Abortion

[bejkuy]

To many people, the issue of legalized abortion will always be a central as long as it remains legal.
Quite a few people in this county, myself included, equate the last 30 years with the holocaust.
When a person holds a view such as this, it is no distraction.  It is THE ISSUE.

[bejkuy]

<<You equate abortion procedures with the Holocaust? You think we should trials and start a world war?>>

?

Gustaf,
You are a reasonable man as am I.  In no way would I support any of the following.  I denounce those who would use any violent means.  I am simply informing you that a large number of people in the U.S. (I would guess 25-35%) see no little between the indiscriminate killing of innocent babies and the slaughter of the Jews.  Obviously there are completely different circumstances that require completely different responses.  

Think about it though, if you are a person that believes that life is a gift from God and that it begins at the moment of conception, you will have very strong feelings when you hear the statistics surrounding abortion.  I know many otherwise liberal people who will not vote for any candidate that is not pro-life.  

[bejkuy]

<<In order to believe that abortion = holocaust, you'd have to believe that:

1) The Jews killed in the Holocaust lived inside the bodies of Gentiles
2) Abortion doctors and pro-choice women want to rid the world of fetuses (or unborn babies, as you would say)
3) Women seeking abortions want to cause harm to their fetus>>

North Carolina Liberal,
I never said that abortion was the holocaust, rather I stated that to many Americans, the last 30 years has been similar to a holocaust.  
Obviously the situation is different.  If I said a 18 year old basketball player was the next Micheal Jordan would that mean he would have to be 6-5, be born in New York, go to NC, and play for the Bulls?

In regards to the rest of your post, Yes, most pro-lifers are people of faith.  Yes, agnostics and athiests, are likely to favor abortion rights.  (Hitler, Mao, not meant as a cheap shot)  Human life is sacred to REAL people of faith.  

The issue isn't about control.  I no more want to control women than   I'm basically a libertarian on most issues EXCEPT abortion.  It's about the protection of a future person.  Don't try to put a convicted murderer who needs to face his crime in the same category as a baby who is full of opportunity and promise.

Have you seen a modern ultrasound?  It's a child.  They kick, they hickup, they react to noise.  

Abortion is the saddest part of America's history.  When will we wake up?

[bejkuy]

[



Yes, I have the highest respect for the view that abortion is wrong. I have never been able to make up my mind on this issue, so I just take a sceptic stand against extremists on the issue. My point was just that it isn't fair to compare it to the Holocaust, which was an evil act, aimed at the destruction of a people. I think that if you want to make such a comparison, the "starving millions of India", or something like that would be more appropriate and less offensive.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fair enough.

[bejkuy]

<<<ok still never had anybody explaint o me how late term abortion or partial birth abortion is legal anyway?  What about the trimeste thoughts discussed in Roe?  and Casey?  

It is my understanding that this procedure happens right near full term, if so how can that be justified?>>>

Will anyone on this forum defend this nefarious act?

[bejkuy]

Partial birth abortion is when the infant is partially delivered before he or she is destroyed.

This is the preferred method of abortion after the third trimester begins.

Any many cases the aborted baby could have survived outside of the mother's womb.

ALL of the democratic nominees stood firmly in support of legalized partial birth abortion.

 

[bejkuy]

For a "civilized" county, we sure tolerate some wretched things to occur.

[bejkuy]

