How Should We Define Pro-Life?
- Thread starter Tyr
- Start date
Spade
I remember posting a thread on the “other Forum” about societies responsibilities to lessen abortion – and Karrie’s post number 2 is quite accurate, in my opinion.
I support Karrie's ideas completely. I don't think anyone wants abortions, no matter how pro-choice they are (I am VEHEMENTLY pro-choice btw). I want them to decrease without subtle coersion. That's how I see the more subtle pro-life camp's goals. They know most Americans don't want to see all abortions criminalized, so they try to decrease access in other ways. Parent notification laws, mandatory waiting periods, mandatory counselling, etc. are all examples. I don't support them.
I would define "pro-life" as being in favour of life as long as the life is viable, which means having potential to develop into a fully mentally and physically capable person AND NOT dependent on life support. They should be able to sustain a livelihood on their own. I don't think spending $millions to try to extend the life of 14 oz. new borns doesn't do anyone any good and only detracts from resources that would make a real difference to someone less compromised.
Abort Pro-Lifers!
Life in any form is what it is. To place one above another is just plain elitism. Humans are part of the web of life, not the king pin, just a thread.
Like SirRupert likes to say, " to pro-lifers, life begins at conception and ends at birth." It is beyond hypocritical. It is contemptuous. Pro-life is a one subject wonder whose emotional appeal defies logic because the emotional severs the connection to the logical mind. The whole movement is unbalanced... and you can take that any way you want.
Life in any form is what it is. To place one above another is just plain elitism. Humans are part of the web of life, not the king pin, just a thread.
Like SirRupert likes to say, " to pro-lifers, life begins at conception and ends at birth." It is beyond hypocritical. It is contemptuous. Pro-life is a one subject wonder whose emotional appeal defies logic because the emotional severs the connection to the logical mind. The whole movement is unbalanced... and you can take that any way you want.
Some perspective: 30,000 kids die of starvation a day mostly from unfair trade imbalances with us the west.
If they were concerned about the living, I might have some sympathy but they don't. If pro-lifers spent half their energy feeding the living they wouldn't have time to dictate what others should do.
Pastor's abortion dream inflames bushfire tragedy
The Catch the Fire Ministries has tried to blame the bushfires disaster on laws decriminalising abortion in Victoria.
The Pentecostal church's leader, Pastor Danny Nalliah, claimed he had a dream about raging fires on October 21 last year and that he woke with "a flash from the Spirit of God: that His conditional protection has been removed from the nation of Australia, in particular Victoria, for approving the slaughter of innocent children in the womb".
Source
Well, that's one argument: abortions bad because god will burn your forests down.
The Catch the Fire Ministries has tried to blame the bushfires disaster on laws decriminalising abortion in Victoria.
The Pentecostal church's leader, Pastor Danny Nalliah, claimed he had a dream about raging fires on October 21 last year and that he woke with "a flash from the Spirit of God: that His conditional protection has been removed from the nation of Australia, in particular Victoria, for approving the slaughter of innocent children in the womb".
Source
Well, that's one argument: abortions bad because god will burn your forests down.
In regards to the whole debate on when life begins, I thought this was already determined through law that they are not alive until they are born, therefore have no rights.... which is why the current abortion laws exist. Therefore, the topic ends there on that matter.
As it goes for invading people's privacy when it comes to abortions.... I think of it this way:
How many of us have the right to butt into other families' lives to tell them how they should take care of their children? Nobody does (Except in abusive and neglectful situations, which involve the living/breathing child having rights)
So if I have no right to go over to Karries' house and tell her that she's feeding her kids the wrong way, or that she's putting them to bed at the wrong time, or she's not giving them enough attention as I think she should, or she's not sending them to the school I would send them to (Which she'd probably rip my balls off if I even attempted this) and we leave all of these decisions up to the parents of the child, then wouldn't it also make sense for them to be allowed to determine if they want a family in the first place, or if they want to abort (Based on current laws don't forget) for whatever reasons they feel are right for them and their family?
