Re: Question for Pro-Life Wingnuts
- From: "Mossingen" <jhankins5@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:37:14 -0600
"da pickle" <jcpickels@(no apam)hotmail.com> wrote in message
Are you saying that I have not said there are many, many "justifications"
of taking the life of one human being to save another human being? If so,
you have not been listening. Justification of the taking of a human life
does not deny that the human life exists. You are denying that a human
life exists! That is barbaric, to me.
It's not to me. When you say "human life" do you (like Alim Nassor) mean
that a fertilized egg forward is a person entitled to all protections of
citizenship until it is born? You skirt around that issue, but your
statements suggest that you really believe that.
I can accept that a fertilized egg or a first-trimester fetus is "human
life" worthy of respect, just not a person.
I think there are many justifications for the taking of human life in all
sorts of situations and under all sorts of circumstances. I need not deny
that what is happening is the taking of a human life. I just require MORE
justification for that taking under different circumstances and under
different circumstances. In my opinion, it is you who is denying a real
moral situation with a flip "definition."
You haven't expressed any such thing or taken any position, just like you
never do. You've just offered extreme-situation hypotheticals that bear no
semblance to anything that would happen in reality in an effort to "gotcha"
It seems you don't really mind aborting the thing at that late date, you
just quibble with a woman doing it on a whim. Which is incredibly
disrespectful to a woman who is in that position.
No, I mind it a lot. As a matter of fact, I would require a really good
justification before I would deny that "thing" its right to life. No one,
woman-host or anyone else, should take such a killing lightly and without
overwhelming justification for the killing. It is you that demands NO
justification at all because the thing is not a human being.
LOL! OK, now let's poke some holes in your view. What kind of
justification would you need to abort a crowning fetus? How do those
justifications lessen in the time preceding crowning? What justification is
required one week earlier? One month? Three months? At conception?
What principle are you applying that could be applied in any reasonable
manner in real-life case?
At least you made your position clear. I wonder how many agree with
your proposal as the best way to resolve this divisive issue.
Based on what, your extreme-scenario hypothetical? Provide your answers
and I'll devise a similar, uncomfortable hypo to expose its flaws.
Expose away. You apparently do not like the trimester set up of currently
the law. Tell me about the third trimester rule that only under
extraordinary circumstances is an abortion justified and why you think
that should be altered to provide no justification at all should be
required for a third trimester abortion?
Because there is no "magic" that happens during the third tri-mester to
distinguish a fetus from the second. I don't consider developmental
milestones as the magical point at which a fetus becomes a child. Those
types of distinctions are fueled by emotion because the fetus starts to look
more like a baby, when in reality it is still developing into one, but not
quite one yet.
Your view is not rational. What exactly is the difference between a late
second-tri-mester fetus and an early third-tri-mester fetus that triggers in
your mind heightened justification for aborting it? You seem to operate on
the assumption that the more a fetus develops, the more "human" it gets,
which is surely true, but you're left with arbitrary time frames to trigger
your heightened justifications.
Sounds to me like you are using the same methodology as Alim Nassor (no
abortion because there is a risk of killing a child/person), but tweaking it
a little bit by believing that the risk gets greater as time goes by. I
think that is just something to salve your uncertainty.
- Prev by Date: Re: Question for Pro-Life Wingnuts
- Next by Date: Re: OT: Man Bluffs Lion
- Previous by thread: Re: Question for Pro-Life Wingnuts
- Next by thread: Re: Question for Pro-Life Wingnuts