embryos I am referring to, were not a result of sex. In a suitable host(ess) however, they will result in pregnancy. They were created, and banked, in hopes of producing offspring for someone who, as a result of illness, may not be able to conceive “normally” or gestate successfully.

The old “pregnancy as punishment of woman for having sex” ideology just doesn’t hold water anymore.

But in this case…it’s significant. And because when you’re part of that 1%, it’s very, very significant.

And that’s good enough. You are willing to “walk the talk” and this is all anyone can ask for. And more than most would proffer.

I fully respect your willingess to act upon your beliefs in a positive, constructive manner. If more people did so, there’d more positive solutions (one way or another) and a whole lot less belligerent sign waving.
Scopata Fuori
“Bad Cat!”

24

I don’t think you’re grokking my point, I didn’t miss anything. You made your target very wide. If you want to narrow the argument you need to trim some of the chatter and chaff from your somewhat sloppy, trying to be cute OP and tighten up the argument. In your OP you pose the specific scenario of someone moralizing about the sanctity of life, but being unwilling to give of themselves to keep a (assumedly sacred) life (zygotic in this case) from dying as a result of poor behavioral choices. If they don’t then they’re “a hypocrite”.

Nowhere in your OP do you address the issue of the people being exhorted to value sanctity of life to “take a course of action that may or may not be in their best interest,“. Rather you pose a scenario of

If you would ever have occasion to tell an alcoholic in need of a liver transplant not to destroy their sacred and valuable lives by continuing drinking, and subsequently refused to assist them with a liver transplant to enable them to keep living, you would be a hypocrite in the same class as the moralizing women. (ie life is sacred, don’t make bad behavioral choices, no I’m not going to shoulder your burden).

Both scenarios consist of moralizing to people about the importance and value of life in situations where a life will be lost if direct physical action on the part of the moralizer is not taken to preserve it. You, by the definitional boundaries of your own sloppy argument, are a hypocrite if you do not offer a chunk of your liver to this person in need.

25

It may or may not be “wrong” to them…but it’s not going to be “right” for everyone.

I believe I have already addressed that “straw man” argument.

Just annoying. “Wrongness” is a point of view which neatly shifts according to side. The annoyance is not their point of view but rather the shallow, self-serving sanctimoniousness.

Yes, some do. And I am all for supporting a woman’s choice, whether it is to carry to term or to abort. That’s the key: “choice” is just that.

Agreed. But those who garner the most support and respect from both sides, are always those who are willing to act in accordance.

So, back to my original request: looking for someone to gestate some embryos. It’ll take someone who truly believes in their cause, to do this. And I have nothing but respect for those who believe so fervently in the right of the embryo to be gestated and born, that they are willing to bear it themselves.

Compensation provided, of course.
Scopata Fuori
“Bad Cat!”

26

Hmm…
Last I checked, pregnancy wasn’t a “punishment” for a bad decision, but rather a consequence.

27

I still think it is a straw man; telling someone that they are about to do something wrong does not automatically mean you should shoulder a burden that they have created (in theory, it would mean that you should shoulder a similar burden of your own, if you should happen to initiate it).

Lets try another analogy (and not forgetting that analogies are by defintiion imperfect illustrative tools only). In this analogy, we give the pro-lifers the benefit of the doubt and assume that they are right about the human status and attributes of the zygote.
I’m walking along the bank of the Thames and I see a woman who appears to be about to throw her infant child into the water. “Hey!” I exclaim, “You shouldn’t throw children in the water, because throwing infants into rivers is a bad thing to do”. “OK Mr smartypants”, she says, “You can raise the child yourself! - if you don’t want to do it, then your claim about it being bad is false and I am justified in throwing the child into the water”.

Does that sound reasonable? (Not to me it bloody doesn’t) How does it differ from the OP’s argument?

