- Joined
- Dec 1, 2010
- Messages
- 61,608
- Reaction score
- 32,219
- Location
- El Paso Strong
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Not a straw man. I've seen the very argument Whovian was talking about.Strawman.
Viability.
Not a straw man. I've seen the very argument Whovian was talking about.Strawman.
Viability.
I kept asking what this doc did that was so different from other abortion doctors. Your answers were basically only that he broke the law. So I ask, other than breaking the law what has this doc done that's so much more wrong than other abortion doctors?
Your question has been answered twice already.
And, in my mind, what he did is not much different than what every other abortion doctor does. Your lines seem arbitrary, Arcana. On one hand you seem to argue viability but then say you're no longer a choicer after 12 weeks. So at 11 weeks it's not a baby, but at 13 weeks it is?Your question has been answered twice already. The man murdered children who were born alive and breathing on their own. The majority of abortions happen at a point in the pregnancy when the fetus is nowhere near the point of viability. In my mind, what he did is much more wrong because he killed "persons" in the legal sense of the term.
And, in my mind, what he did is not much different than what every other abortion doctor does. Your lines seem arbitrary, Arcana. On one hand you seem to argue viability but then say you're no longer a choicer after 12 weeks. So at 11 weeks it's not a baby, but at 13 weeks it is?
Besides, I don't believe every initially unwanted child grows up to be a murderer or a drain on society just as I don't think a "wanted" child from a good home can't wind up being those things.
It's a "baby" from the moment of conception, if you want to go with simplistic terms. It's alive. It's a life. I'm certainly not the kind of pro-choice person who pretends we're not dealing with life termination when talking about abortion. The difference between strict "moment of conception pro-lifers" and someone like myself is that I don't place any value at all on the "life" of a first trimester fetus and I make no apologies for it. It may seem arbitrary to you, but the line has to be drawn somewhere in order to reach a compromise. Ideally, I would prefer that the limit be placed at 8 weeks, but I'm willing to go as far as 14 weeks if that will appease the more liberal pro-choicers.
I've had this discussion countless times on here and there are scientific reasons for my "arbitrary lines". Most of them in regards to fetal brain development. I don't want to have this discussion again, suffice it to say that my limitations, even when they go as far as 14 weeks gestation, err on the side of caution. I'm perfectly at peace with my stance on abortion. :shrug:
How is this a response to my questions?
I must say I find this quite refreshing. American liberals/leftists are never this honest.
How did liberals bring us to this? You realize that this guy broke the law right? Where did liberals say this was acceptable?
You have to look at it as a realist. Abortions are NEVER going to stop, you can't ignore that fact, and having abortions legal, is better than having it illegal, due to the fact that it will harm women. Abortion by itself isn't good, but when you put it in the context of the real world, having it legal, is better then having it illegal.
So it is better to kill millions of babies rather than a few thousand women? That makes no sense