quote: Either elective abortion is the premeditated murder of innocent children, or it's simply a medical procedure involving the removal of some superfluous tissue.
I think that this is only a true statement if you believe in the human soul.
Without that belief, there's middle ground between those two positions.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:BTW, just for clarity's sake -- and Dagonee and I have puzzled around with this together before, so I'm pretty sure he understands where I'm coming from
Another aspect is something Avid Reader said: "That's a lot of dead babies someone intended to keep." This gets to the heart of the matter, from a different direction. The fact that the baby was never intended to be kept before it died is adds to the wrong being done.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: I see larger ramifications and implications of this rate for society as a whole.
I mean, one may not think that any other reason than loss of potential life should trump, but surely we can agree that this number (abortion rate) can be a proxy measure of other things that can be wrong? And surely we can agree that abortion doesn't just affect those immediately involved, no?
Well, that *might* be so, but I could just as easily imagine someone arguing that abortion is also an indicator of good things -- e.g., fewer abused/unwanted children, less welfare burden, more economic productivity from women not tied down by motherhood, etc. But really what I had in mind was pro-choicers being bothered by the morality of abortion itself, rather than merely using it as a measure of perceived societal ills.
Posts: 326 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Xavier: I think that this is only a true statement if you believe in the human soul.
Without that belief, there's middle ground between those two positions.
I don't see that the soul even comes into play here, unless it's your contention that government is instituted only to protect beings with souls (a mighty high burden of proof, IMO).
Posts: 326 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:But really what I had in mind was pro-choicers being bothered by the morality of abortion itself, rather than merely using it as a measure of perceived societal ills.
What you are missing is that pro-choice is not pro-abortion.
I think that abortion is wrong. But there are times when it may be the lesser of two evils, and in those times I think it should be the couple (or the woman if there is no "couple") who make the decision, in consultation with their doctors, family, and religious community if applicable. And because the decision is likely to be an agonized one, I don't think there should be legal hurdles to go through once it's been made.
I'm upset by high rates of abortion, because they suggest, to me at least, that many are not the result of a considered choice to pursue the lesser of two evils in an extreme situation, and many would likely have been preventable by a little forethought and/or a little more knowledge about birth control. Which makes me question whether I still wish to identify as "pro-choice." So far I do . . . although I do not allow the term, at least as it applies to me, to be defined by the opposing side as "wants women to have abortions" or even "anybody should be able to get an abortion at any time for any reason."
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: I see larger ramifications and implications of this rate for society as a whole.
I mean, one may not think that any other reason than loss of potential life should trump, but surely we can agree that this number (abortion rate) can be a proxy measure of other things that can be wrong? And surely we can agree that abortion doesn't just affect those immediately involved, no?
Well, that *might* be so, but I could just as easily imagine someone arguing that abortion is also an indicator of good things -- e.g., fewer abused/unwanted children, less welfare burden, more economic productivity from women not tied down by motherhood, etc. But really what I had in mind was pro-choicers being bothered by the morality of abortion itself, rather than merely using it as a measure of perceived societal ills.
Ah. I was perhaps being hyperliteral when I responded to this:
quote:Originally posted by Irregardless: I honestly never have understoof why pro-choice people would be bothered by a high rate of elective abortion.
That is, I was answering the (implied, I guess) question of why a high rate bothered me. In part, it bothers me because of what I take it to indicate in toto.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
And, just for the record, Dagonee has indeed helped clear a whisp or two of the fog of confusion through his writings on the subject.
I'm getting there, but this is going to be a long process for me, I think. I'm sure I'll make sense of it for myself eventually.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
The more I think about it, the more "That's a lot of dead babies someone intended to keep" bothers me.
My principle premise underlying my beliefs on abortion is that the "worth" of a human being is inherent and depends not at all on other people's wants, desires, needs, or perceptions of that person's value. A particular person may be more or less important (I had a hard time picking the word) to another particular person - a person will care more about the suffering of a family member than a stranger, but the true worth is measured from a perspective external to all of us.
That doesn't mean that all preference for family or friends is wrong - I believe we can incur higher moral duties based on relationship. But this is an elevation of our duty of care, not the inherent worth of the person owed the duty.
I think a lot of the world's ills come from failure to acknowledge this as well as failure to live up to it once we've acknowledged it.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't believe they had the nerve to include spontaneous abortions in with induced abortions. Spontaneous abortions are basically miscarriages.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by dkw: I think that abortion is wrong. But there are times when it may be the lesser of two evils,
OK, we are getting to the heart of the matter here. I can only think of one meaningful reason for abortion to be regarded as 'wrong' -- that it is the killing of an innocent child. If you think it's wrong for some *other* reason, I'd love to hear it.
But if that IS the reason, then I cannot imagine what alternative would make infanticide the lesser of two evils. What is worse than child murder?