28

Now, I’m a bit torn on the issue, and I really dislike both sides, but isn’t this a bit like saying:

On to your proposition… well, creating a burden then demanding that people take it over for you? Come on. Most of the pro-lifers believe that the burned shouldn’t be created - going out of your way to create one then demanding them to carry it for you?

This is why I dislike both sides. They’re all assholes about it.

29

The vast majority of sexual encounters do not result in conception. Sex does not equal pregnancy.

30

Pregnancy may be a consequence of sex, but carrying a pregnancy to term is only a “consequence” because you deem it to be a consequence. As a consequence of a woman’s decision to have an abortion, her pregnancy is terminated. Why can’t you accept that as a consequence of her decision also?

31

Actually, I can, and do…but I consider carrying to term to be the lesser of the two consequences, and the one with the greatest potential positive outcome.
In a termination, the potential essentially ends there. Though it is possible that there would be negative outcomes from carrying to term, there is equal possibility that there would be positive outcomes, regardless of the current situation of the woman carrying.
This is, of course, merely my opinion.

32

[quote=Blalron]
The vast majority of sexual encounters do not result in conception. Sex does not equal pregnancy.

[quote]

You’re playing semantics here. I understand that the majority of sexual encounters do not result in pregnancy…but barring medical intervention, show me where pregnancy occurs without sex…

33

DirkGntly:

Insofar as you acknowledge that it’s merely your opinion, I take it that you wouldn’t seek to make abortion illegal?

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion, and to draw conclusions and make decisions based on it. Hope you’d extend the same acknowledgement to other people who might draw a different conclusion and seek an abortion.

34

[QUOTE=Mangetout]
I still think it is a straw man; telling someone that they are about to do something wrong does not automatically mean you should shoulder a burden that they have created (in theory, it would mean that you should shoulder a similar burden of your own, if you should happen to initiate it)., /QUOTE]

The deficiency in this line of reasoning, is that it assumes that the action to be undertaken is indeed wrong, when this is a subjective assumption. You may feel throwing a child in the water is wrong, and I may agree with you; but that is a construct of our culture’s particular set of values and morality. The Hooboobangi tribe may believe devoutly that the CooChoo God must receive his sacrifice every fourth blue moon. I would have to accept that, whether I am willing to take the child myself, or not. I might (or might not!) believe it’s unclean to eat pork…but am I wrong? Says who? And who are you to decide for me what is wrong, or right, for me?

This is the reason it is not a “straw man” argument:

I feel it is hypocritical for someone to force another person take a specific course of action (carry a fetus to term/take the longer, scenic route to work) as opposed to exercising their free choice (to terminate the pregnancy/take a shortcut to work) if and only if that person is not willing to help shoulder the consequences of their choice that they vicariously made for that person.

If the woman is forced to bear the child, when her choice would have been to abort, she has a consequence to deal with as a result: a baby.

If a carpooling driver is forced to take a longer route around town, when his choice would’ve been to take the turnpike, he has a consequence to deal with as a result: a higher gas bill.

So, it’s not a matter of someone being asked to shoulder the burden of someone else’s choice. It’s a matter of being accountable to accept the consequences of “your” choice that you insisted someone else make.

The alcoholic/transplant argument is also not comparable, as well as fallacious on multiple levels. I am a hypocrite if I insist he stops drinking but am indifferent to his delirium tremons. I am also a hypocrite if I congratulate him on his first year of sobriety, then attempt to buy him a round of drinks to celebrate. I am not a hypocrite if I proffer my observation that he will die if he continues, regardless of whether I would offer a transplant. Again, we’re falling back into the trap of connoting that the “morally innocent” bystander does not bear responsibility for imposing their set of values and choices on another.

