Pandora
Well-Known Member
First, let's get my position on abortion clear: I am an agnostic, and none of my opinion about abortion is or ever has been informed by religious doctrine. The first trimester cutoff, and other arbitrary "magic numbers" are UTTERLY devoid of any basis in science or ethics. I have said before that there should be a real national debate - I emphasize "REAL" - based on the following two questions:
1. What IS human life?
2. When does it begin?
This should involve biologists, medical researchers, philosophers, and other potentially competent people to answer these questions. Ideological assertions of any kind ("A woman has a right to choose") are disallowed.
This REAL debate has NEVER occurred, because any possibility for it was cut short with Roe v. Wade, a judicial fiat that not only was not based on any real scientific or philosophical competence, it was also hignly flawed in the realm where the justices of the USSC were SUPPOSED to know what they were doing, the U.S. Constitution. There HAS been a lot of a posteriori pseduo-scientific justification.
Since such a resolution of the real issues has NOT yet taken place, my position is the following: since it is a reasonable hypothesis (after all, nobody doubts that fetuses at least BECOME live human beings) that abortion DOES kill a human being, then until the REAL debate takes place and the issues are resolved, which may even be resolved in favor of the pro-abortionists, prudent policy is that abortions be prohibited, and society take on the responsibility of unwanted children. Meantime, society effect those policies that decrease the number of unwanted children conceived.
Notice there is a feedback effect with legalized abortion - if abortions are readily available, and feminists have convinced women that fetuses are just a blob of cells, than many more women become pregnant with unwanted fetuses, since there is not much negative consequence for doing so.
Also note that there used to be a HUGE number of adoptions in this country - the number of adoptions fell way off after abortion came on the scene - the babies that would have been adopted were never born.
Here in essence is Obama's vs my position:
Obama:
"I'm for abortion, but I can't justify why I would support it."
Me:
"I don't know whether abortion is killing a live humen being or not, so the safe course is to prohibit it until it is determined whether or not abortion is the killing of a live human being."
Since the answer was not out of your "pay scale" perhaps you are more qualified to be the"one" instead of Obama
Libsmasher for president