Posts: 326 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: I believe abortion should be legal, although it is not an option I would choose myself except in some very specific, never-going-to-happen circumstances. But I find it horrifying and saddening when it becomes, as these statistics seem to show it being, a form of birth control.
I might have said the exat same thing, so I'm just going to quote kq and call it good. Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: I can only think of one meaningful reason for abortion to be regarded as 'wrong'
Well then maybe you need to think a little harder. I'm not particularly interested in going any further in this discussion with someone who is only capable of seeing one reason for anything.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure what you're getting at, Irregardless. That is, although I respect your freedom to pursue any line of thought on this forum (within TOS, of course), I don't really have a good sense of why you are pursuing this particular one.
I seem to be picking up some hostile or aggressive vibe, but that could just be me. [Maybe you are just intense? Or maybe I'm having a paranoid day, which definitely happens.]
So, what's the point of this conversation, for you? (Again, you're welcome to just about any point you want , but I think dkw and I could be aided by a clarification of where you see this going, ideally. Thanks!)
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't like abortion. Pretty outspoken on the fact, but I don't tend to argue with people - this is one of those topics that people believe that they believe, and no amount of factoids or logic will sway themselves from their position (myself included).
I have no respect for the "the child is better off (dead)" arguement.
Where I do tend to get really upset is when abortion is used as a form of birth control. But self-control isn't something easily taught, and some kids today (including some of my relation) believes it's perfectly ok to have vigorous unprotected sex with many men, because hey, STD's only happen to other people, and if I get pregnant, well, that can be taken care of. I guess that's one of my main complaints about abortion (aside from the spiritual complaint) - it's people not taking responsibility for their actions, in many cases (But not all, I know, I know)
Posts: 880 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think premarital sex is wrong, it's just good sense (to not do it). And even Catholics use the "timing" method of birth control (or so I've heard).
Kicking a puppy is wrong.
Posts: 880 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because I'm thinking that maybe (and this is just a hypothesis) Irregardless is trying to express that he find the idea of abortion to be personally and morally repugnant, and that he can't imagine why someone else would not. That is, I'm guessing that he is expressing some pretty heartfelt emotions along with a confusion about how someone could not react the same way.
If that's true, Irregardless, then I want you to know I hear you. I do get that this is somehing you feel quite strongly about.
(I suspect I feel less strongly about it than you, but I'm pretty sure I'm in a more confused state than you. Witness my posts at the top of the page, for instance.)
---------
Edited to add: I'm not sure about the "asking other people questions" part of it, though. Do you want a list of answers, or do you want more to underscore the conclusion you've already drawn, or what? (Honest question -- not a trap. I think dkw and I -- and others -- may be able to help with the former, but the best we can do in the latter case to help you would just be to acknowledge your position and respect your right to express it. Anything else would just muddy the sitation abominably, I'm afraid.)
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
To me it comes down to which wrong acts should be criminalized. While not the only indicator, direct physical harm to another human is usually dispositive that something should be made criminal.
Although "direct" is fairly fuzzy, I doubt anyone would dispute that it does "direct" harm to the fetus. This leaves two main area of arguments for opposing banning abortion: either 1.) the fetus is not another human being yet or 2.) some circumstance exists that places this situation outside the usual criminalization of direct harm to another.
Those who favor choice one don't always think abortion should be legal up until birth - they may decide to cut it off at the point the fetus is definitely or most likely human.
Many, or most people, favor choice 2 at least sometimes. Most people who oppose legalized abortion want a danger to the life of the mother exception. Many want a danger to the physical health of the mother exception. Some want a danger to the mental health of the mother exception and some want a rape/incest or disabled child exception.
If one wishes to honestly convince others - and it is possible to do so - then it's very important to comprehend the many ways someone can arrive at the belief that "this set of abortions should be legal." And many of them include recognition that abortion is wrong in some way.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
[note: deleted block-quoting of self because I am ashamed of my inability to understand the difference between the "edit" and the "quote" buttons. ]
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:So, what's the point of this conversation, for you?
It is not my intent to be either aggressive or obtuse; it just seems to me that there is rampant inconsistency on this issue (not on this forum, especially, but everywhere). There are any number of politicians, for example, who are soundly pro-choice with respect to public policy but also say things like they "personally oppose" abortion, that it's "wrong," "tragic" or "sad" and that it needs to be "rare."
However, I have never heard any of these people attempt to explain why abortion is so "wrong."
Posts: 326 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:And abortion is also good for the children. Because if you are poor/destitute or are an unfit parent, it is criminal to raise a child that will be abused or will suffer unduely.
While I certainly don't disagree that it's criminal to raise a child in an environment of abusiveness and suffering, I fail to see how terminating that child is better.
