I think I understand your positions. It is unlikely that you will change anyone's mind. Too much debate becomes combat IMHO.
I should have stopped here, as there really is nothing else that needs to be said or argued. Over and out.
No problem. I came back right at you but edited it out before posting. It wasn't as mean as yours though... I doubt you know this but I'm a stay-at-home dad. I've had four kids with 3 of them being daughters. I work part-time and meet make my kids' school snack and breakfast and get them off to school and meet them off the school bus and take them to lessons and go to their school events. My wife works in health care and gets home about 6 or 6:30. I do the cooking and most of the laundry and shopping. I'm a lousy housekeeper-- just don't care. I married a woman whom I knew had had two abortions. I was married to her for almost 14 years. I know everything about the effects of abortion on the baby and quite a bit about the effects of an abortion on the mother. I've lived with the tears, the occasional grief and the depression. I read to my daughters three nights a week at bedtime and draw pictures on their back for them to identify. I'm the dad that most of these other mothers wish their husbands were a little more like... and you think I'm some kind of monster. Isn't life funny...
I think most posters understand the pro-life stance within the religious/moral context. Many just disagree that it is the pragmatic solution to the problem. In an ideal holy world devoid of socio-economic complexity the conception and birth of every child-to-be would be the goal. This is not an ideal world. There will always be unwanted pregnancies. This is indisputable. For whatever reason, good or bad, there will be some who will seek to terminate the pregnancy. Criminalizing is not the answer. Moralizing is not the answer. Abstinence is not the answer. Education and prevention is the answer.
It is hearts that need to be changed as you said so well.... just love the child well enough and long enough for it to be born. My goal is just to keep telling the truth i see and know from experience. I try not to get dragged into the insults but sometimes it is hard.
We've had many discussions here giddy; I don't think this is fair to me or honest to yourself. Now, for real this time, over and out.
DNA does not define life. The same DNA that is in an embryo is in every cell of your body - by your argument destroying skin cells is murder. There's no rationalization on "my side". I only say that it's up to the mom. And no one should interfere because no one is god. You are the one saying life begin at conception - but based on what? Your definition of a human being is arbitrary. I am not imposing my belief. I personally don't like an abortion after 26 weeks. That's my belief. But I am not imposing that upon others. Because I know my belief isn't shared by all, and that others see it differently. Here is an example. Some people believe killing animials is immoral. They think even eating meat is immoral because you are killing sentient beings. But they can not impose that upon others. They can't stop you from hunting animals or killing for food can they? It's not their right. They can protest it, but to impose their belief would be wrong. That is what you are doing. I am not trying to impose my beliefs upon you or your family, but you are doing that to other people's families. Do you not see that? The reason rape and murder are illegal is because a society needs these laws or it will fall into anarchy. Yes, morality plays a role, and morality - the difference between what we accept as right versus wrong, stems from both the evolutionary needs required for us to have survived and excel as a social group. I don't see destroying embryo's as immoral. There is no moral code that states that...outside of the interpretation of the bible. Science does not say a human being is a one-celled organism. This is your definition, accepted by you and created by others. You buy into it - great for you, but I don't, and I don't take kindly to those who would impose their values and sense of morality upon me. I think it's self-righteous and absolutely egotistical. Who are you to tell me or my loved ones how to run our lives? Or that you are the one who says what life is or not. Roe vs. Wade will never be over-turned, because the political repercussions are far too great. Do you think even Bush wanted it overturned? Heck no. It will never ever be over-turned, because if it were to happen, the politicians responsible for it would face a mass fury from women. It would tear this country apart, and you wouldn't stop abortions, you'd just create a travesty of human rights and set this nation backwards. I am not going to discuss this anymore, because i am getting a bit upset about this and this discussion with you is going no where. I respect your beliefs, but I do not agree with them and do not want them anywhere near me in my life.
For the umpteenth time, I've had the same basic position on this issue for my entire adult life which includes about 15 years before I ever came into some kind of faith walk. I've not quoted a scripture to support my position, so will you stop with this nonsense of demonizing religion for anyone's pro-Life commitment. I think I've corrected you directly twice in this thread yet you keep coming back with the same invalid assertion.
I sure wish I knew what you meant here. You called me a "disturbed individual." I was just trying to help you understand that I'm not some misogynistic oaf-tycoon who prowls the secretarial pool. You "owe" me an email explanation if you don't want to post here...
Completely on a separate note.. I find it impossible to have debates with anyone on abortion. They are two diametrically opposed viewpoints with very little room for compromise or even debate. It seems like you either believe life starts at conception or you dont. The whole crux of the abortion debate rests on were life starts from which (despite all the scientific evidence you want to provide) is still a fairly arbitrary distinction. Yes its a ball of cells (which I generally view it as) but some view it as life. And that's most of the debate, which generally doesnt go anywhere outside of people yelling at each other. There's very little fact or nuance to this question outside of that which leaves very little to debate about.
I apologized for my insult, and I don't think you really have any reason to claim that I "think you're some kind of monster". We've had many discussions in here - while they may get heated - I don't think I or you have ever thought the other subhuman.
I disagree. When you get two people who are willing to give up the rhetoric and come to a compromise, people on different sides can see eye to eye. When either side becomes completely intransigent, your statement above becomes true.
Moreover, it's not just about vague definitions of when life "begins". It's about pragmatically reacting to the reality that abortions are not going to just magically dissapear - legal or not. Gah. I need to escape from this thread. dammit.
Are you kidding? 1. No one else has my same DNA; the DNA of others has similar characteristics but it's not about wasting DNA it's about DNA denoting us as human beings. I don't feel like a murderer when I sneeze or spit for that matter. It's not about the death of a few DNA strands, it's about the whole being. 2. As a group, humans play "God" all the time. Many or most of our laws are driven by some component of morality. It's usually considered a good thing. We are glad that people aren't free to murder and rape us. 3. To make any proclamation about when life begins is playing God, so let's just concede that we are both "playing God." Here's the question: which of us is killing human beings if we promote abortion? Your side or mine? Which side? If we have to play God (and we have to), I'm going to err on the side of caution and treat that bundle of cells as a human being. What's more it is your side that is being arbitrary by articulating some definition about when the life in the womb is human or not while my side has granted that status from the get-go... so who is really being arbitrary here?
There are different kinds of apologies that range from I shouldn't have said that (but I still think it) all the way to I didn't mean that in the very least. If you slap somebody and apologize, that doesn't erase the sting of the slap. Words are trickier so your apology remains in the twilight zone. You didn't erase your insult, so what exactly am I to think? I try to put my position in some context and you come back and tell me that I'm being dishonest with myself. Sorry but I'm not feeling the good vibes that you evidently think you are emanating....
What on earth are you talking about? I have to erase the words to "consummate" the apology? I'm not going to virtually beg or something. I apologized. End of story. Sheesh.
