6 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 14 previous comments
- Yes, it's clear that an embryo is not a "legal person" in this country.
A Jew wasn't a "legal person with rights" in NAZI Germany, either.
I still think that the primary difference between a young fetus and an adult is stage of development.
But, at least we can agree on something. A ban on abortions after 20 weeks, then? They are legal in much of the country today.
But, can we extend killing to any other human life that we find doesn't deserve protection as long as they are properly anesthetized? That seems like it would be a logical consequence of your stand.Aug 24, 2015
- I don't support banning abortion at all. I do support requiring anaesthesia for the fetus if there's a chance it could suffer. The evidence I've seen indicates that it's far later than 20 weeks before pain can be perceived.
I don't think it's helpful to compare Nazi Germany and Jews to abortion.
In theory, we could extend killing to any human life, but in practice our society would not choose this path. Almost everyone agrees that a human being, once born, is in a class of protected life, a legal person and citizen. It's hard to see us returning to a state where some citizens have less inherent value. Of course, we treat some life (non citizens) as lesser life in practice.
I find abortion morally repugnant, but I'm primarily interested in reducing abortion by enabling every woman to have excellent access to contraception, education, and health care, removing the stigma of open female sexuality, and treating women as full human beings who are capable of making all decisions regarding their bodies.Aug 25, 2015
- The evidence I've seen is that pain can be perceived at 20 weeks.
You are deciding which humans deserve life.
What everyone agrees is not necessary right. That's just a formula for denying minority rights.
It's hard to see us returning to a state where some citizens have less inherent value. Of course, we treat some life (non citizens) as lesser life in practice.
_I find abortion morally repugnant, but I'm primarily interested in reducing abortion by enabling every woman to have excellent access to contraception, education, and health care, removing the stigma of open female sexuality, and treating women as full human beings who are capable of making all decisions regarding their bodies. _
Your solutions to reducing abortion haven't really panned out. Treating women as full human beings would be holding the fully responsible for the actions they take with their bodies.Aug 25, 2015
- I disagree with you, Jordan. The states with the most regressive treatment of women and the abstinence only policies tend to have the highest number of unintended pregnancies. Arizona for example requires an abstinence only sticker on biology textbooks, yet has one of the highest rates of unintended pregnancy in the nation.
I haven't heard you mention anything about men's responsibility not to have sex with women they don't want to have a child with. In a just society, they would be at least as culpable as women. I also note that there are children available for adoption. If pro-life people were willing to commit to children 100%, they'd give those children loving homes.
Everyone decides what humans deserve life. You and I disagree on the abortion, but if you're truly pro-life, then we probably agree that we need to fund families so children and adults have good food and education, abolish the death penalty, enact national health care, feed the world's poor, protect civilians to the extent of our ability during conflicts, reform policing, and intervene in nations that mistreat their citizens. So I suspect we agree on most issues.
I know that banning abortion will not stop abortion, just make it more difficult and less safe, and I don't think it's my right to intervene in a woman's life in such a difficult decision. Aug 25, 2015
- Yes, I believe men should not have sex with women with whom they don't intend to have children, if they are fertile.
There are actually waiting lines for babies for adoption in this country. Many people go internationally to adopt babies because they can't find them in the US. Older children up for adoption often pose more challenges, but usually Foster care is available. There are very few children in orphanages anymore.
Religious people adopt many children. I know several who have adopted, even special needs children.
Yes, banning abortion won't stop it, just like banning murder hasn't eradicated that. We don't hear calls for making murder safe, legal and rare, though.Aug 25, 2015
- I believe you when you say that you disapprove of men having sex with women they don't want to have a child with. However, that doesn't help the current situation much. Women bear the shame and hostility of unintended pregnancy. Men do not for the most part. As the recent Ashley Madison and many other revelations have demonstrated, even the most religious men seem unable to control their desire to have sex outside marriage.
The fact is that there are children without permanent parents in the United States, and no guarantee that a woman who gives birth will be able to hand the infant to a loving family. There are waiting lines for newborn babies, just like people like kittens and puppies.
Most religious people do not adopt children. Some certainly do. I know many religious and non religious people and I don't see a difference in their adoption rates. In fact, you're probably aware that non religious people and LGBT people are discriminated against in adoption, generally by the same people who are pro-life activists.
Abortion is not murder, not legally and not philosophically, at least outside your narrow religious beliefs. Comparing the two is unhelpful, just like your earlier comparison to Nazi Germany.
Most pro-life people generally are pro birth Republicans, trying to force women to give birth but then considering their religious duty done and their pro-life work complete. I try to minimize the perceived need for abortion by providing everything a woman needs to avoid becoming unexpectedly pregnant and providing her the means to end an unwanted pregnancy as early as possible. Every pro-choice activist I know has the same goals. Working to make sex education, birth control, and early medical abortion available has resulted in improving women's lives around the world, and this improves the lives of children as families have the will and means to properly care for them. In summary, I believe my goals, and those of my fellow pro-choice activists, have made a positive difference in the lives of women, children, and families around the world. I don't see positive results from the pro-life activists.
Aug 26, 2015