10 FALLACIES IN THE ABORTION DEBATE

Conservative Commentary ^ | 8 November 2002 | Peter Cuthbertson

[Lurking Libertarian]

Checked the Bill of Rights too. No mention of God or the Lord

The omission had to be intentional; every State Constitution at the time (and most of them to this day) begins with the words "We the people of the State of ______, by the grace of God free and independent, do ordain and establish this Constitution..." The Founders deliberately chose not to follow that pattern. Not that most of them weren't Christian, but Deism also had a lot of followers at the time, and the Founders, I believe, chose to keep the Constitution as secular as they could.

[Cinnamon Girl]

He was born in NYC.

[MHGinTN]

(In my best Southern Drawl ...) New York City?...!

[Nephi]

Checked the Bill of Rights too. No mention of God or the Lord! Interesting... Which country's constitution were you looking at Nephi?

Did you check the Preamble? No, didn't think so. Would it be relevent? Yes, because it sets forth the basic principles of the constitution.

Belief in God is freedom because God is libertarian, not authoritarian. When you believe in God and live your life accordingly, you begin to qualify for blessings from God and He will share his intelligence with you.

You ignore the evidence of God in His divinely inspired document, born out of the ideal of religious freedom, which recognizes your freedom to worship the money in your hand. A document never before, or since replicated by any other people...so, there is no comparison.

You ignore the evidence of intelligent design that is DNA and in every living creature. God is pure intelligence and some of that intelligence is in DNA by His design.

What evidence do you offer to support atheism? What evidence do you offer for the thousands of missing links in the speciation needed to support your atheistic fantasies?

Does your family know that you really don't love them because you can't see, or quantify love?

[MHGinTN]

Uh, in my opinion, you've gotten a bit off the thread with this.

[Tired of Taxes]

Every abortion of which I am familiar was the man's choice. The woman's choice was not to have the abortion.

Most cases do seem that way, don't they? I've heard men say, right away, upon discovering their girlfriends or even wives were pregnant: "She HAS to have an abortion." There are other men who would be devastated, though, but usually they're not the type who "use" women in the first place.

[demosthenes the elder]

ah, I see that you and I are in agreement on this issue, to some extent. It is not so much a question of life as it is of humanity.

[Tired of Taxes]

The moment when the egg becomes fertilised is not in any sense arbitrary. It is the time when two separate human substances actually form a distinct, complete human life.

Do you want to outlaw abortion from the point of conception? Then we'd have to outlaw many forms of contraception, too, as some are suspected as abortifacients. Is that what you think we should do?

[MHGinTN]

There is a distinct difference in stating one's beliefs regarding individual human life and agreeing to some point in gestational life beyond which abortion should be illegal except to save the life of the mother. The former is a statement of heartfelt belief, the latter is a pragmatic compromise in order to save as many as we can, many who will be slaughtered by legalized serial killers if compromise isn't accepted.

[Tired of Taxes]

I am an atheist. I have no morals.

Yes, you do. I'm an atheist, too, and I have morals. Everyone does. You're only human, Sir Francis.

However, I agree that we shouldn't base our laws purely on "morals". Morals are too subjective. Example: Some people think it's "moral" to take money from people who earned it and redistribute it among the general public.

Much better to base our laws on "principles".

[demosthenes the elder]

Is there a hierarchy here? Is it based on tenure? Do I need to know the secret handshake to state my opinion?

That sometimes does indeed seem to be the case here, or at least seems to be the attitude of the religious fundamentalists here. I keep wondering how they reconcile their distaste for Muslim Shariya Law with their evident desire to slam their Christian moral code down everyone's throat.

[Tired of Taxes]

There is a distinct difference in stating one's beliefs regarding individual human life and agreeing to some point in gestational life beyond which abortion should be illegal except to save the life of the mother.

So... here's a question for everyone: At what point do you think we should make abortion illegal? Even most pro-choicers have a limit.

[Nephi]

Who asked you?

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

The best recent example of supressed empathy is the local snipers.

You are more analagous to those "snipers," you advocate ritual mass murder out of some ethereal "empathy." If this is what your religion is about, why not say so?

Next, you'll try to tell us in your progession of fallacies we should all bow down to your altar of pagan idols.

Not me, I'm an atheist, I am a political constituency of the party in power and I VOTED PRO-LIFE. I will not bend my knee to your false gods or your ad hominem arguments.

This folks, is the Religious Left I speak of, pay attention...

[demosthenes the elder]

Also, my other argument to pro choice people is that if it is their choice to abort, it should be my choice not to pay for it.

I can wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment. Forcing people to subsidize activities that they find morally unconscionable is absolutely wrong.

I would very much like to see a form of "direct voting" established via a modification of the IRS tax forms, which gives the taxpayer a set of known controversial items to which they can choose to deny funds from their income taxes. Categories should include: Abortion, Welfare, Public Education, School Vouchers, National Endowment for the Arts, Campaign Funding, Military Spending, International Relief - material aid, International Relief - Economic Bailouts, The "War on Drugs", the Intelligence Agencies, The BATF, etc...

Ideally, there would be a way of detailing which government programs get what percentage of your (anyone's) taxes. I think this form of "direct voting" would do a lot to shake much of the crap out of the system, if it were practicable and if it could ever be rammed past the Congress.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

There's so much I could say here, but I'll just let it drop.

No huevos?

[MHGinTN]

I offered my opinion for which you need not ask. I'm here to speak for the little ones. When a thread as important as this one is tangentialized, I state my opinion. [Note: even in answering you, I try to slip in a little something for the little ones.]

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Freedom and money are my gods,...

Pagan idolatry...

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

...belief in money is simply ridiculous.

It is idolatry...

[demosthenes the elder]

you might wish to consider here that there have been societies in our history which are considered to have been exceedingly morally upright, who practiced a form of eugenic retroactive abortion on children -toddlers, actually, 2 years after birth- whom they judged unfit for continued existence.
The Spartans come immediately to mind.
Morality does not require a belief that all human life, no matter how innocent, is sacred.
Just a thought.