Posted on 09/17/2008 10:00:44 AM PDT by NYer
"Ooohhh, isnt it nice, When your heart is made out of ice"
Ride Sally Ride by Lou Reed
At the Washington Post On Faith blog Sally Quinn writes, ostensibly, about the morality of abortion and the impact that should have on your choice of candidate.
The piece begins by following the logical consequences of a belief that life begins at conception. I will get back to this concept of belief versus observation later (please stick with me) as I think it to be crucial, but let me run through some of Quinn's post first. She, quite rightly points the logical inconsistency of that belief with the rape / incest exceptions supported by McCain.
McCain and Palin are pro life and committed Christians. McCain says he believes that life begins at conception and that abortion is murder. So does Palin. McCain, however, is in favor of allowing an abortion if a child is conceived by rape or incest. Murder is acceptable, in other words, if rape or incest are the cause of the pregnancy. But does McCain then believe that one could murder a child in infancy if the child had been conceived by rape or incest? What's the cutoff age for killing someone conceived under those circumstances? Three years old? 24? 86? His position raises the question.Quinn makes a good point about the intellectual dishonesty or calculating callousness required to hold this position. As has been stated here and elsewhere, voting for McCain is not a choice for perfect good. I won't rehash this here. This position is, I think, morally and intellectually indefensible.
Palin is more consistent. She is against abortion under any circumstances other than to save the life of the mother.
I have total respect for those who believe that life begins at conception. I do not. My belief is that when a fetus is viable, when it can survive on its own, then it is a human being. My beliefs are based, not on religion, but on my own sense of morality. I do not want others imposing their religious beliefs on me.A closer look at Quinn's statement here is quite revealing and, I think, instructive. While there is much to disagree with in this short statement the root of the issue is in one word. Belief. This is how they get away with it. Belief. I have mine. You have yours. We are entitled to them. You cannot impose yours on me, and I am equally unable to impose mine on you. It is in the Constitution, look it up.
.- Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, has backed away from his remarks that deciding when life begins is “above my pay grade,” conceding in a television interview that the comments were “probably” too flip.
At the Saddleback Church candidates’ forum in August, moderator and church pastor Rev. Rick Warren had asked the candidates “At what point does a baby get human rights?”
Note that even CNA mischaracterized the question. This is a critical distinction and I believe that Rick Warren understands it and that is why he phrased the question the way he did. When does a baby get human rights? A baby. It is a human life, a baby. Case closed. The question is about rights. I think that Warren rightly sees the pitfalls of debating when life begins as a matter of faith. It is a life, let's talk about rights.
Frame the debate in this way and the intellectual and moral dishonesty of Obama and Sally Quinn become much more readily apparent. If we are successful in framing the debate in this way then perhaps Quinn and everyone else who uses this intellectually ignominious argument to defend the indefensible will be shamed into honestly debating what choice really means.
A clear example of moral relativism, which is what the pope has been addressing since his election.
bookmark
Is that a fact, or just my belief? Hm...
You can't legislate morality!
What on earth do these people think murder laws are? They are moral judgments! Yes, they may be very common moral judgments, but that is all they are.
Ms. Quinn is a practicing atheist (i.e. - one who does his own will no matter what he/she may profess). This is a very common type found in all political parties and in every religion.
She is vile.
"My belief is that when a fetus is viable, when it can survive on its own, then it is a human being."
When would that be? How many 1 month old babies survive on their own? How many 6 month old babies survive on their own? How many 2 year olds survive on their own?
jw
Can Sally Quinn survive without others?
I’d like to see her kill and field dress a moose, say, before I accord her an unlimited right to life, then.
Or gather and grind enough roots and berries to sustain her.
The huge majority of people on the planet don’t have a right to life by her argument.
It's not a "belief" but a fact. At her age, she'll find out out soon enough.
What makes Sally Quinn qualified to expound about anything? She banged her way to the top of the Washington Post society pages. She is nothing but an immoral old gossip.
I especially find the claim that a woman has a right to do with her body what she wants a specious one.
First, it is not a woman’s body which is being dismembered or destroyed.
Second, society has many laws which prohibit what one can legally do with one’s body. Two examples which quickly come to mind, prostitution and illegal drugs. If the current trend continues this will also include smoking and eating certain foods.
I agree that the debate, as yet, has been on the pro-abortions terms. It is important to make people understand that the right to life is the first one protected in the constitution and without it, there is no need of any others.
I also think that inconsistency and ambiguity hurts the cause. I am one who opposes abortion for any reason, even in cases of rape, incest and risk to the health of the mother.
Another position that gets my goat is the one which acknowledges the horrors of abortion and claims a desire for a reduction of abortion or “to make it safe, legal and rare.” The number one way to immediately reduce the number of abortions by many millions a year world wide is to make them illegal.
Millions of women have had abortions they would never have had because abortion is legal. Millions of women equated legal with moral and aborted their own children without realizing the enormity of what they have done.
This is an epic battle. One which cannot be given up. It may not be profitable to discuss this in terms of faith, but I have no doubt that a country that continues to slaughter its children in the womb has no business asking God for His blessings.
Isn’t this the broad that made that insincere apology about Palin, on the O’Reilly show last week?
Bears repeating!! Without life, there is no hope; there are no voters; there is no tax base; there is no future.
Maybe I don’t “believe” that slavery is wrong. /sarc
It's not a "belief" or some deep, obscure theological mystery that a pre-natal child is a human being, as a point of fact and common sense.
Things get a little bizarre when atheists, who do not believe in an immortal human soul, start fishing for delayed ensoulment arguments for abortion.
We would take it then that she would oppose abortion in ALL cases where the fetus has reached viability? And that it would be a homicide to abort such a viable fetus?
One can "believe" that life begins at "quickening" or at exit from the womb or at majority, 18 or 21. One can "believe" that life begins when a child leaves his family or at any other arbitrary and convenient point. The only fixed, non-arbitrary point for the beginning of life is when God Said. The only non arbitrary established beginning point for an individual human life is conception.
The left desires a political definition of life and its beginning in order to justify the killing of some human beings for the use and convenience of other human beings and for the convenience of the State. The collectivist believes the only individual human life is The State and people are simply dispensable parts of The State to be rearranged and killed for reasons of The State.
Because the Left cannot imagine God then the highest goods are Convenience and Pleasure.
Until some doctor advises them they have a mortal disease and are only months away from death. Then they scurry to the nearest priest to make their confession and arrange for a Catholic funeral service. God always welcomes back the Prodigal Son.
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.