It baffles me that, for the most part, we continue to talk about abortion as if it isn't murder. And yet, when a boyfriend tries to poison a pregnant girlfriend because he wants to kill the baby he is charged with just that... murder. So is this killing, or is it not killing?
Here is an article by the Post-Gazette that reports a teenager accused of attempted third-degree murder with the help of two accomplices. The accused tried to sneak cow hormones to his pregnant teenage girlfriend. Fortunately the baby was unharmed.
We can't make exclusions for mothers aborting their own child on the basis of "personal choice." We have to decide, scientifically, whether the baby in the womb is a life or not a life. I would say if this young man is being charged with murder (I don't care what degree) it means that this IS in fact a life. If not, then the ACLU should come to this boy's rescue...
A mother who kills her born baby who is a month old (or even a day old for that matter) doens't get the benefit of "choice." Simply put, she is a killer. Why do we make the exception when the baby is unborn?
It stupifies me that we continue to dance around this as a nation.
Liberals continue to spearhead the discussion on abortion against "Christian fundamentalists" by saying that we (Christians who impose our morality on others) just base our argument on our personal faith. I disagree. As powerful as faith is in making personal (and social) choices, this argument is backed by logic and science as well.
I'm accusing Liberals of not using logic. I'm accusing them of flourishing their own morality on the basis of, well... what DO they base it on? When it comes down to making a decision on abortion we have to look at it as a simple, logical issue that involves devastating implications.
The question, again, is, why does a boyfriend of a pregnant teen get charged with attempted murder, but a mother who goes to the abortion clinic does not? You have to throw "choice" out the window unless you're willing to grant that "choice" to ALL mothers who have children alive in the world, no matter how young or old...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
There's a huge lack of concern for life--whether the youngest of life or the oldest. Women say there's a "choice" to have a child--I say the choice you made to have intercourse knocks that excuse for murder out the door. People say that they only had one choice when they dumped their elderly parents or grandparents in a nursing home that today has very little standards as far as care---somewhere to take them to die so you don't have to bear the guilt of your own pride. No one wants to take responsibility for anything anymore and it's so sad. In no way should abortion be considered a choice---it should be considered a crime. But the liberals who rule this country have no moral compass--they have no regard for anything but the lucrative business that is killing infant children.
Abortion will always be considered a woman's choice, there's no two ways around it. Because when you bring up abortion in the post, it sounds like you're saying "You got pregnant, there's a life inside you no matter how small, and you have the responsibility to foster it until it is born (and then after)."
But what about incest and rape, where the woman DIDN'T have the CHOICE to conceive? At that point, she has the seed of a criminal growing inside her. So by your logic, that child is her responsibility, although she may not have made the decision to conceive, even though Heather's point speaks otherwise.
I was born a Catholic and raised under Christian values but am now a registered Democrat, and cannot support the right-wing use of ABORTION IS MURDER as their main political point. There is no middle ground...if there's even the slightest chance that a woman was impregnated through rape and whatnot, something AGAINST her CHOICE, then she has the right of choice on keeping the child. She should not be burdened with something that was out of her hands. How many convicted rapists that impregnate these victims end up offering to take care of the baby after birth? 1) we as a people wouldn't allow it and 2) it never happens anyway.
You cannot liken a woman choosing abortion to a man poisoning her without her consent.
These are just my thoughts. I found you through your link to my site in your blogroll. Thanks for that, and keep up the good work.
Nicholas
tecmo, what about women who were not raped and still commmitted abortion? Your argument does not justify the action. And furthermore, you're justifying murder because a crime was violated against the woman. So is it okay that if somebody assaults me, for me to assault someone else?
Let's say, a man is driving with his son in the car and gets hit by a drunk driver. The son goes into a coma, recovers but suffers tremendous brain damage. Is it okay for the father to kill his son because it's not his responsibility to take care of the tremendous medical bills and upkeep of "maintaining" a mentally-challenged child?
Your argument has no value. Even if a woman is raped, which is a disgusting, pitiful and violent act, she doesn't get the benefit of murdering the baby. In all cases, the baby is still innocent.
I'm not trying to justify anything. Merely pointing out why ABORTION IS MURDER will never be accepted. There are surely women who weren't raped that abort their children. But the government will not overturn a law if there's a miniscule chance that a rape resulted in an unwanted pregnancy. There will not be a standard set that has flexible interpretations.
My opinion is rightfully conflicted. Raised as a Catholic, I hate the idea of abortion. But as a man who has had several female family members suffer through sexual assault, I find myself sympathetic to a woman's rights. As Chris Rock said, "I don't hate the abortion argument. I hate that rich, old, white men are sitting around telling women what they can and cannot do with their bodies."
The Republican Right has used the abortion/pro-life issue as one of their main (if not their most poignant) political points. George Bush ran in 2000 on a pro-life platform, and with 6 years out of an 8 year term with a Republican Congress, he did nothing to change abortion law. These Republicans hypnotized the massive amount of single-issue, conservative voters with promises of a pro-life future, and used that as political stepping stones to reach certain offices. They blinded voters like my conservative parents and grandma, who are single issue voters when it comes to abortion. And what came of it? The faults and failures of Bush's other political platforms were highlighted because these single-issue voters failed to adequately see if the rest of the Bush administration's beliefs would work (which most didn't) when you look past the pro-life smokescreen he had set up.
