Intellectual Blindness

[PaulAndrew83]

Intellectual Blindness

There is one thing I cannot understand about modern thinking.

It is the question of how anybody with any grasp of high school biology can turn round and think that abortion is not the taking of human life.

This is the most amazing proof of human stupidity that I can think of.

Thoughts?

Paul

 

[rwoehmke]

It is amazing! How can lawyers and judges, some of them educated at institutions like Harvard, Yale, Columbia, etc. be so obtuse as to not recognize that a fetus at any stage, but particularly after six weeks or so is a miniature human being? Yet one must conclude if this is so, it should not be a surprise that many with a lesser intellectual; capacity are just as obtuse. Tis a sad comment on human nature.

 

[christcnection1]

Intellectual Blindness

There is one thing I cannot understand about modern thinking.

It is the question of how anybody with any grasp of high school biology can turn round and think that abortion is not the taking of human life.

This is the most amazing proof of human stupidity that I can think of.

Thoughts?

Paul

To paraphrase the great Protestant Apologist Ravi Zacharias, “the problem is not intellectual. It’s moral and spiritual.”

These individuals are not so much intellectually blind. They are moral likely suffering from moral and spiritual blindness.

Among the other options is that they actually do acknowledge it as a child, but they are moral relativists, and believe that to preserve human life in the womb is subjectively good at best.

If you’re not convinced there is a moral law, then you must also believe there is not a moral law giver. And if there is no moral law giver, then all morality is ultimately subjective, if there is no revelation. And if it’s subjective, then why not look at abortions as a great convenience?

If man becomes the measure of all things, anything goes. Ideas have consequences.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Intellectual Blindness

There is one thing I cannot understand about modern thinking.

It is the question of how anybody with any grasp of high school biology can turn round and think that abortion is not the taking of human life.

This is the most amazing proof of human stupidity that I can think of.

Thoughts?

Paul

ah my friend you witness the power of peer pressure, amplified by the media.

no one wants to look the fool for holding an opinion that is not acceptable to express in a liberal college classroom or the set of the bbc, nbc,cbs etc…

its a sorry world that we live in

 

[Dameedna]

Well it certainly isn’t about to become a frog.

However, most recognize it’s a human life, and many do have good arguments as to why it is not wrong to take that life.

You can disagree with it, but they are not being intellectually blind. The worst they will say, is that it’s a potential human. I used to say the same thing, then realized it couldn’t be anything but that, hence my frog comment and to be intellectually “honest” that is what I now view it as. Even if it is also a collection of cells. At least I know what it is I’m supporting and I’m not lying to myself or trying to kid myself.

Humans are ultimately animals a result of natural processes, and the ending of a life, under certain circumstances is something I support(for my own reasons I won’t get into). I know it’s a tricky area ethically, regadless of what you support.

Abortion upsets people terribly, BUT the way in which it is worded(Potential human life, fetus etc) is a result of people actually feeling rather uncomfortable with the thought of taking life. Most people, don’t actually want to do that, and it there is anything “good” that you can derive from this situation it is exactly that. People , don’t like the thought of ending a human life so they reword it and try and reduce it which is what they are actually trying to do.

If you can get them to face that it is a human life, and not “potential” then at least they can address the question of wether they support the taking of a human life in a moral and ethical way.

Don’t be too surprised however, if they still agree with it.

 

[PaulAndrew83]

“However, most recognize it’s a human life, and many do have good arguments as to why it is not wrong to take that life.”

In my experience disagreeing about whether or not its a human lifein england anyway is the main way these people justify it. This is blindness because it is a denial of reality for moral reasons so that one can continue to kill human beings without the guilt.

As for those who recognise that it is a human life and continue to support it I consider them to be like Mao and Stalin.

As for those who use some kind of evolutionary argument I consider them like unto hitler for he considered jews, gypsys, slavs etc as lesser humans like unto apes.

Of course this has the effect of enraging them should I tell them but sometimes it has the effect of waking them up.

Paul

 

[AmbroseSJ]

If you can get them to face that it is a human life, and not “potential” then at least they can address the question of wether they support the taking of a human life in a moral and ethical way.

Very good post Dameedna, and perceptive as well. The problem with all of the militant, aggressive, intolerant, hell & damnation to the abortionist rhetoric is that it is counter-productive. It is not even engaging CATHOLICS, much less the rest of the world at large. The first thing the Church should be doing is CONCENTRATING ON TEACHING AND INSTRUCTING Catholics in a charitable and persuasive way. Waving the flag of INTRINSIC EVIL is very inflammatory as well as philosophically abstract and non-helpful.