<<<I will defend third-trimester abortion, because I believe it to be a component of liberty that cannot be renounced.
I will begin by contradicting the reasoning of Roe and Casey. They seem to show little understanding of Constitutional principle and are primarily a reflection of what the Supreme Court wanted in the way of policy. The Constitution's text has a fairly absolute mandate as to abortion: Legal at all points before birth. Section 1 of Amendment XIV settles the question of fetal standing before the law. It says "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." Fetuses are thus not citizens as defined by the Constitution that the state has a compelling interest in defending. It never fails to amuse me that the same Conservatives who deny rights to illegal immigrants because of their lack of citizenship will twist the meaning of this clause to accomodate fetuses. Amendment IX states "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed so to deny or disparage others retained by the people." I find this to be a perfect example of legal language which protects the rights of women from an overzealous legislature intent upon hallowing fetuses at everyone's expense. Also, the Equal Protection Clause seems to protect abortion because criminalizing it would be tantamount to sex discrimination. It would seem apparent that the consequences of bearing children are very different for men and women. Study after study shows that women bear a much greater economic hardship as a result of reproducing. With this empirical evidence firmly in mind, the failure of the government to provide for relief in the form of abortion to pregnant women would result in a disparate impact, and thus a violation of equal protection. So, to mandate that abortion be a right throughout the pregnancy would merely be abiding by the pure dictates of the law.
Abortion can also be conceptualized from a philosophical perspective. Utilitarians, in the line of Jeremy Bentham, can argue that the happiness of the mother outweighs the rights of the prospective person. Libertarians, in the line of John Stuart Mill, can say that a woman's self determination is a fundamental right. A Kantian definition of Categorical Rights would say that the right to an abortion is an inviolable principle. Even Catholic philosophers, such as St. Augustine, who said fetuses had rights after hominization, and St. Thomas Aquinas, who felt female fetuses were persons after 40 days and males after 80, defended some vestiges of a concept denying fetuses full rights. Of course such a decision might grow in complexity as a fetus ages in gestation, but that is precisely why it should be left to the individual who knows their circumstances.
Personally, I feel that defending a woman's physical autonomy is a moral duty of government. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life. I can see no justification for allowing an unwanted pregnancy to obstruct something so innately personal and so circumstancially imperative.
In closing, abortion would rightfully be included in the pantheon of rights considered fundamental to humanity. However, some wish to fob it off like a poor relation. I fear for the future. I fear for the day when humanity's flickering candle of personal dignity goes out. That is why this right must be defended so vigilantly, and gestation should not take priority over all that is so important. >>>

Migrendel,
 
Your reasoning is scary.  I wont't respond to each of your premises, but will tell you that your line of thinking, when stretched even so slightly allows for sterilization of the mentally retarded, mercy killing of the elderly, and mandatory abortion of all "imperfect fetuses."
You appear to place a higher value on  convenience over life.

[bejkuy]

<<<I'd like to know how the hell you came up with mandatory abortion for imperfect fetuses. It would help if you'd take the time to actually show your reasoning, but I'll work in the blind here. I believe that a right to life is established at birth, and that is what allows for abortion. I believe the right of liberty allows for an individual to make their own decisions regarding reproduction. The sterilization of the mentally retarded without consent would be impermissible because it would violate their right to make their own choice about future heredity. If one can show consent for a mercy killing, I believe that is totally permissible because the right to decide whether one wishes to continue their life, when ravaged by disease, should be fundamental. I don't believe abortion should be mandatory. I believe it should be a personal decision. If someone wishes to keep a defective fetus, that should be their right, but I would on the other hand allow for someone to voluntarily terminate that pregnancy. I don't know how you came up with those ideas. I personally feel you simply decided to put down a host of things that you think will either malign me or reflect a non-textual inference you made about my legal views. In any case, I hope your knowledge of my actual legal views on those topics assauges you. >>>

Simmer down my liberal friend.  I did not accuse you have harboring such vile notions.  I simply made the logical correlation between abortion on demand up through 9 months (overwhelmingly done for convenience) and the next logical progressions of legalized euthenasia (my state), mercy killings, sterilization, etc.

The leap to such practices would be much shorter in a society that allowed partial birth abortion than one that valued and protected the lives of ALL it's citizens and future citizens

[bejkuy]

<<<A mercy killing is, I think, here meant to mean when you "pull out the plug" on people who are getting demented, suffering from nasty developing diseases, etc and want to be killed but can't do it themselves, b/c they're too handicapped. Euthanasia is the formal term I believe. Or maybe he is using it in general, in which case your soldier example is perfectly valid. >>>

That's not what I was talking about.  I was referring to the "mercy killing" that went on in Nazi Germany of "defective" people.
I also was referring to mandatory sterilization.

Are you aware of the rascist beginnings of planned parenthood?