Well, actually my mind can grasp that idea-the idea that at some point, to die or even never to have lived is better than a life, if that life is filled with pain and misery. I don't believe in that idea, but I can understand it.
What troubles me is the enormous hubris implicit in making such a decision. If an abortion is based on the avoidance of suffering argument, then you are making one of two arguments. One, never existing is better than a life like that. Or two, if the person had lived they would thank you. Who are you-or who is any human being-to snuff out a life based on such flimsy supposition? Particularly when we can point to any one of the millions upon millions of people in the world who are suffering but would still prefer to live?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:So, what's the point of this conversation, for you?
It is not my intent to be either aggressive or obtuse; it just seems to me that there is rampant inconsistency on this issue (not on this forum, especially, but everywhere). There are any number of politicians, for example, who are soundly pro-choice with respect to public policy but also say things like they "personally oppose" abortion, that it's "wrong," "tragic" or "sad" and that it needs to be "rare."
However, I have never heard any of these people attempt to explain why abortion is so "wrong."
Okay. So, bear with me here. (picture a confuzzled crone, more-than-slightly hard-of-hearing, with an earnest and intent -- if somewhat turtlish -- expression, peering over at you)
Are you wanting to tell us you see this inconsistency and that it troubles you? That is, what sort of response would be helpful to you? [i.e., do you want a list of reasons, or an acknowledgment of your passion, or a list of hypothetical guesses about what reasons someone else might have?]
What would be appropriate for someone trying to engage in thoughtful discourse with you to say?
[What would a "good" or "useful" response to you look like, for you?]
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe he's asked for reasons why someone would consider abortion to be wrong that don't involve the death of an innocent child.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: I believe he's asked for reasons why someone would consider abortion to be wrong that don't involve the death of an innocent child.
So, a useful response would be to list some reasons why someone else might hold a different position?
[I'm obtuse, but not intentionally so. I'm just trying to figure out if supplying such a list will make this conversation more helpful or less. I've got my paranoia itch on today, and I'm pretty sure I'll be messing up on something before 12 noon. ]
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
Edit: And I think the confusion is on "wrong," not "tragic" or "sad." Your response earlier about it being an indicator covers "tragic" and "sad" very well.
Edit of the edit: I'd be interested in hearing them if no one else is.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Okay. Cool. I'll run with that, unless Irregardless lets us know that he would like something different.
Sometimes it seems that the more productive discussions I've engaged in on sensitive topics (at least, when clarity and understanding are the primary goals of all involved) have started with lists of hypothetical reasons. That is, what are all the sorts of reasons (good and bad) that one can come up with for someone to hold a given position?
I think making it hypothetical (rather than framing it in terms of a given persons "defending" his or her own views) can make it easier.
I'll go looking for you, Irregardless [and Dagonee. I have to do some paid work now, but I'll keep this simmering on my back burner for later today.]
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: I believe he's asked for reasons why someone would consider abortion to be wrong that don't involve the death of an innocent child.
Exactly correct. For example, it is conceivable that someone could call abortion "wrong" simply because their religion tells them so (this is similar to some things Senator Kerry said in the last Presidential election). But even in that case, there is usually some underlying rationale involving perceived harm to a child, etc., rather than alleging the existence of some arbitrary "thou shalt not abort" edict from God.
Posts: 326 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll say something that will almost certainly upset some people, but personally I believe that a lot of the "I'm pro-choice but I don't like abortion" comes from a deep-seated uncertainty about what actually happens in an abortion.
I'm not talking about the biological mechanics of the operation, of course. I'm talking about issues of life, death, humanity, and murder. I rarely meet anyone whose faith in an idea is so certain that when faced with such issues, doubts-even niggling, tiny doubts-are felt.
I believe that someone who is pro-choice worries, deep down, that just maybe the out-and-out criminalize-abortion pro-lifers are right. "Maybe it is infanticide. Maybe that is a human child we're destroying. I mean we don't really know what if anything a fetus is thinking or feeling, do we?"
And then the mind moves back, thinking to the string of decisions that brings one to the clinic, and realizing that, awfully, if they (it takes two) had just been more cautious, this dreadful decision would never have come up at all. (Not everyone who has an abortion does so because of stupid decisions, I realize. But lots do.)
I think people can be pro-choice while disliking abortion for a variety of reasons. After all, the kinds of choices that end up in abortions are usually bad or flawed.
Unprotected sex, either with a partner you love and want to raise a family with or with a partner you love but don't want a family with, or a partner you lust after or just like, or protected sex used improperly, and sometimes-rarely, I believe-protected sex with a partner you love and wish to raise a family with, but the properly-executed protected sex failed to protect by no fault of your own.
All of these acts except the last one are either undesireable or at least questionable. But as to why think those things are undesireable? Well...honestly a bunch of that is tied up with-for most of us-the string of decisions that ends up with, "Do we get an abortion or not?"