Yes, I know as Catholics we must submit to the Magisterium, however, as Catholics we must also follow our conscience. If that conscience is undeveloped or erroneous, than THAT should be addressed.

The Church is turning this into another CRUSADE which will accomplish nothing, or worse, set the cause back.

 

[Dameedna]

“However, most recognize it’s a human life, and many do have good arguments as to why it is not wrong to take that life.”

In my experience disagreeing about whether or not its a human lifein england anyway is the main way these people justify it. This is blindness because it is a denial of reality for moral reasons so that one can continue to kill human beings without the guilt.

Then rather than judge them recognize this. They change the wording due to a lack of comfort over the idea. They have to relegate the fetus to an abstract, a “potential” human, rather than an actual one.

If you judge them, and deem them immoral, you have helped no-one. You have lost, and you have contributed to the problem.

As for those who recognise that it is a human life and continue to support it I consider them to be like Mao and Stalin.

Regardless of what you think of them, as soon as you say this, you help no-one. Your judgment will be your legacy, not your moral truth.

As for those who use some kind of evolutionary argument I consider them like unto hitler for he considered jews, gypsys, slavs etc as lesser humans like unto apes.

As I said above.

Of course this has the effect of enraging them should I tell them but sometimes it has the effect of waking them up.

Paul

Nope, it will **** them off, they will ignore you and any chance you had to engage with them in an intellectual and ethical discussion will be ruined by your inability to acknowlege them as humans who need your love.

Did I just judge you? yes I did.

I expect I had the same affect on you, as you do on people who are pro-choice.

No affect at all.

 

[Dameedna]

The Church is turning this into another CRUSADE which will accomplish nothing, or worse, set the cause back.

This is true and I thank you for your thoughtful post. I’ll share a little story about my ring around the posie over this issue.

I have alway’s supported abortion and contraception(and still do). That alone will make people hate me, and for those people, I cannot change so that you will like me and I don’t agree with your religion or philosophy so we’ll never meet eye to eye.

HOWEVER, I alway’s supported the concept of abortion up to the 3 month mark( for my own reasons, that aren’t important with regards to my point). Then I moved to the the US and entered into the most divisive debate that seems to exist politically that makes or breaks a presidency. Abortion.

I am Pro-choice. Of course, I was pro-choice up to 3 months but still pro-choice. Not good enough say’s the pro-choice crowd. Either you AGREE to choice or you do not.

Why? say’s the pro-life crowd, if you agree life is precious you will agree we cannot make a choice about human life regardless of stages of fetal development.

To the pro-choice, CHOICE exists till labour(and not even then for some). If you believe in choice, if you are “part” of the crew, then you will support everything we say AND IF YOU DON"T, you are a fundamentalist christian who doesn’t give a **** about female rights.

This debate on rational, ethics and choice, all the big ticket items raged, and because I sided with choice I eventually had to concede that a woman that was 9 months pregnant should be allowed to abort. This…was her choice.(See any kind of ideological fanaticism happening here?)

THEN, there was a news story about a man that murdered his wife, and chopped her up into pieces. She was 8 months pregnant.(Scott Petterson trial) The court was deciding if they could charge him for double homicide. They did.

I was INCENSED. The was a consipiracy of the highest level. This is an attempt to give a FETUS the same rights as the mother and that is not on. This was an attempt to stop a womans right to choose, how dare those chauvenistic manipulative bastards?

I wrote a very angry post on a forum about how disgusted I was about the entire decision and how it was an absolute rejection of a basic human right to choose what happens to our own body.

And then someone said.

Are you not horrified that this happened at all?

Oh dear. For the sake of my desire for human choice, I gave in to what I now see as an extreme. I was so worried about my belief in choice, that I had lost my humanity. I didn’t give two hoots about a woman that was chopped up into pieces and a baby that was pretty much ready to face the world.

My point.!!!

IF YOU PUSH THIS ISSUE, you will drive people to extremes. It is too important. It is about LIFE itself, and the POINT of life. Choice. You cannot treat this like any other issue. You judge, they will ignore you. You condem, they will laugh at you.

