[secretagent]

What concerns me about the pro-abortion position, in addition to the tens of millions of innocents slaughtered for no morally defensible reason, is that the principle has been established whereby dehumanization is possible for a specified group of individuals, and it is founded mainly on arbitrary and indefensible (logically and ethically) bases.

I think pro-choicers (I include myself) rest upon a non-recognition of "personhood" - at some point after conception up to some point of development. It seems to me that the recognition of personhood has a great deal of sensory "gestalt" to it, at least it does for me.

That is, I see a "person" in a picture of a, say, 26 month old, that I don't in a picture of a fertilized egg.

[XBob]

677 - "That is, I see a "person" in a picture of a, say, 26 month old, that I don't in a picture of a fertilized egg."

Interesting, sort of like what my brother said when his children became 'people', little individuals, and not just crying poop machines.

[chimera]

I think pro-choicers (I include myself) rest upon a non-recognition of "personhood" - at some point after conception up to some point of development. It seems to me that the recognition of personhood has a great deal of sensory "gestalt" to it, at least it does for me.

That is, I see a "person" in a picture of a, say, 26 month old, that I don't in a picture of a fertilized egg.

Visual perception is a dangerous basis upon which to rest your system of ethics regarding the life or death of individuals. Clearly what you see or can't (won't) see changes nothing about the individual being seen or not seen. Remember, the Nazis could look at a full-grown person of the Jewish faith and not "see" a person, but a subhuman, in their minds.

What if you couldn't see the individual at all, 26 weeks or otherwise? Would that change the reality of the person?

But, I think, intentionally or not, you may have swerved into the reason why those who find abortion acceptable do so. And, if pro-abortion people are intellectually honest, they will admit it, at least to themselves. And the reason is this: you don't see it. You don't witness the tiny body being torn asunder, you don't see the blood and guts being spilled, you don't hear the soundless screams of agony. The bloody deed is done silently, hidden from view, where those who support such butchery don't have to witness the results of their handiwork. Why do you think people find pictures of the results of abortion so offensive? It is because, deep down, they know the reality of the bloody deed, but have deluded themselves into thinking it doesn't matter, because they don't see it. Out of sight, out of mind. Well, it does matter, and we as a people had better have the intellectual courage to face the truth, or have the blood of millions on our collective hands, now and in the future.

One reason I changed from pro-abortion to pro-life many, many years ago was partly because of an honest facing up to the reality of what I was advocating. That, and the moral indefensibilty of the act, based on facts of science and logic and reason.