Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?[W:87]

I think it's the pro-life side and I say that as a pro-lifer. This might be the surprising to some, since the "appeal to emotion" argument is often denigrated as a poor, or illogical argument. I admit that I even went so far as to believe that the pro-choice "side" makes the more logical sense if you completely strip the emotion out of the topic. I've rethought that, though. I don't think all those arguments intended to divorce the human fetus from it's humanity or completely denying that it is worthy of empathy simply because it is in the womb are logical, to me and I do think it takes some twisting of logic to argue that the fetus is anything but a developing human baby. I do hope we'd all agree that a human baby, even a very young one, should be protected from destruction wherever possible (not to assume anything).

So, thinking more about it, I believe the pro-choice side is easier because it doesn't really have to stand up for anything. How often do we hear, "well I'd never have an abortion but..." So the pro-choice side doesn't really take responsibility for anything. In most of the positions we hold, whatever the topic, there's a potential down side, one we need to recognize. Certainly that's true as a pro-lifer. We have to acknowledge that, sometimes, the argument in justifying the termination of a pregnancy can be quite strong - this is why you get some variance when it comes to the whole "rape, incest, danger to the mothers health" scenarios. To be pro-life, we need to be willing to acknowledge that life is not always the easiest "choice" and we should not downplay that.

The pro-choice side takes responsiblity for nothing, really. If it's a "bad" abortion or one that most people would find pretty callous, the argument is, "hey, I'd never do such an act, but it's not my business or yours" or, as we most often hear, "I'd personally never do it, but..." In that way, they can still personally claim the moral high ground without responsibility for any of the bad.

So, back to the original question, which side do you think is more emotionally "driven". I'm adding a poll.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

It's undoubtedly the pro-aborts.

Literally all they have is emotionalism and histrionics about how if you don't agree with them you hate women. Down the line, there's zero science and zero logic or reason behind their opinions.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

Crap pressed the wrong option.

Clearly pro life.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

I agree with the OP, at least as far as identifying the pro-life side as one based almost entirely on emotion.

The basis of the Pro-life argument is that Human life begins at the moment of conception. That as soon as a female gamete (egg) is fertilized by a male gamete (sperm), the resulting zygote is a human being. Many argue from a religious base, that conception endows the developing zygote with a soul/spirit.

Admittedly, there are some who try to hold to a scientific argument that biological life starts when the zygote is created, trying to compare it to other one-celled living creatures at conception, despite the fact that it is actually cells developing into a more complex creature over a nine-month period.

In either case, the argument then becomes about the taking of a Human Life; that it is literally "murder" to abort this zygote once it is created and begins it's growth within the female.

On the other hand, the argument of Pro-choice rests on the idea that the developing zygote is merely a "potential" human being. That throughout it's development, sometimes right up until birth, it can naturally abort (miscarry) at any point. Therefore, an elective abortion is no different. It is simply a woman's choice to end the process at will.

The second argument has very little basis in emotion, and great basis in the individual right of the woman to control her own body.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

JayDubya said:

It's undoubtedly the pro-aborts.

Literally all they have is emotionalism and histrionics about how if you don't agree with them you hate women. Down the line, there's zero science and zero logic or reason behind their opinions.

Click to expand...

Jay, some pro-choicers make claims like that, sure (been there) but not all and you have to recognize that some of that (though not all, by any means) may be said as a reaction to angry posts about rape victims deserving life in prison for getting an abortion, etc. (I'm being intentionally hyperbolic in my example, I don't know of anyone whose actually said that).

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

Captain Adverse said:

I agree with the OP, at least as far as identifying the pro-life side as one based almost entirely on emotion. (Still Typing).

Click to expand...

Well hurry it up.

:mrgreen:

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

X Factor said:

Jay, some pro-choicers make claims like that, sure

Click to expand...

Some? It would be more accurate to say that a statistically insignificant percentage do not.

And not one name comes to mind.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

Captain Adverse said:

The basis of the Pro-life argument is that Human life begins at the moment of conception.

Click to expand...

That is not an emotional assertion.

That is a scientific fact.

This is the problem.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

JayDubya said:

That is not an emotional assertion.

That is a scientific fact.

This is the problem.

Click to expand...

Well you seem to have no problem with the very unscientific notion that peoples lives should be ended if they're poor.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

jetboogieman said:

well you seem...

Click to expand...

tl;dr

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

JayDubya said:

Some? It would be more accurate to say that a statistically insignificant percentage do not.

Click to expand...

Honestly, it's hard to say. I agree it does seem like a lot, sometimes, but I get pretty heated too and I just react without paying attention to who I'm reacting to.