Be careful, what you wish for in this debate. You will never force your views on this, with humans, no matter how well you debate it. You want people to choose? They will probably not choose you unless you give everything you have with the utmost love to the person making the decision. You have to love them, before you can love the child inside them.

I still agree with abortion, but I’m a lot more wary now of my own views on it.

Nothing will define you as a human, more than how you debate this issue, imo. Not what you believe, but how you address it’s reality. It’s the biggest of all big ticket items. Choice vs Life.

 

[crowonsnow]

There’s never been a question for me as to whether it’s human or not. Of course it’s human. But pro lifers generally seem to enjoy ignoring the fact that therapeutic abortion is certainly not the only way a human or a developing human meets its end. The “pro life” camp isn’t really pro life, it’s only pro fetus. To me that’s the real issue. Perhaps a better definition if “intellectual blindness” is to be pro life and pro war.

 

[ateista]

It is the question of how anybody with any grasp of high school biology can turn round and think that abortion is not the taking of human life.

The fetus is exactly as human being as a plate of scrambled eggs is a fried chicken… Elementary biology, indeed.

 

[Fran65]

The fetus is exactly as human being as a plate of scrambled eggs is a fried chicken… Elementary biology, indeed.

Your analogy is both revolting and wrong.

Scrambled eggs that are cooked and eaten are *not *chickens. because: they 1) have not been fertilized; 2) have their order (white, yolk) disrupted by the action of the whisk, and 3) have been cooked.

If they are similar to anything, they are similar to the unfertilised (human) ovum.

The Foetus (I’m British) is 1) the result of fertilisation and 2) intact and capable of becoming a full grown adult - including living outside the uterus from 23 weeks onwards. The foetus is human.

I hope that you have never had the horrible experience of trying to scramble a fertilised, twenty days developed chicken embryo.

 

[fhansen]

There’s never been a question for me as to whether it’s human or not. Of course it’s human. But pro lifers generally seem to enjoy ignoring the fact that therapeutic abortion is certainly not the only way a human or a developing human meets its end. The “pro life” camp isn’t really pro life, it’s only pro fetus. To me that’s the real issue. Perhaps a better definition if “intellectual blindness” is to be pro life and pro war.

Well I’m pro-life and anti-war and none of that’s relevant here anyway. If the fetus is human then to be pro-fetus is to be pro-life and, by your argument, since all humans meet their ends someday anyway why not take laws against murder off the books?

 

[Fran65]

Therapeutic: the treating of disease.

Disease: and impairment of health or abnormal functioning.

Pregnancy is neither an impairment of health nor abnormal.

Abortion is very, very rarely therapeutic other than in for example the case of a woman with life threatening pre-eclampsia before 23 weeks.

 

[KindredSoul]

Well I’m pro-life and anti-war and none of that’s relevant here anyway. If the fetus is human then to be pro-fetus is to be pro-life and, by your argument, since all humans meet their ends someday anyway why not take laws against murder off the books?

Because if murder of the already born were legal, it might result in pro-choicers themselves, or someone they’re attached to, being legally killed. They’ve managed to detach themselves from the unborn so much so that abortion is no threat to them… It’s a very tragic and, for the unborn, a deadly case of people wanting to have their cake and eat it too.

I pray for the day abortion is a thing of the past…and if it were possible, I wish it could be erased even from there…

 

[crowonsnow]

Because if murder of the already born were legal, it might result in pro-choicers themselves, or someone they’re attached to, being legally killed. They’ve managed to detach themselves from the unborn so much so that abortion is no threat to them… It’s a very tragic and, for the unborn, a deadly case of people wanting to have their cake and eat it too.

I pray for the day abortion is a thing of the past…and if it were possible, I wish it could be erased even from there…

We have laws that legally kill, people included - and by the millions I might add, even when abortion is removed from the equation. I personally wish humans weren’t so find of killing each other. If they weren’t so fond of killing each other, human abortion would be a moot subject.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

This is true and I thank you for your thoughtful post. I’ll share a little story about my ring around the posie over this issue.

I have alway’s supported abortion and contraception(and still do). That alone will make people hate me, and for those people, I cannot change so that you will like me and I don’t agree with your religion or philosophy so we’ll never meet eye to eye.

HOWEVER, I alway’s supported the concept of abortion up to the 3 month mark( for my own reasons, that aren’t important with regards to my point). Then I moved to the the US and entered into the most divisive debate that seems to exist politically that makes or breaks a presidency. Abortion.