You say:
Even if a woman is raped, which is a disgusting, pitiful and violent act, she doesn't get the benefit of murdering the baby. In all cases, the baby is still innocent.
So by these ideas, not only does the woman suffer from being assaulted against her choice, she then gets the double whammy of not being able to choose to keep the seed of a criminal inside her. That's basically saying, "sucks for you that you were raped, have fun dealing with the consequences." How can we as men say that when we've never and can never experience what a woman is going through? Your opinions aren't right just because they are your opinions. I refuse to make such ignorant blanket statements like that when I know that I cannot fully imagine the mindframe of someone in that position. It's like automatically saying "Marijuana is bad" because you've heard some prick with an agenda repeat it over and over, so you blindly say the same thing even if you've never personally tried it. You're trusting that the rich, old white man saying "Get rid of abortion" knows what a woman is going through when he has no way of truly understanding.
We can go back and forth with our sides of the abortion angle, but its not going to change anything. I hate the thought of a woman aborting a potential child, but I hate the idea of stripping a woman of her rights even more. By forcing women to keep their children no matter what, we are valuing the unborn life of a child over the life of the woman. This argument will never be fair for that one point.
Again, I am not justifying abortion. Merely pointing out why and how it is damn near impossible for the current abortion laws to be overturned. And even if they say they are going to (Bush), they're most likely just appealing to your passionate beliefs to get your vote.
We have more laws and protestors to defend the rights of animals than we have to defend babies in the womb.
At the end of the day, I don't care about WHO stands on the issue politically. To me, it's not a political issue.
The question always is and should be, can we SCIENTIFICALLY PROVE that a baby inside the womb is alive?
If the answer is yes, (which it is), then destroying that life is ... you finish that sentence.
I really don't know how you can keep dancing around it.
At all cost, we should always stand to protect life. And in the cases of women being raped, that young woman deserves good counsel and support. And if she can't bare living with that child, she has the choice of giving the baby up to adoption. You keep calling it "torture" that a raped woman would have to live with a life inside her.
How is it that we've screwed all our definitions up?
There HAVE been women who have been raped and decided to let the baby live and have said it was the best thing they could have done.
And by the way, on some of these issues, I speak from personal experience. I'm not an outsider on the issue of abortion. But I won't disclose any details in this forum.
I think that women who have been raped, pregnant as a result and therefore abort is such a small percentage (which it is) is the only standing pro-choice supporters have to support their views. The facts are that the law is inconsistent when it comes to unborn children being murdered everyday. And its not a "potential child"--it IS a child from fertilization. No woman when she finds out she's pregnant says 'hey everyone I'm going to have an embryo!!' no she says I'm going to have a BABY. i've been sexually assaulted and if i would have ended up pregnant as a result that would not have justified killing the baby--i would never have put my self on the same level as the criminals who offended me.
i believe if you have no moral compass---no personal religious conviction on why this is wrong no matter who or how its defended--you're just going to go with the flow just like the rest of this sinful country.
Hey Anonymous, thanks for leaving your comment. How did you come across my blog by the way?
Michel,
I understand your points, and respect your opinion more than you understand. I'll say it again...I am not justifying abortion. I'm only pointing out why ABORTION IS MURDER will not be an accepted idea.
I've given you fact after fact about the abortion issue, and you come back with oversimplified responses, and no actual response to the points I've made.
At the end of the day, I don't care about WHO stands on the issue politically. To me, it's not a political issue.
That doesn't clear anything up. It IS a political issue, because the politicians are using your beliefs on this topic to sway your political leaning. You seem like a well-versed human who is passionate about certain topics, if you refuse to vote, then your apathy is letting evil people take office under false pretenses.If you do vote, then you cannot just gloss over the fact that the people promising to change abortion law are only saying it to get your vote. The number of single-issue voters as it relates to abortion is probably larger than any voting group. To say the issue is not political is absurd.
Your post, briefly summed up, is "Why is abortion not murder, but other people trying to kill the fetus will be charged with attempted murder?" My responses have not been to be the asshole opposing your views...I'm answering your question to the very best of my knowledge.
There HAVE been women who have been raped and decided to let the baby live and have said it was the best thing they could have done.
If you are going to throw out a blanket statement like that, please provide some citation or a way of backing the story. Otherwise, you're justifying your opinions with more of your own opinions. I'm sure there are plenty of women in that situation, but the government will not create a law based on the exception rather than the rule. If I could throw out a blanket statement with no backing, too, I'd believe that most women who were raped would rather not deal with a daily reminder of a criminal who took all of their choices away from them in one instant.
This has been a fun back and forth. Again, I'm only answering your original question. But somewhere along the way, your topic changed from "why is abortion not considered murder?" to "why is tecmo considering abortion okay?" There's too much weight behind this issue to merely state that "all life is sacred" and hope that that feeling will change the opinions of those actually in the situation and those fighting to prove who has more rights, the woman or the child.
oh...and blech bengals
Tecmo
Somewhat digressing...
I love your site and I think it's funny as heck. I urge anybody who is a fan of the Steelers (and ponies i guess) to check it out...
I also didn't mean to make a caricature out of your comments. It's a tough issue, but one where I feel we, as a nation, should really come to a conclusion.
I would love to see you stop over this blog more often.
I know I'll do the same, and hopefully direct more traffic your way...
Post a Comment