Dennis Miller on Abortion

http://www.valleyskeptic.com/dm_abortion.html ^

[mountaineer]

The issue is should the police power of the government be used to keep a person from depriving another person of their life when the definition of a "person" has no answer?

What makes you a person, and what business is it of the government if I should choose to deprive you of that life?

[tom h]

"She is a mass of hormones in rearrangement. And she is justifiably not in her usual mind. She necessarily needs others around her to give her support. She is also easily swayed into making a decision to abort her baby."

Slyfox, you are absolutely right. When my wife conceived our third child she was in tears. Our older two were already 6 and 4 and her life as a full-time Mom was in order -- one in school, the other starting school in a year, lots of house projects to get underway, volunteering, women's groups, etc. This pregnancy was definitely problematic!

But we didn't abort! Little Abby came along 8 1/2 months later and she is the greatest blessing we know. Inconvenient? Heck yes! Plans put on hold? Sure! Have to rebuy baby stuff? You bet! Crimp in our middle-aged lifestyles? Darn straight! But she is beautiful and wonderful and now that she is 3 my wife cannot believe she ever felt that she didn't want her.

Of course, our evangelical Christian faith meant that abortion was never an alternative. But if we weren't Christians, or were neutral or "pro-choice," there is a strong likelihood we might have aborted this child.

An emotionally charged woman, unexpectedly pregnant, might make the abortion decision if no other information is provided -- about the sanctity of life, about the humanness of the fetus, about the post-abortion health risks, etc.

I would like to know if anyone has done the following two surveys

(1) Women who considered abortion, but didn't, and wish after birth that their child had been aborted.

(2) Women who considered abortion, and did, and now wish that they hadn't aborted the child.

My guess is that the statistics for hypothetical survey #1 would be 2% in favor and 98% opposed. My guess for #2 is highly speculative, but 50%-50% would not surprise me.

Is there any Freeper who works for a pro-life organization who can or will sponsor such a survey?

tom h

[SoothingDave]

Since some children are miscarried early, for a variety of natural reasons, is it then OK to artificially induce miscarriages?

This is done all the time when the fetus is either dead or will die. D&C's are a prime example of artificially inducing miscarriages when the fetus has already died.

Well, yes. But beside the point. People have induced miscarriages all the time, electively, not when a fetus has died, but to kill the fetus.

This is artificial. This is elective. That miscarriage occurs naturally has no bearing on whether that makes it OK to induce it as a choice.

People have heart attacks naturally every day and die. Is it therefore OK to artificially induce heart attacks in people?

Not sure of your point here but unless there is a valid medical reason for inducing a heart attack (I beleive there is some procedure that does this in order to correct a problem) then no, it is not okay as it violates that persons right to life.

Can you really not see the point? Heart attacks occur naturally and kill a person. But that doesnt' mean another person can elect to induce a heart attack.

Likewise, miscarriages occur naturally and kill a person. But that doesn't mean another person can elect to induce a miscarriage.

SD

[Wyatt's Torch]

What makes you a person,

I'm a living, breathing, human being who by any definition of science and/or medicine is a "person"

and what business is it of the government if I should choose to deprive you of that life?

That pesky Declaration of Independence thing which states, "...that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Persuit of Happiness - That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."

That and the laws of man and civilization are such that there connot be a free society without the protection of these rights through law and the enforcement of those laws through government (police power, courts, etc.).

[Monti Cello]

Since one out of two pregnancies end in miscarriage, what do you call that? God's choice?

Well only 1 out of 2 people live beyond 75 years.

That's God's choice. But does it mean it's OK to kill the elderly?

[BibChr]

Then take my answer. Of course the government has the power to — in fact, not only the power, but the obligation, to — protect the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness! That is what it is for!

You seem to grant and miss my point at the same time. I am saying that the debate about personhood is objectively over. Science has spoken, logic speaks, the facts speak. There is no point in the continuum of development from conception to death when it is anything other than a human being.

Dan

[Dan Day]

Good thing your mother wanted you, or else you would not have been...

Same thing if my parents had decided to watch Johnny Carson that night instead of making whoopee.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

My fellow Americans, it is time to suck it up. Look deep into your immortal soul (if you believe you have one) and do the right thing. Have the courage and strength to live your own life, by your own standards, and stop trying to call the shots for everyone else.

