Thread by Lorianne.
Seeing as I just discussed murder, it seems fitting to next discuss abortion, as abortion is murder. When you get an abortion, you are killing a living organism, something that had the potential to become a fully-developed human being. I understand the perspective of the pro-life movement.
However, we kill living things all the time. We chop down trees to build our homes, we kill rodents and insects when they intrude said homes, we kill fish and other animals for sport and for nutrition purposes, and neither microorganism nor mouse is safe in Smith Hall; they are constantly killed for educational and research purposes.
We murder organisms we deem inferior to us without hesitance every day, and I personally believe fetuses fit into this category.
We do not have emotion for the reproductive gametes before they combine. When a man masturbates, I would be surprised to learn that he mourns the death of his sperm, as they die shortly after ejaculation. However, once a sperm cell combines with an egg and has the potential to become a human, people become very emotional, despite the fact that it is not a person during the first trimester, the time in which abortions are permitted.
During the first trimester, a fetus has no idea what is happening, as its brain is not developed enough for such advanced forms of awareness, thought and emotion. In the first trimester, a growing fetus cannot possibly understand what life is. It does not understand that it is being deprived of anything when an abortion is taking place. If my parents aborted my birth, I would not have been upset, as I could not have experienced any emotions during those early weeks of life.
Although it could be argued that I would be missing out on future experiences, I would not have been aware of this deprivation and would therefore not have experienced this deprivation.
Aside: If, for example, a wife cheats on her husband, but the husband never becomes aware of the affair, I would argue that this duplicity is not bad for the husband. If the wife is still loving and the husband is still happy, and if no one that knows about this affair negatively alters their behavior toward this man, he is unaffected. Yes, those aware of this affair would say that their relationship is not as strong because of this lie, but the man is still happily oblivious to it all. According to this train of thought, a fetus early in development, oblivious to everything, surely cannot emotionally suffer from an abortion.
And even if I was aware of what was happening, I do not think I would want to exist if my life was a mistake. I would not want to be a burden on a young woman still in high school. I would not want to limit the freedom of a young couple, one that may not want a child yet and may be financially unstable. And I would certainly not want to be the resulting reward of rape.
We wear condoms and take birth control in the attempt to prevent childbirth. Just because these precautionary measures fail does not mean women should be forced to suffer through carrying a child for nine months and undergo a painful and potentially fatal delivery.
Some that cannot raise a child on their own put their children up for adoption, but why force another to potentially grow up in an orphanage? We are overpopulated enough as it is.
To create life is a major responsibility; people should not have children unless they believe they can care for their children and make them happy. Life is hard even when one has loving parents with the best intentions. Life is filled with unfulfilled desires, never-ending stress (especially so close to finals) and disappointments. I do not know if I want to be responsible for putting another human being through the hardships that accompany existence.
Thread by Ol' Sparky.
Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels upset pro-life advocates earlier this year when he called for a “truce” on social issues including abortion. Now, he may have gotten himself in more hot water.
He told 6News in Indianapolis that conservatives in the state legislature can move forward with pro-life legislation so long as it doesn’t distract from the economic and education-related legislation he prefers to push.
“As long as it doesn’t get in the way of the really crucial (objectives) — keeping Indiana in the black, improving our economy and bringing big reform to things like education. As long as it doesn’t get in the way of that, there’s plenty of time and capacity,” Daniels said.
Daniels also told 6News that his call for a truce was not aimed at the Indiana state legislature, but Congress.
“I was answering questions about the nation’s situation, which I think is very grave in terms of our economic and financial future. I said the priorities ought to be there,” Daniels added.
The comments follow a letter distributed by Sen. Greg Walker and Rep. Wes Culver to fellow Republican state legislators urging them to support a package of five bills that would include one banning abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy because unborn children can feel intense pain.
“We believe that with 150 legislators, we can give adequate attention to the many important issues our constituents feel are important,” the letter, which doesn’t mention Daniels, says.
Walker told a reported for the television station that there’s no reason social and fiscal issues can’t be pursued at the same time.
“I can focus on all those things and still change the oil in my car, too,” Walker said. “I mean, there’s other things to be taken care of.”
Whether the comments from Daniels will help pro-life advocates and social conservatives understand his call for a truce is something only time will tell. But the comments appear to continue to relegate social issues like abortion to the back burner — making the potential presidential candidate appear to believe pro-life concerns are like the little children who get relegated to the “kids table” at Christmas dinner while the adults talk about more important issues while they dine together.
In his comments about a truce, Indiana Governor Daniels replied, “I don’t know,” when asked if he would issue the executive order every pro-life president has done by instituting the Mexico City Policy.
He eventually walked back those comments and told reporter Michael Gerson he would sign the Mexico City Policy but he is sticking to his controversial comments calling for a “truce” on abortion.
“I would reinstate the Mexico City policy,” Daniels said, adding that promoting abortion with money meant for family planning is one of “a thousand things we shouldn’t be spending money on.”
The Daniels truce drew condemnation from potential presidential opponents Tim Pawlenty, Mike Pence and Mike Huckabee.
Representatives of several pro-life groups immediately responded to Daniels’ truce comments earlier this year.
Tony Perkins, the head of the Family Research Council said Daniels’ comments “raise serious questions about his level of commitment to fundamental issues like life — leading many of us to wonder if he has the ability to lead a unified conservative movement.”
Calling the remarks a “surprising departure from his pro-family record,” Perkins said it was “astonishing” to see that “not only is he noncommittal about his role as a pro-life leader, but the Governor wouldn’t even agree to a modest step like banning taxpayer-funded promotion of abortion overseas-which President Bush did on his first day in office with 65% of the country’s support.”
“These aren’t fringe issues that stretch moderate America. They’re mainstream ideals that an overwhelming majority of the nation espouses,” he said.
Also, several pro-life groups, including LifeNews.com, released a joint statement condemning the truce.