As an example, white missionaries invaded darkest Africa in its purest, wildest state, and set about clothing, educating and converting the natives, who up until that point had happily made their own choices and thrived thereupon, sans clothing, the three R’s, and MTV. Once they were gathered up, dissuaded from running about in the altogether, taught to fear/worship <insert the deity of your choice here> and compelled to give up a happy hunter/gatherer lifestyle for that of a dirt farmer, the missionaries took on the moral responsibility of teaching their new converts to make clothing and feeding them when they were unable to provide for themselves in the manner these moral intercessors deemed “correct.”

For them to say, “ok, ye be SAVED now that you’ve accepted the choices we made for you” and then hit the trail, leaving the natives holding the rosary, so to speak, is, in my personal ethical continuum, reprehensible, and negates their credibility.

[QUOTE=Mangetout]
You shouldn’t throw children in the water, because throwing infants into rivers is a bad thing to do". "/QUOTE]

SPLASH.

Sorry. Couldn’t resist.

Now, back to the matter(s) at hand, so to speak.

Eight embryos, eight lives, if I am to accept the “anti-choice” line of reasoning. I am open minded, here. My personal choice would not have been to have created these embryos to begin with; but I support the reproductive choice that was made, once it has been made, to create and bank them in hopes of obtaining a healthy sprog (or more).

I am helping to find a surrogate (or more than one) to gestate these embryos. If I am to fully understand the “pro-life” stance, then it is mandatory that these babies be Born, regardless. Hey, I’m all for it, if that’s what the biological mother’s choice is.

So here’s a win-win situation:

Those pro-lifers who are able to, volunteer to rescue at least one of the little fellows from the eventual termination/defrosting. I’d do it myself if I could. You get the golden harp at the end of the road for fetus-saving, and the biological mother gets her sprog she so desperately wants.

And the “pro-life” ideology gains beaucoup credibility.

Compensation provided, of course. :cool:
Scopata Fuori

“Bad cat!”

35

DirkGntly,

What is the “bad decision” you refer to here?

36

Still waiting on that $100,000 check to save that little girl

37

Not even close.

Completely unrelated to the crux of the argument(s) at hand. “I will choose to do something even I accept as a very bad thing” IF you don’t perform Action “A” is not equivalent to “If you are willing to help shoulder the burden you are asking ME to carry, then perhaps the burden won’t be too heavy for me after all, therefore, I can consider seeing things your way.”

As I am pro-choice, I can simply say: If you don’t believe in abortion, don’t have one.

Now, back to the subject of the OP:

Anyone got an opening in the uterine department? Eight little embryos await.
:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:
Scopata Fuori
“Bad Cat!”

38

[QUOTE=Scopata Fuori]
So, it’s not a matter of someone being asked to shoulder the burden of someone else’s choice. It’s a matter of being accountable to accept the consequences of “your” choice that you insisted someone else make.[\QUOTE]

Sing it sister. I’m getting a little tired of dealing with my kids, aged 5 and 3. I know, I should have thought about that before I had them, but making them was fun, and I don’t see why I should have to deal with the consequences. I do not personally believe that they are legitimately of a sufficiently advanced cellular state to have the protection of law. I assume that if I choose to kill them because I’m getting tired of them, you will either: (i) not object; or (ii) take over their upbringing at your own cost and expense.

Which one do you want to pick?

39

No, forcing someone to take on YOUR burden as a consequence of YOUR choice because of what THEY believe in is wrong.

Like I said, I don’t take either side on the issue, because I think both sides are assholes; thank you for demonstrating the reasoning behind my stance.

Please, at least try to figure out the .sig system. You’ve got the :eek: down PAT, though, and you deserve a cookie.

40

And then there are those who decided to descend upon me in my hospital room where I was lying there at 5 months waiting for a dead fetus to be removed from me and lectured me at great length about the evils of abortion.

Don’t you just love it when people feel perfectly free to harangue perfect strangers about matters that are seriously NOT their business? I especially loved them demanding if my [nonexistant] husband knew if I was there…

At least my fury got the habit of leaving the clipboard of what proceedure you are going in for no longer where anybody could look at them changed.