I am Pro-choice. Of course, I was pro-choice up to 3 months but still pro-choice. Not good enough say’s the pro-choice crowd. Either you AGREE to choice or you do not.

Why? say’s the pro-life crowd, if you agree life is precious you will agree we cannot make a choice about human life regardless of stages of fetal development.

To the pro-choice, CHOICE exists till labour(and not even then for some). If you believe in choice, if you are “part” of the crew, then you will support everything we say AND IF YOU DON"T, you are a fundamentalist christian who doesn’t give a **** about female rights.

This debate on rational, ethics and choice, all the big ticket items raged, and because I sided with choice I eventually had to concede that a woman that was 9 months pregnant should be allowed to abort. This…was her choice.(See any kind of ideological fanaticism happening here?)

THEN, there was a news story about a man that murdered his wife, and chopped her up into pieces. She was 8 months pregnant.(Scott Petterson trial) The court was deciding if they could charge him for double homicide. They did.

I was INCENSED. The was a consipiracy of the highest level. This is an attempt to give a FETUS the same rights as the mother and that is not on. This was an attempt to stop a womans right to choose, how dare those chauvenistic manipulative bastards?

I wrote a very angry post on a forum about how disgusted I was about the entire decision and how it was an absolute rejection of a basic human right to choose what happens to our own body.

And then someone said.

Are you not horrified that this happened at all?

Oh dear. For the sake of my desire for human choice, I gave in to what I now see as an extreme. I was so worried about my belief in choice, that I had lost my humanity. I didn’t give two hoots about a woman that was chopped up into pieces and a baby that was pretty much ready to face the world.

My point.!!!

IF YOU PUSH THIS ISSUE, you will drive people to extremes. It is too important. It is about LIFE itself, and the POINT of life. Choice. You cannot treat this like any other issue. You judge, they will ignore you. You condem, they will laugh at you.

Be careful, what you wish for in this debate. You will never force your views on this, with humans, no matter how well you debate it. You want people to choose? They will probably not choose you unless you give everything you have with the utmost love to the person making the decision. You have to love them, before you can love the child inside them.

I still agree with abortion, but I’m a lot more wary now of my own views on it.

Nothing will define you as a human, more than how you debate this issue, imo. Not what you believe, but how you address it’s reality. It’s the biggest of all big ticket items. Choice vs Life.

i dont follow as to how there can really be some gray area here. if you are killing someone it is murder, plain and simple. if you do it in defense of your own life it is called self defense. other than that what possible reason could one have to commit the homicide of abortion?

1. it is not a womans body, it is a separate genetically identifiably separate person being murdered
2. there are no other circumstances in which the murder of the child would be allowed if it were one second old.

this is really about sex with no consequence, it is nothing short of another holocaust, much more massive in comparison.

it is an attempt to free oneself from the bonds of society and biology at the expense of human life.

its says that fulfilling ones desires is more important than fulfilling ones responsibilities.

 

[crowonsnow]

Well I’m pro-life and anti-war and none of that’s relevant here anyway. If the fetus is human then to be pro-fetus is to be pro-life and, by your argument, since all humans meet their ends someday anyway why not take laws against murder off the books?

Laws against murder? That’s noble, but a laugher nonetheless. If you are powerful enough you can murder anyone and everyone you wish and it’s quite legal. Ask any pro-life Christian about their god’s right to kill when it pleases.

 

[crowonsnow]

Therapeutic: the treating of disease.

Disease: and impairment of health or abnormal functioning.

Pregnancy is neither an impairment of health nor abnormal.

Abortion is very, very rarely therapeutic other than in for example the case of a woman with life threatening pre-eclampsia before 23 weeks.

Okay Fran. Is the Vatican on record as saying that the termination of a pregnancy is ever okay to save the life of the mother, or vice-versa?

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Laws against murder? That’s noble, but a laugher nonetheless. If you are powerful enough you can murder anyone and everyone you wish and it’s quite legal. Ask any pro-life Christian about their god’s right to kill when it pleases.

all things are G-ds possessions, it is His right to dispose of them as He wishes.

one human does not own another, and therefore cannot dispose of what he does not own.

are you angry that G-d is allowed to kill and you are not? of course not. so why be mad that He exercises a right that you cannot?

it is not wrong for Him on that basis. and its not a matter of opinion, it is a concept at the basis of property law. if you have title to something you may do as you wish with it.

how should that apply any less to G-d?