In fact, I'll probably eventually have to bail from this thread. Lol.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

Well its clearly the pro-choice side and of course I can only answer from what I have seen here and other places and in real life.

BUT . . . .

I dont think its fair to group all pro-lifers together, they are VASTLY different. Hell the 3-5 pro-lifers that post the most here are practically shunned by the NORMAL prolifers here. At least one is blasted by pro-lifers and others for thier dishonesty and vile posting. SO I cant group them all together. MANY pro-lifers have said they avoid the topic because of THEM more so than pro-choiers, that speaks VOLUMES of what type of dishonest and vile posters they are.As far as easier vs responsibility etc I dont buy in to any of that. I think the emotion comes from 1.) being on the losing side (not a knock just the reality) and 2.) the ones that are typically emotional are arguing from a place not based on reality of law, rights and equality but PERSONAL SUBJECTIVE OPINIONS. That right there can lend itself to more emotion.

Eitherway though like i said i answered pro-choice but think its unfair to paint the whole because of the actions of the some.

Most people regardless of thier side acknowledge some key facts. They acknowledge that there are TWO lives involved, TWO not one. ANd they acknowledge there is now factual way to give equal right to them both all the time, its just impossible. THe people that acknowledge those facts on both sides are the most interesting too.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

JayDubya said:

It's undoubtedly the pro-aborts.

Literally all they have is emotionalism and histrionics about how if you don't agree with them you hate women. Down the line, there's zero science and zero logic or reason behind their opinions.

Click to expand...

You realize you just proved your own post wrong right? The immense dishonesty and emotion in your post is counter to your claim and destroys it.
Thank you. LMAO

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

Captain Adverse said:

I agree with the OP, at least as far as identifying the pro-life side as one based almost entirely on emotion.

The basis of the Pro-life argument is that Human life begins at the moment of conception. That as soon as a female gamete (egg) is fertilized by a male gamete (sperm), the resulting zygote is a human being. Many argue from a religious base, that conception endows the developing zygote with a soul/spirit.

Admittedly, there are some who try to hold to a scientific argument that biological life starts when the zygote is created, trying to compare it to other one-celled living creatures at conception, despite the fact that it is actually cells developing into a more complex creature over a nine-month period.

In either case, the argument then becomes about the taking of a Human Life; that it is literally "murder" to abort this zygote once it is created and begins it's growth within the female.

On the other hand, the argument of Pro-choice rests on the idea that the developing zygote is merely a "potential" human being. That throughout it's development, sometimes right up until birth, it can naturally abort (miscarry) at any point. Therefore, an elective abortion is no different. It is simply a woman's choice to end the process at will.

The second argument has very little basis in emotion, and great basis in the individual right of the woman to control her own body.

Click to expand...

So an 8 month old baby in the womb is only a "potential" baby, and the intentional destruction of human life is no different than the natural end of life? None of that is logical to me, at all. Besides, you don't have to even consider the unborn child, do you? You wash your hands of the whole thing by saying, "it's her choice."

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

X Factor said:

Jay, some pro-choicers make claims like that, sure (been there) but not all and you have to recognize that some of that (though not all, by any means) may be said as a reaction to angry posts about rape victims deserving life in prison for getting an abortion, etc. (I'm being intentionally hyperbolic in my example, I don't know of anyone whose actually said that).

Click to expand...

FYI the poster you are responding to feels exactly the way you described and has said so many times.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

Captain Adverse said:

I agree with the OP, at least as far as identifying the pro-life side as one based almost entirely on emotion.

The basis of the Pro-life argument is that Human life begins at the moment of conception. That as soon as a female gamete (egg) is fertilized by a male gamete (sperm), the resulting zygote is a human being. Many argue from a religious base, that conception endows the developing zygote with a soul/spirit.

Admittedly, there are some who try to hold to a scientific argument that biological life starts when the zygote is created, trying to compare it to other one-celled living creatures at conception, despite the fact that it is actually cells developing into a more complex creature over a nine-month period.

In either case, the argument then becomes about the taking of a Human Life; that it is literally "murder" to abort this zygote once it is created and begins it's growth within the female.

On the other hand, the argument of Pro-choice rests on the idea that the developing zygote is merely a "potential" human being. That throughout it's development, sometimes right up until birth, it can naturally abort (miscarry) at any point. Therefore, an elective abortion is no different. It is simply a woman's choice to end the process at will.

The second argument has very little basis in emotion, and great basis in the individual right of the woman to control her own body.

