Abortion: A moral quagmire

Enter Stage Right ^ | June 17, 2002 | Wendy McElroy

[Jn316]

NO barf alert?

"This is largely because the pro-choice and pro-life positions are being defined by their extremes, by those who scream accusations in lieu of arguments."

Go figure! Life and death extreme?! *shocking!*

[chs68]

"Pro-life leaders should start being candid about how they plan to enforce a ban on abortion. For example, if they believe abortion is premeditated murder, then they seem logically constrained to impose first-degree murder penalties — including the death penalty, if applicable — upon women who abort and those who assist her. Are they willing to do this while remembering that murder has no statute of limitations?"

I am hardly a "pro-life leader", but the answer to this question seems to me to be a no-brainer.

Performing abortions would be made illegal.

That would mean that doctors who perform abortions would be liable under the law.

Doctors (or others) who perform abortions would be taking an enormous risk.

As it it now, they are completely protected under the law.

[dmz]

but you have avoided answering the question, do you believe that the woman and the doctor should be charged with 1st degree murder 100% of the time?

[wardaddy]

The middle ground this woman is trying to cling to is that of a pro-abortion advocate having problems with the extreme wing of her side (which is quite large). She wants to placate her guilt by questioning her own agenda and pointing to flaws she sees in the opposing viewpoint as a counterbalance to her own quandry. In the end, she's just another pro-abortionist looking for validation in vain.

[RobbyS]

The lady doesn't seem to realize that the extremists on the left dominate the Courts, the academy, and the Democartic Party. The number of abortionists who have been murdered is quite small, and the violent incidents quite small.

[Sloth]

The only hope for progress in the abortion dialogue lies in the great excluded middle, in the voices of average people who see something wrong with a young girl forced to bear the baby of a rapist.

Sorry, if it's OK to kill rapist's babies, then what's the point of protecting other babies? Screw the "moderates".

[A CA Guy]

Hitler was a Satan for killing people in ovens.

Our whacked out culture has half the people calling it an acceptable "CHOICE" when the moms kill the babies in the ovens of their wombs.

I find rationalization taken to unprecedented levels to justify this murder.

Even if we accept doing it because of just rape or because the mom might die, we still have 98% too many happening under that scenario.

[ArGee]

I think abortions should be legal under the same circumstances in which killing a born human being is legal.

IOW: When they are an immediate threat to your life and the only way to defend yourself is to kill them first.

However, if you added rape I would not refuse to back the bill. I would wait for another day to prove that killing the child conceived in rape does not unrape the mother.

Shalom.

[an amused spectator]

Just make the observation that:

"It appears as though abortion may cause some cases of breast cancer", and stroll away.

[ClearCase_guy]

do you believe that the woman and the doctor should be charged with 1st degree murder 100% of the time?

Absolutely. What other outcome is possible? The baby is a human. The doctor and the mother conspire together to end the baby's life. It's premeditated murder and they should both be prosecuted. No exceptions.

[jlogajan]

"It appears as though abortion may cause some cases of breast cancer", and stroll away.

Actually you better run away because the largest study of its kind in Denmark showed there was not abortion/breast-cancer link.

[FreeTally]

Another "middle ground" article that chooses to ignore the fact that the unborn child is a life. Its not "anything under one's skin" as the author tries to equate.

When you assert that the unborn child is a life, and thus protected from an abortion by the Constitution, the discussion ends. There is no more room for argument.

When you exclude the fact that a child is a life, you can make up all sorts of "middle ground" arguments.

[Caleb1411]

How, short of totalitarian government agencies, can they control what is in a woman's womb, and when?

I must have flunked biology. I always thought a woman had control over what's in her womb. I hadn't realized that a baby could plant its little self there ex nihilo.

And if the author is making plaintive pleas for "middle ground," let's try this:

1. Overturn the unconstitutional Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions.
2. Let the citizens of each state decide these life questions. It's really their prerogative.

[tortoise]

"It appears as though abortion may cause some cases of breast cancer", and stroll away.

Of course, one could also point out that going full-term versus having an early abortion substantially increases the mortality rate for the mother as well. Using that logic, everyone should have abortions to protect the well-being of the mother by lowering mortality rates.

[FreeTally]

I must have flunked biology. I always thought a woman had control over what's in her womb. I hadn't realized that a baby could plant its little self there ex nihilo.

I have always laughed at the argument of "forcing a woman to carry a baby to term makes her a ward of the state". By that logic, forcing you to care for it for 18 years makes you a ward of the state. The lack of logic in these arguments is almost astounding.

[dheretic]

I could honestly not blame a man for killing every member of a jury that had his wife executed for aborting a baby that resulted from rape or incest.

[dheretic]

No, if she has the option of abortion she has no grounds to make that argument on. She had the option of ending the pregnancy. If she goes to term she has no basis on which to claim that she shouldn't take care of the baby.

[Khepera]

The PRO-DEATH crowd should be given what they want.

[Campion]

but you have avoided answering the question, do you believe that the woman and the doctor should be charged with 1st degree murder 100% of the time?

I would be happier if they were charged with a misdemeanor and fined $5 each than I am with the current situation in the US, which is that abortion on demand for any reason whatsoever is a "constitutional right" from conception until the baby's head is outside the mother's body at birth.

Bringing up bizarre questions like "should the woman be charged with first-degree murder" is like diverting a discussion on shutting Auschwitz down to ask how we can possibly be sure we can apprehend and prosecute all the people who shoved Jews onto trains.