Finally, an honest liberal on abortion

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #316976
    Vknid
    Moderator

      Here is Bill Mahar, telling you to your face what abortion really is.  Murder.

       

       

      Abortion is an inversion of not only the values that this country was founded on but also the values that built our society.  So the inversions of those founding values is destroying society.  People that built this country for over 150+ years knew life had value.  And they felt that so strongly they would place priority on the lives of the many and give up their own in sacrifice for them. As it’s been said, “plant trees whose shade you know you will never sit under”.  But now we have inverted those values and we now prioritize the self and will gladly sacrifice others for the self.  Even our own children.

      You can rationalize it for the next 100 years, but when you support abortion you are submitting that whether a living human has value is based in part on a calculation of how inconvenient that life is to you.

      You can talk about well he/she is a “person” here and not a “person” there.  That’s simply cherry picking whatever is the current science to try to paint grey what is black and white because it is supportive of your entitlement.  Making arguments based on nebulous terms is still just rationalization.

      Do many people claim to be pro-life and then when they make a mistake they alter their stance temporarily?  Yes.  And that makes them murderous hypocrites.

      Does that mean IVF is wrong too (it causes multiple “conceptions”)? Yes.

      But what about “my body my choice”?  In the vast majority of cases it was 100% your choice. You chose and now it’s no longer just your body.  If you are driving your car and pickup a friend to bring them to the mall, but halfway there you decide you don’t want to go to the mall, is it ok to just eject them from the car on the interstate?  My car my choice?  No, because you are not the only one in it.

      What about when the life of the mother is at dire risk?  This is the only time I invoke “my body my choice” in this context.  If we are in the situation where someone will die regardless then it’s just doing the best you can.  But any mother (or father) that would not sacrifice her life for her child is simply just a pregnant female.

      But what about capital punishment, you support that right?  No, I do not.  I am fine with self defense but life and death is God’s territory.

      These peripheral discussions do not take away observable reality.  A human in the early stages of development is still a human regardless of what term  you use for that state of development.  And it is most certainly alive.  So stopping he/she from developing and ceasing his/her life is killing  a human.  You can play the whole “he/she is not a person yet” but that’s just more grey in an attempt to obfuscate right and wrong.

      Right and wrong are typically fairly black and white.  It normally only gets grey when what we want clashes with what is right. And to a great degree that is human nature and a nature we must always battle to be better humans.

      Now someone will say, what about rape and incest?!?!?!?  It’s the same value vs. convenience calculation regardless of the reason.  The difficulty of a situation does not alter the right or wrong in it.  But you know what?  Take that argument.  If we can agree to cease birth control abortion then I will take that exchange since that eliminates the absolute vast majority of abortions in this country.

      Life either has intrinsic value or it does not.  And any devaluation of life devalues all life.  Once someone fashions a “not a human wand” so they can kill another human then that rationalization will spread and can then be used by anyone else.  IE Hitler, IE Hamas, IE Mao etc etc

      The observable roots of abortion and the birth control pill in this country, in large part, begin at Margaret Sanger.  She thought the world needed to help the poor by making sure there was just less of them to start with.  Unfortunately,  her idea has worked well given that Planned Parenthood (an abomination of a name) is most often in poor areas.  And in New York city they now abort more black children then they allow to be born.

      While we began using this formula for the value of life that is based on inconvenience or difficulty for those who cannot defend themselves or even form a union to complain or protest it will not end there.  And it’s already started.  You see it on the news everyday where a person has decided that others are inhuman and their lives no longer have value (no that’s not always or even mostly mental illness).  If you wonder how we arrived at that point, look to where the ability to take away the value of someone’s life began in this country, abortion.

      Some say the Devil’s greatest lie is to convince you he does not exist.  This could be.  But I think his most productive lie is that life is primarily about the self.

       

       

      #317001

      But any mother (or father) that would not sacrifice her life for her child is simply just a pregnant female.

      I’m curious, do you think a woman who got raped and has her life possibly at risk have an abortion?

      #317003

      I believe human life begins the moment our unique DNA sequence is instantiated. Our DNA is, objectively, what makes us “us”, and it’s the ultimate identifier of an individual, both legally and biometrically.

      I conclude the unborn are people, even though they look different from us. Any decision regarding the unborn, therefore, ought to be made with that in mind, including extreme cases such as rape, incest, or life of the mother.

      Do we kill children for the crimes of their parents? Do we kill children for being crippled? Do we kill children to save the lives of adults?

      #317004

      From a scientific perspective it’s murder because scientists agree that life begins at conception.

       

      And here is where the pro-choice lobby lose the argument.

      They know this to be true BUT they cannot agree to it or else they’ll have to admit that they’re supporting murder.

      Instead, they consistently try to re-frame the argument by claiming baby growing inside of a mother as nothing more than “a clump of cells” and/or a “parasite”. Some of these “educated” people even liken it to a tumor. But there’s no scientific evidence to support those positions.

      That people would attempt to devalue and dehumanize life in order to justify an act of utter barbarity – says a lot about them.

       

       

      #317036
      Vknid
      Moderator

        I’m curious, do you think a woman who got raped and has her life possibly at risk have an abortion?

        I assumed you would chime in  and attempt to rationalize painting an entire white room grey because there is a single dot of grey in a corner of one wall.

        I am pretty sure I answered both things very clearly above in explicit detail but I will explain again.

        Difficulty does not ,nor should it, affect morality or logic.  Raped or not, it’s still a human life.  This has no bearing on anything but the difficulty.  Life is rough, always has been.  We make mistakes and sometimes bad things happen to us.  Neither thing absolves us of right and wrong.

        Life at risk serious risk?  I see that as a horrible situation to be in, literally a life and death decision. But again, this does not make the life inside you valueless.  Since someone will likely die anyway, I believe it to be up to the woman. (without rape that up to the man and woman).  The woman can choose to possibly sacrifice her life or not.  But a woman who chooses not to do so, is not a mother in my opinion.  The absolute definition of parenthood (planned or otherwise) is sacrifice.  That’s the same whether you are the father or the mother.

        But as I explained above.  I would gladly take a ban on abortion with the exception of rape/incest (which is rape) vs nothing at all as that ceases the absolute vast majority of it.  I believe it should be up to the states like almost everything should.  The only thing the Federal gov should be enforcing is what is constitutional and what is not.    One of the reasons there is so much division is because there is an attempt to make EVERYTHING centralized.  The idea that a state customizes it’s laws for the people that live there puts others states on the warpath is moronic and destructive.

        #317061

        Gotcha

      Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
      • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

      Subscribe to our mailing list to get the new updates!

      SIGN UP FOR UPDATES!

      NAVIGATION