abortion
this one's gonna be a quickie, in three parts.
numero uno: men are not allowed to legislate anything regarding abortion. as we lack the proper plumbing to conceive and carry a child, there is no way we can make an objective informed decision about abortion. this issue should be left to women.
dos: people that support repealing roe v wade and other subsequent laws are not pro-lifers. this is political spin. they are pro-birth. remember that the large majority of people who think abortion should be illegal support the death penalty. calling them pro life grants them a framing victory which cannot be allowed.
tres: let us grant the basic premise their argument is based on - life starts at conception (if anything, life starts when the blastocyst takes up its parasitic relationship with the uterine wall). so this week old fetus is a baby. the argument goes that the state is allowed to compel the mother to carry the child to term for the sake of the unborn child. it then follows that the state is allowed to compel any of its citizens to carry burdens for the sake of supporting other life.
consider the case of someone who desperately requires a transplant. if my dna matches theirs, it stands to reason that the state can compel me to surrender a kidney, or part of my liver, or a lung. this is a natural and logical conclusion to the pro birth argument. it grants totalitarian power to the state in order to compel the sacrifice of my privacy and body for the sake of others. who will compensate me for time lost from work? what of future medical costs or other consequences from the transplant? people even die from shock, albeit only rarely.
it boils down to this - both sides of the fence would like to see a decrease in the number of abortions. cons and libs alike would prefer a country where every child had a loving home. they just think they can get it different ways. the pro-birth people think its supply/demand and by reducing supply, they can lower demand. pro-choice people think that by encouraging alternatives (multiple forms of birth control and family planning) and educating the public will reduce abortions. ill let you decide which one is more effective.
its off to bed for me, for now.
ill be posting more often, hopefully.
numero uno: men are not allowed to legislate anything regarding abortion. as we lack the proper plumbing to conceive and carry a child, there is no way we can make an objective informed decision about abortion. this issue should be left to women.
dos: people that support repealing roe v wade and other subsequent laws are not pro-lifers. this is political spin. they are pro-birth. remember that the large majority of people who think abortion should be illegal support the death penalty. calling them pro life grants them a framing victory which cannot be allowed.
tres: let us grant the basic premise their argument is based on - life starts at conception (if anything, life starts when the blastocyst takes up its parasitic relationship with the uterine wall). so this week old fetus is a baby. the argument goes that the state is allowed to compel the mother to carry the child to term for the sake of the unborn child. it then follows that the state is allowed to compel any of its citizens to carry burdens for the sake of supporting other life.
consider the case of someone who desperately requires a transplant. if my dna matches theirs, it stands to reason that the state can compel me to surrender a kidney, or part of my liver, or a lung. this is a natural and logical conclusion to the pro birth argument. it grants totalitarian power to the state in order to compel the sacrifice of my privacy and body for the sake of others. who will compensate me for time lost from work? what of future medical costs or other consequences from the transplant? people even die from shock, albeit only rarely.
it boils down to this - both sides of the fence would like to see a decrease in the number of abortions. cons and libs alike would prefer a country where every child had a loving home. they just think they can get it different ways. the pro-birth people think its supply/demand and by reducing supply, they can lower demand. pro-choice people think that by encouraging alternatives (multiple forms of birth control and family planning) and educating the public will reduce abortions. ill let you decide which one is more effective.
its off to bed for me, for now.
ill be posting more often, hopefully.
posted by keylaeris at 06:28
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home