An internet oasis of open discussion without personal attacks
Scott wrote:I think we can see now that we all have almost unanimous agreement. The only people who are surely wrong are those that cry out at almost half the population as anti-choice or pro-death in terms of the abortion debate. We can see nobody is anti-choice or pro-death since we almost all even those crying out such divisive rhetoric actually want abortion to be legal under certain circumstances and illegal under others. It's simply where in the infinitely divisible spectrum of gray between the two points of agreement one draws the line.
Yet once we all see that, then it does show the spectrum is made up of a lot more gray than black-and-white if you excuse the metaphor. For instance, take the rape issue. Some have said that the fact that one of the hypothetical women was raped is the deciding factor for wanting that instance of abortion to be legal while others not. Even that one factor itself is not black and white of course. Consider the spectrum between the most forcible rape to the most consensual, irresponsible utterly unprotected sex such as statutory rape, drunk sex, accidental-condom-breaking, freak-vasectomy-failures and pregnancy-related contract violations such as someone hiring a surrogate mother bailout out. So even when we isolate the difference down to one issue, it still isn't black-and-white.
Scott wrote:Exactly chazwyman! The tiny few people who would actually support either extreme seem to be clinging to an unreasonable, unjustifiable, black-and-white view. Rather, nobody is absolutely "pro-life" or absolutely "pro-choice". Rather almost everyone is a little of both, almost everyone acknowledges that there is no simple black-and-white point at which the would-be baby suddenly goes from having no personhood or no right to life at all with no requirement at all for the would-be parents to endure even the slightest inconvenience to maintain that would-be babies potential for life to suddenly having the strongest one imaginable such that the mother is like a slave forced to do all she can to nurture that would-be baby and keep it 'alive' until birth, especially not at the arbitrary moment of either fertilization or birth. Rather, we all realize that there is a huge gray spectrum between these two black and white points between a single-celled zygote and the most viable fetus, multidimensional if you take into account extenuating circumstances like rape, poverty, adoption availability and detected birth defects, and we all know somewhere vaguely on that spectrum abortion goes from something we clearly want to be legal to something we clearly want to be illegal with a vast gray-area in-between where it is no clear, that somewhere it vaguely goes from something almost identical to using a condom to something almost identical to infanticide of a newborn. Philosophically, trying to sort out this vague spectrum might be of interest, but we can now easily see the fanatics on either side are wrong, not necessarily because they might hold to one of these two extremes that makes them fanatic, but that they treat the debate like it's black and white and like the other side is absurdly diametrically opposed to their own. This is predictable behavior in a way because potential fanatics will presumably give themselves the benefit of the doubt, metaphorically and quietly patting themselves on the back for being reasonable enough not to choose something like option A or option B, but then they loudly villianize this 'other side' making the 'other side' out to be some unreasonable group absurdly diametrically opposed to their more reasonable albeit strongly opinionated views. This is wrong. There is no diametric opposition. The villianization by extremist groups of the other side is the sociopolitical equivalent of a strawman fallacy, but in real life the consequences are severe from nutjobs blowing up abortion clinics to politicians abusing the issue as a wedge to get elected while selling out to a bipartisan group of wealthy special interests. We've got two riled up opinionated sides each viciously despising a ridiculous fictional other side, mistakenly thinking each other is that fictional, unreasonable other side that is diametrically opposed to their reasonable side.
Scott wrote:No, since nobody has explained why they voted for anything besides C. If I had to guess, I think they may have misinterpreted what I wrote, probably thinking that the abortion wouldn't kill the would-be baby or thinking that due date meant conception date.
Bricklayer wrote:If those who started wars were as willing to get up close and intimate with the actual killing as mothers are in an abortion, war may enjoy the same respectability as does abortion. Few soldiers and even fewer generals and even fewer polititions are as committed to the death of another as a mother is in an abortion.
We will never be rid of war or abortion because there is a time to kill.
Spiral Out wrote:One can be Pro-Life AND Pro-Choice simultaneously. You can hold the belief that life is sacred and act according to that belief, and you can also hold the belief that everyone has the right and responsibility to choose for themselves and act according to that belief as well. The two beliefs do not conflict and are not mutually exclusive. It's only when one desires others to adopt and adhere to his/her own specific beliefs that conflict occurs.
Newme wrote:According to your line of thinking, all children being ripped apart limb by limb AFTER all their body systems are intact (at 8 weeks gestations), including the nervous system... all these children want to live if their mother wants them to live & want to die if their mother wants them to die?
You might want to watch an ultrasound of an abortion & see if you still see the child's input as insignificant...
- Choice B: I want it to be legal for a wealthy woman who is 5 days past her due date to get an abortion even though doctors are sure that the healthy baby would be delivered safely and relatively easily otherwise and even though many safe, healthy, loving families are willing to adopt the would-be newborn immediately and even pay the woman significantly for it.
Users browsing this forum: Dachshund and 4 guests