[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OT: sponge burning!

On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 03:37:42PM -0800, Michael M. wrote:
> According to the CDC, [1] 1.4% of all abortions performed in the U.S.
> were obtained at 21 weeks or more (statistics for 2003).
> So, because some unknown portion of 1.4% of abortions have the potential
> to be aborting a fetus that might, under exceptional circumstances, be
> viable, then a politician who is pro-choice can be said to support
> "murder"?
> Still doesn't compute.
That is not it.  The point is that if a fetus at 22 weeks can survive,
who gets to decide when the fetus is actually alive.  I say we err on
the side of caution and say that it is alive from the moment of
conception.  You are welcome to your own opinion, however.

> It seems to me you can only equate abortion with murder if you believe
> that a fetus equates with a human being (in terms of the human rights it
> should be accorded), in which case viability is not an issue because
> even a not-yet-viable fetus should be accorded those same rights.
> That's certainly a valid point of view, but no more or less valid than
> the view that a fetus is not a human being entitled to the same rights
> accorded a human capable of conceiving a fetus.
> It seems to me what you're doing is claiming that because you believe
> abortion is murder, then anyone who is pro-choice must support murder.
> That is plainly wrong.
Actually, there are two kinds of death which can be effected by one
person on another: a lawful death or an lawful death.

Some examples of lawful death:

* self defense
* an executioner doing his job
* a soldier killing an enemy combatant on behalf of his government

Some examples of unlawful death:

* killing someone you do not like
* getting drunk and running someone over with an automobile
* getting in a bar fight and accidentally cutting someone's neck with a
  broken bottle

In the first group, the "victims" have either threatened the life of
another in an immediate way, been stripped of their right to life via
due process, or engaged in an act of war against the state.  In the
second group, the victims are innocent.

Now, the law in the US makes it OK to abort fetuses.  But, they have not
committed a capital crime, threatened the life of another, or engaged in
an act of war against the state.  To me, that means that the victim of
an abortion is innocent.  Killing an innocent is called murder.

Now, if you believe that life begins at birth, that is one thing.  Of
course, since babies can be born extrememly premature and still
survive, this is kind of fuzzy.  So then, where is the line drawn?
Hence my assertion that it is better err on the side of caution and
consider life to have started at conception.



Roberto C. Sanchez

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: