What is the line of demarcation - here's a chart if it helps - where this "it" crosses the line from being a potential human being and into being a real human being?
Posted on 11/13/2007 5:34:21 PM PST by Semper
One of the most dangerous political considerations today is that of abortion; it is a most divisive subject. Many in this arena are motivated by religious beliefs. Just in case anyone has forgotten, we are not a theocracy – our founding fathers wanted religion left to the churches and the government left to the most qualified.
Those who fanatically oppose the medical procedure of abortion refer to themselves as “pro-life”, implying that those who do not agree with them do not value life as much as they do (a most arrogant state of mind) .
To believe so strongly in your understanding of life that you assume the right to take away the freedom of a woman to determine what will define her life is dangerous. You certainly have the right to try to influence that woman to do what you think is best, but it is her right and responsibility to make the final decision.
One of the things that hurts the anti abortion movement is the terms which are coined. A fetus is not a baby (just as a child is not an adult and an adult is not a senior citizen). Human life goes through stages of development. And, until someone is born into this human environment, until they breathe on their own, until they feed on their own, until they exist outside of a woman’s womb, they are not anyone’s responsibility other than the woman who sustains them.
That is unless you want to overrule the intention of our founders and apply your religious understanding of how life should be interpreted and take away the freedom for which countless “already born” have died.
Do you presume to insist that human activity (birth, growth, deterioration, death) is more powerful than God’s creation - which is described as spiritual? Can the human decisions to kill a living person (as in war) or to abort a POTENTIAL, undeveloped person actually overrule God’s creations?
I believe that there is nothing humans can do to overturn God’s laws and his infinite creation of good. What is required is for us to FREELY choose to live in accordance with HIS plan. And politically, we need to support those who realistically have a chance to foster that outcome.
FREEDOM
What is the line of demarcation - here's a chart if it helps - where this "it" crosses the line from being a potential human being and into being a real human being?
I think Peter Singer belongs in a locked psychiatric ward.
"Those with the best weapons will have the best plows when the time comes." Semper
Close. Anything but conception is arbitrary. A day before birth is not developmentally different from a day after. The act of birth doesn’t change the nature of the entity, only its location.
A day before conception, however, and there is no “person” to discuss. At the moment of conception however, the personhood is cemented and the only variable is time. The die is cast.
Of course not. If I thought that, I would be trying to legislate away your freedom to decide for yourself.
Should the abortionist to continue with the abortion or perhaps throw the breathing fetus on a shelf and wait for it to die? After all, whose responsibility is the fetus now?
Matters of murder are.
I do, too. The question is for Semper.
So before human conception you do not exist? Our existence depends upon the human sex act? I do not believe that. I may be wrong but I believe our existence depends upon a Source beyond the human sex act. I believe that our existence is eternal (no beginning and no end) because that is the essence of our Source from which we are created in the image and likeness. I believe that our human conception is a "window" through which we may or may not enter this human, material environment but it is not our basic origin. Unless you reject all spiritual teaching, this can not be our ultimate origin.
I believe that it is not mine and it is not yours. I pray that the decision is based upon free moral considerations and that it contributes to the greater good of all directly concerned.
“And using that language is what helps those who would take your freedom and degrade what this country was founded upon.”
Really?
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Men are CREATED equal, that they are ENDOWED by their CREATOR with certain
UNALIENABLE RIGHTS,
that among these are LIFE, liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness (note the order)
That TO SECURE THESE RIGHTS, Governments are instituted among Men...
(Declaration of Independence)
Perhaps you got your training in Constitutional Interpretation from Planned Parenthood????
Well there are many things in this human experience which are hard to understand. How about war - when it is not absolutely necessary? An aborted fetus is not nearly as aware of life as a young person being blown up by an IED. That young person has family and friends - those who have experienced life with each other and have been hurt incredibly when that life is terminated in in a way that effects many others. I will not offend you by posting pictures of those I have seen blown up by IEDs. If you are for war, are you pro death?
That’s an existential distraction. Nice try though.
“I pray that the decision is based upon free moral considerations and that it contributes to the greater good of all directly concerned.”
Pray? that it contributes to whose greater good? Certainly not the butchered baby in the bucket. Whose then?
pro death?
Absolutely. For some.
So you agree with Peter Singer? You are okay with post-birth abortion as long as it is somebody else making the “moral” decision?
We should make decisions based on whether the consequence of that decision would entail extra responsibility.
Is it okay to euthanize babies if they’re not what we wanted or are inconvenient? Let’s say you have a daughter who gives birth, doesn’t want the baby because it’s screaming too loud, strangles it and tosses it in the dumpster. Is that an okay moral decision? Would it upset you that your grandfetus was terminated ex-utero or would you be proud of the fact that your daughter was exercising an independent moral choice?
Okay, then, if you're consistent, the politicians you support would be those who want to repeal all laws. (The usual term for those politicians is, "anarchists".)
After all, if I want to drive a truck bomb into an elementary school, that's really my moral decision to make and is none of the government's business.
If I want to cook up some crystal meth and sell it to your kids so they can get high (before they die) and I can get rich, that's really my moral decision to make and is none of the government's business.
If I want to break into your house while you're on vacation and steal everything you have and sell it, that's really my moral decision to make and is none of the government's business.
Nor is he given a choice.
LOL! I posted something similar a few days ago...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.