A+.

[underthesun]

If life begins at conception, use of an IUD is abortion.

This is only true if conception actually takes place. There are 2 types of IUDs, one is copper and the other progesterone releasing both of these act as spermicides, so IUDs while they do prevent implatation will also prevent conception.

[SoothingDave]

I'm a living, breathing, human being who by any definition of science and/or medicine is a "person"

Said the black man 150 years ago. The Court disagreed.

When you decide to give the gov't the power to seperate "personhood" from "humanity" you give it the power to kill the inconvenient. Blacks aren't people, Jews aren't people, fetuses aren't people.

SD

[Wyatt's Torch]

I believe the point you are trying to make with your example is that it is not okay to do things to a person (i.e. kill them) that also happen naturally. I, of course, agree. The question in your former example ( elective miscarriage - aka abortion) is if the procedure is being done to a "person". If you have read any of my other posts, you will see that I believe there is no consensus answer to that question. As for your latter example, whether it's inducing a heart attack on someone against their will or shooting them in the head, it is a violation of that persons right to life.

[SoothingDave]

There are 2 types of IUDs, one is copper and the other progesterone releasing both of these act as spermicides, so IUDs while they do prevent implatation will also prevent conception.

How does the IUD owner/user know which method was used to prevent a pregnancy?

SD

[mountaineer]

Exactly, and a fertilized egg is only a very, very young person. It cannot be anything else. If the law is bound to protect you and me, it also should protect those human beings who are younger than us. What kind of free society permits the slaughter of helpless and utterly dependent children?

[Wyatt's Torch]

That's God's choice. But does it mean it's OK to kill the elderly?

No as, again, it would be a violation of that person's right to life. As I said in a subsequent post, my point was that not "every" union of a sperm and an egg is a "person".

[Wyatt's Torch]

Is it a universally accepted fact that a fertilized egg, at any and all points before birth is a person?

[SoothingDave]

Is it a universally accepted fact that a fertilized egg, at any and all points before birth is a person?

Is it universally accepted, scintific and medical fact that it is not?

What is the definition of a person? Can something be human and not be a person?

The pragmatic thing to do would be to err on the side of caution. As you argue, we do not know if a fetus is a "person." Why assume it is not?

If we assume it is, we in no way make ourselves murders. If we assume it is not, we may.

SD

[Monti Cello]

First of all, Miller pretends he is reasonably in between extremes, while holding tightly to the pro-abortion extreme. The use of the word 'God' does not counterbalance the remainder of the opinion expressed in this piece.

The two greatest pro-abort weaknesses in my view:

1. No one would condone feeding crack to a fetus. But apparently it's OK to kill the fetus. One can only conclude that impaired life (out of the womb) is valued less than death. This is how crippled people are suing for pain and suffering for not being aborted. It's a sick, perverted situation for people to be arguing that someone is better off dead. I'm all for choice. For the fetus.

2. Only the most hardened feminist has the balls to argue that abortion is OK up till delivery. This is not a mainstream position whatsoever. This stance puts the lie to the validity of the 'woman's right to choose' argument.

The feminists are teetering on this one. They should be pubilcly forced take a position on late-term abortion. Support removes them from mainstream debate. Opposition is a de facto forfeit of their principle on the issue. The defense of life/individual principle then stands to take the argument.

[Wyatt's Torch]

And people used to think the sun revolved around the earth and that the earth was flat...so what? There needs to be a single, objective answer to the definition of a "person" for this debate to ever be settled. "Humanity" is irrelevant as it is entirely subjective (see Mao, Stalin, and Hitler as just three examples of people who their followers considered humane).

[lugsoul]

Neither acts as a spermicide. They may act as a physical barrier to conception, though most docs are unclear on the extent to which this occurs. Progesterone is most definitely not a spermicide. The negative effect of progesterone is to thicken the cervical mucus and slow the mobility of sperm.

The primary effect of IUDs is to prevent implantation.

[Monti Cello]

If we assume it is, we in no way make ourselves murders. If we assume it is not, we may.

Yes, I think the side with the mountains of dead bodies should bear the burden of proof.