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Irregardless, there are lots of people who think premarital sex is wrong, or birth control is wrong, or kicking a puppy is wrong.
None of these involve killing an innocent child.
You just brought up the proper deabte. Is the fetus a child? Is it just another part of the female body until birth? Must there be brain activity? Individual heart beat?
What I would like to see are large amounts of funding by those that want to outlaw abortion that would go to women willing to wait and give it up for adoption.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:this is similar to some things Senator Kerry said in the last Presidential election
Except that Kerry said he accepted the Catholic teaching on abortion, and the Catholic teaching on abortion isn't "abortion is wrong." It's that an person is fully human person from the moment of conception and that abortion is the taking of an innocent life.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Irregardless: But even in that case, there is usually some underlying rationale involving perceived harm to a child, etc., rather than alleging the existence of some arbitrary "thou shalt not abort" edict from God.
Do you think so? Because a lot of the discussions I've had with my religious friends seem to rely on the understanding that edicts from God don't have to make sense, and sometimes that is the point. (e.g., not mixing wool and linen fibers for the clothing of those who are Jewish, and certain LDS practices that I can't quite remember right now)
I'm not sure I think this wouldn't fit on the list of reasons.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm not sure I think this wouldn't fit on the list of reasons.
The Catholic teaching on abortion wouldn't fit there (see above).
Yeah. But I'm thinking that this could be a tenable reason to hold. That is, it wouldn't be beyond the pale for someone to sincerely hold that it is wrong for no other reason (or rather, no other needed reason) than that God has said so -- either in scripture, or direct revelation, or whatever.
posted
(Of course, whether and how many people have this particular primary reason is another question. But I'm taking it that our goal here is to come up with a list of plausible, tenable reasons. That's why I asked, initially.)
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese: Do you think so? Because a lot of the discussions I've had with my religious friends seem to rely on the understanding that edicts from God don't have to make sense, and sometimes that is the point. (e.g., not mixing wool and linen fibers for the clothing of those who are Jewish, and certain LDS practices that I can't quite remember right now)
Oh, I'd agree that this is true of many religious tenets (i.e., God says so, and if I don't understand why, that's tough) -- but not so much on abortion. It seems to me that even most religious opponents of abortion want it criminalized for exactly the same reason that they want, say, killing ten-year-olds illegal. Not because God specifically said "don't kill ten-year-olds" but because it's an application of where He is believed to have said more generally "don't murder people."
Posts: 326 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Then this might well be a partial answer to the confusion for you. Perhaps some people have a different reason [regarding God] than what you attribute to them? (Almost certainly not all of them, of course, but we can well imagine that all of us are likely to fail somewhat in trying to guess correctly at other people's reasons for their beliefs.)
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
And a lot of religious opponents of abortion (by which I mean people who are opposed to abortion for religious reasons)are also opposed to birth control (which would prevent the need for many abortions) and are pro-death penalty. So how does that makes sense?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because they think birth control is wrong and the death penalty isn't?
If ones opposition to abortion is that it is the taking of an innocent life, there's nothing incompatible with deciding that it's ok for the state, after due process and a finding of guilt, execute people who take others' lives.
After all, most death penalty opponents are in favor of murder laws.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
People are pretty complicated, and the reasons we give for what we believe usually are pretty complex, too.
I more than half-wonder if we often come to conclusions first and then make sense of why afterwards. I guess that's another possible reason to put on the list: maybe some people haven't worked through why they believe what they believe yet (rather like Rakeesh said, actually)?
That is, perhaps some of the people Irregardless finds confusing just haven't pieced through the logic yet, and so maybe they either don't have a reason (per se) or are unaware of the logical contradictions that follow from holding certain beliefs in tandem.
[That definitely seems like a potential candidate for the list, to me.]
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: I'll say something that will almost certainly upset some people, but personally I believe that a lot of the "I'm pro-choice but I don't like abortion" comes from a deep-seated uncertainty about what actually happens in an abortion.
No. Not at all. I think a woman should have the ability to choose whether or not to go through with her pregnancy. I think that in a lot of instances, such as teenage mothers and rape victims, abortion is probably the preferable choice. However, I do not think that people should take the availability of abortion as a license to have unprotected sex with no thought of birth control beyond, "Oh, I can just get an abortion."
And I think that for some people, not all by any means, it is about wanting to punish people for having sex.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
km, I was responding to the "so how does that make sense" portion. I agree, there are some people with that motivation.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I certainly don't either, pH. I'm not sure where you got that idea from my post, unless that was more of a general statement.
But why do you think abortion shouldn't be viewed as birth control? People can cite medical health reasons for that opposition, but I think it's a rare person who would view that as the only reason.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
]
