Chris, of course we both left out plenty of information in our blogs. After all, we're not writing an encyclopedia or textbook on the history and philosophy of abortion here. It's a blog.
And we could go back and forth forever and not come to any kind of agreement, which is exactly my point.
Nobody can ever provide definitive proof of when "life" begins that we will all agree on. That is why many people who personally oppose abortion support pro-choice politics. Pro-choice isn't arguing that you are wrong. It is only arguing that, in the absence of actual proof, I have as much right to hold my belief as you have to hold yours, and that the law shouldn't seek to force your belief on me.
Pro-choice is pro-American! I say let's just agree to disagree; though unfortunately pro-lifers won't be happy until a cop is telling me I don't have the right to disagree, it seems.
And I still think you are stretching it a bit trying to make Stinett's case into a launching point for abortion discussions. Yet sadly, I ended up discussing abortion to make that point. Doh!
But really, what "important questions" does it raise? Whether an 8-month-old in-utero baby should be taken from its mother's stomach by force? Well, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say no, that was wrong. Ditto to whether women should be aborting 8-month-old in-utero babies without legitimate medical reason.
But again, good luck finding many people who would argue otherwise. As I said, I don't see this as an argument against abortion, but rather another sad example of mental health issues, if anything.
As for the Peterson case, which I think is a huge waste of valuable news space, same thing. Wrong to kill a woman? Yep. Wrong to kill a woman's baby? Yep. Wrong to abort a baby against the mother's will? Yep. Again, good luck finding anyone to argue anything else.
About the only relevance I see there is that Bush and friends have made killing a pregnant woman equal to double murder, implying that a fetus is equivalent to a fully developed and birthed baby with all associated rights. Yet another clever way they are attempting to erode a woman's right to choose through backdoor legislation.
But public opinion, and the Constitution, will keep abortion legal for the foreseeable future.
Respond to Randy
Back to top