If Pro-Lifers are given their way, they're allowed to get involved in everybody's personal lives and somehow give fetuses rights.... how far down the rabbit hole do we go?
What happens if the mother plans to have a child or is forced to have the child beyond her wishes, and then suddenly has a miscarriage? It could have been from something silly as drinking or smoking, or not eating properly.... or it could have been a slew of other personal medical conditions beyond her control.... should she be charged with the death of that fetus?
Many also have miscarriages due to various stresses in their lives, some that might not even relate to the pregnancy either (Family issues, relationship issues, job issues, etc.)
How many miscarriages occur each year around the world? Those couples who actually plan for having a child and unexpectedly lose that child are usually quite devistated from this occuring..... yet we then open a big can of worms with applying rights and laws for fetuses, and on top of their own grief, they can then also be charged for "Murder" or neglect..... and perhaps be jailed for somethng that was beyond their own control.
And if things go down that path, who the hell would want to risk having kids in the first place? The pregnancy rates in this country alone have been lower then most other past years..... does anybody think this approach would help anything?
As it goes for invading people's privacy when it comes to abortions.... I think of it this way:
How many of us have the right to butt into other families' lives to tell them how they should take care of their children? Nobody does (Except in abusive and neglectful situations, which involve the living/breathing child having rights)
So if I have no right to go over to Karries' house and tell her that she's feeding her kids the wrong way, or that she's putting them to bed at the wrong time, or she's not giving them enough attention as I think she should, or she's not sending them to the school I would send them to (Which she'd probably rip my balls off if I even attempted this) and we leave all of these decisions up to the parents of the child, then wouldn't it also make sense for them to be allowed to determine if they want a family in the first place, or if they want to abort (Based on current laws don't forget) for whatever reasons they feel are right for them and their family?
If Pro-Lifers are given their way, they're allowed to get involved in everybody's personal lives and somehow give fetuses rights.... how far down the rabbit hole do we go?
What happens if the mother plans to have a child or is forced to have the child beyond her wishes, and then suddenly has a miscarriage? It could have been from something silly as drinking or smoking, or not eating properly.... or it could have been a slew of other personal medical conditions beyond her control.... should she be charged with the death of that fetus?
Many also have miscarriages due to various stresses in their lives, some that might not even relate to the pregnancy either (Family issues, relationship issues, job issues, etc.)
How many miscarriages occur each year around the world? Those couples who actually plan for having a child and unexpectedly lose that child are usually quite devistated from this occuring..... yet we then open a big can of worms with applying rights and laws for fetuses, and on top of their own grief, they can then also be charged for "Murder" or neglect..... and perhaps be jailed for somethng that was beyond their own control.
And if things go down that path, who the hell would want to risk having kids in the first place? The pregnancy rates in this country alone have been lower then most other past years..... does anybody think this approach would help anything?
Last edited:
Law can't declare science away. Dividing cells, a beating heart, and brain activity make a fetus a living thing by scientific definition. Canadian law does NOT, in any way shape or form, legally define a fetus, because what Canada has is a decided lack of abortion law. There is no law, except one that states that writing laws limiting a woman's access, would violate HER rights. Not one word about fetuses from what I've seen.
A sea sponge is living too.... shall they have human rights? Just because a fetus looks like a human and has many parts like a human, doesn't mean they automatically get those rights we all have.
If you look at a fetus of a chimp, it'd have many of the same characteristics as a human fetus.... should they have human rights too?
Based on a PDF document I just found that compares Jewish religious views to Canadian law in regards to the rights of a fetus/newborn compared to a drug addicted mother:
http://www.motherisk.org/JFAS_documents/JFAS7001F_e1.pdf
Seems pretty clear and a done deal.... their argument, along with many of the pro-life arguments are based on emotional appeal and attempting to find a method to trump the rights of the already living.
While I agree there's an issue with drug addicted mothers and the affects on the child they wish to carry through, it does explain the above description of when a person is considered alive.
I guess it's kind of a moot point, since a fetus isn't in a position to demand his/her rights, otherwise I'd say it's the wrong people who are making the decisions.