Click to expand...

its always human life(adj), always that fact cant be changed.

but its not always a human being (noun)

links to this have been posted many times, its not agreed upon in the scientific community that the super early stages fit the definition of human being (noun) even embryologist dont agree on this but some choose to ignore that fact and dishonestly claim otherwise.

For me none of that matters because it doesnt change the foundation and the reality of things though, there are two lives and they cant be given equal treatment since one resides in the other. Thats where the conversation starts.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

X Factor said:

So an 8 month old baby in the womb is only a "potential" baby, and the intentional destruction of human life is no different than the natural end of life? None of that is logical to me, at all. Besides, you don't have to even consider the unborn child, do you? You wash your hands of the whole thing by saying, "it's her choice."

Click to expand...

I was merely presenting the basis of the arguments.

I agree that at a certain stage of development the fetus can be considered a viable "human being," even though the potential for a natural miscarriage remains right up until birth. I'd liken it to a born human who might expire at any point between birth and "four score and ten" naturally.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

AGENT J said:

Well its clearly the pro-choice side and of course I can only answer from what I have seen here and other places and in real life.

BUT . . . .

I dont think its fair to group all pro-lifers together, they are VASTLY different. Hell the 3-5 pro-lifers that post the most here are practically shunned by the NORMAL prolifers here. At least one is blasted by pro-lifers and others for thier dishonesty and vile posting. SO I cant group them all together. MANY pro-lifers have said they avoid the topic because of THEM more so than pro-choiers, that speaks VOLUMES of what type of dishonest and vile posters they are.As far as easier vs responsibility etc I dont buy in to any of that. I think the emotion comes from 1.) being on the losing side (not a knock just the reality) and 2.) the ones that are typically emotional are arguing from a place not based on reality of law, rights and equality but PERSONAL SUBJECTIVE OPINIONS. That right there can lend itself to more emotion.

Eitherway though like i said i answered pro-choice but think its unfair to paint the whole because of the actions of the some.

Most people regardless of thier side acknowledge some key facts. They acknowledge that there are TWO lives involved, TWO not one. ANd they acknowledge there is now factual way to give equal right to them both all the time, its just impossible. THe people that acknowledge those facts on both sides are the most interesting too.

Click to expand...

You really are in no position to speak for pro-lifers considering you think our side is the "loser" side. It's also interesting the hostile posts by pro-choicers seem to escape your notice or concern.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

Captain Adverse said:

I was merely presenting the basis of the arguments.

I agree that at a certain stage of development the fetus can be considered a viable "human being," even though the potential for a natural miscarriage remains right up until birth. I'd liken it to a born human who might expire at any point between birth and "four score and ten" naturally.

Click to expand...

So the intentional ending of the life of a newborn would be just the same as it dying naturally?

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

AGENT J said:

its always human life(adj), always that fact cant be changed.

but its not always a human being (noun)

Click to expand...

Well, a form of human life begins at fertilization. If you read the whole first paragraph you'd see that I pointed out Pro-lifer's assume that human life equates to human being.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

X Factor said:

So the intentional ending of the life of a newborn would be just the same as it dying naturally?

Click to expand...

Don't misquote me. I said a miscarriage at that stage would be the same as a natural death of the born.

Our law recognizes that at a certain stage of development the fetus is considered human enough to prevent elective abortion unless the life of the mother was endangered.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

AGENT J said:

FYI the poster you are responding to feels exactly the way you described and has said so many times.

Click to expand...

While I appreciate you're trying to "rat" him out to me, you'd have more credibility on the topic if you'd just as strongly condemn the extreme things said about pro-lifers, but you don't. Actually, I take that back, I wouldn't care either way.

I will say that I know Jay get's angry and (and, yes, he says things I disagree with), but I also understand how frustrating the complete disregard and even hostility (not a knock, just reality :2razz, for the developing baby can be. You have to have pretty thick skin to advocate for life in this forum.

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

Captain Adverse said:

Don't misquote me. I said a miscarriage at that stage would be the same as a natural death of the born.

Our law recognizes that at a certain stage of development the fetus is considered human enough to prevent elective abortion unless the life of the mother was endangered.

Click to expand...

And how do you feel about that? Think that's wrong?

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

X Factor said:

And how do you feel about that? Think that's wrong?

Click to expand...

Think what is wrong?

Re: Pro Life or Pro Choice, Which "Side" is More Emotionally Driven?

Captain Adverse said:

Think what is wrong?

Click to expand...

Any restrictions on abortion. Do they bother you? They sure go against the "her body, her choice" mantra, don't they?