WHY THE ABORTION ARGUMENT WILL NEVER END

[Unseen]

It’s because the abortion discussion isn’t about facts at all. It’s a contest between competing opinions based on incompatible values. There never will be a scientific fact that settles the debate.

When does a life begin? The answer is and shall forever be a matter of definition, and people can make definitions that comport with their values and desires. If they desire a world in which every potential baby has a chance at living, and that value supersedes all, they will define life accordingly. Likewise, for those who feel that the abortion choice is so personal that the government should have no interest in it, and that value supersedes all, they will define life in a manner that comports with their belief.

So, since it’s about opinions and values, basically, the contest takes place in the arena of political power. In other words, it’s a “majority wins” thing. That’s the only “fact” that will ever matter.

[Strega]

Oddly, it seems to be something objected to solely on religious grounds.  I know the objections are couched as ‘humanist’ but obviously they aren’t, or there would be more effort put into funding children’s health care (CHIPS was permitted to expire on Sept 30th this year).

In the UK, there are no abortion debates in politics – it’s considered a medical issue.  Those countries that shout the loudest over the abortion matter are mostly theocracies or what we would consider to be backwards states.

The problem over here in the USA is that abortion became enmeshed in politics.  Now it’s in the political sphere, it will never be solved.  A committee of middle aged white men sitting around debating it, was shown on social media recently.  That is it’s own comment.

Abortions will happen, legal or not.  Bleating about it politically is a way to evoke emotions at the polling booth, see the Alabama Senator race as reference.  The only issue to debate is the health provisions for the women who need to terminate pregnancy.

[Unseen]

But there are anti-abortion protests in the UK.

[Strega]

Yes but the government is contemplating preventing the protests, not contemplating preventing the abortions.  Every country has whack-jobs who wave their religious literature around, but there’s no pro-life/pro-choice battle going on in the streets, the government or the churches.  It’s not a political issue.

[Reg the Fronkey Farmer]

In am listing to the argument in Ireland for over 30 years now!!  Did anyone hear anything about this definition of “personhood” that was slipped into the Tax Bill? (from last Sunday School).

[Unseen]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:

In am listing to the argument in Ireland for over 30 years now!! Did anyone hear anything about this definition of “personhood” that was slipped into the Tax Bill? (from last Sunday School).

Like I said, Reg, it’s a matter of opinion and values and from opinions and values definitions are crafted.

There exists no fact which will settle the disagreement (it isn’t even really a debate).

 

[Matt]

@Unseen WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING IN ALL OF YOUR RECENT POST’S TITLES?

 

When does a life begin?

Interesting question, consider this: There is an unbroken chain of living beings from our earliest common ancestor to us. To reproduce, a living sperm and a living egg come from living parents and produce a living child. So, when does a life begin? When life begun!

[jakelafort]

The notion that capitalizing text equals shouting is a bit crazy.  To characterize it as such when it is the title, even more so..

[Unseen]

Matt wrote:

@unseen WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING IN ALL OF YOUR RECENT POST’S TITLES?

When does a life begin?

Interesting question, consider this: There is an unbroken chain of living beings from our earliest common ancestor to us. To reproduce, a living sperm and a living egg come from living parents and produce a living child. So, when does a life begin? When life begun!

I capitalize the title because IT’S A HEADLINE. Just be glad I don’t capitalize the body as well.

So, you’re arguing that there are no individual lives, just one life. I’ll test that when I’m dead, which since I’m almost 71, isn’t as far off as it once was.

I’ll get back to  you if you’re right.

[PopeBeanie]

Fortunately, reason outweighs religious prescription in most state legislation wrt end of life rights. I think it’s reasonable to discount religious claims in all legislation, and it’s reasonable to use some of the end of life definitions to beginning of life law, per state… especially wrt measurable brain activity.

[David Boots]

Strega wrote:

In the UK, there are no abortion debates in politics – it’s considered a medical issue. Those countries that shout the loudest over the abortion matter are mostly theocracies or what we would consider to be backwards states.

In a lot of places it is not a political issue. Once again, as Strega points out, scratch the surface and you will find a theocrat telling other people what they should do and what they should think.

My response is best summed up with the bridge from this classic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hf-B9Tqkss

 

• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by David Boots.

[Unseen]

PopeBeanie wrote:

Fortunately, reason outweighs religious prescription in most state legislation wrt end of life rights. I think it’s reasonable to discount religious claims in all legislation, and it’s reasonable to use some of the end of life definitions to beginning of life law, per state… especially wrt measurable brain activity.

A good definition for those whose attitudes and beliefs incline them to accept it. If their prime motivation is to (as they see it) save babies from abortionists, they won’t.

[Author]

Posts