E
Elf01
Guest
For anyone who was pro choice and is now pro life what arguments did you find persuasive?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
S
StephieNorthCo
Guest
Ok. I’ll fess up. For a long time I didn’t really think about it, so the argument was “well I wouldn’t do it, but what right do I have to impose my will on a majority”.
Then the brain kicked in.
Wait a minute. That’s a life you’re talking anout. But is it? Maybe it’s just a blob of stuff, and the is no soul present until birth, then God imparts the soul.
But then the science kicked in. Hmmm. Is that life of some kind? Yes, by definition of life. Is it mothers? No, it’s unique DNA. is it human? Yes, by the same DNA arguments.
So, we have a new, unique human life.
Since we have a new human life, then that life needs to have every “right” any other human has, and that includes protection.
Consider the alternative… if it has no rights, until birthed, then that line is arbitrary. What if I don’t like what I see? Can I kill it then? Most people would argue no, but some would say, yep, if you do it immediately… less than 3 months… less than a year… less than the age of reason… less than the age of being productive.
So the real answer hit me. As soon as you have a new human life (union of sperm and egg) you have a valuable, unique, precious life.
And thus, I am pro life.
BTW, the same arguments go for euthanasia.
Then the brain kicked in.
Wait a minute. That’s a life you’re talking anout. But is it? Maybe it’s just a blob of stuff, and the is no soul present until birth, then God imparts the soul.
But then the science kicked in. Hmmm. Is that life of some kind? Yes, by definition of life. Is it mothers? No, it’s unique DNA. is it human? Yes, by the same DNA arguments.
So, we have a new, unique human life.
Since we have a new human life, then that life needs to have every “right” any other human has, and that includes protection.
Consider the alternative… if it has no rights, until birthed, then that line is arbitrary. What if I don’t like what I see? Can I kill it then? Most people would argue no, but some would say, yep, if you do it immediately… less than 3 months… less than a year… less than the age of reason… less than the age of being productive.
So the real answer hit me. As soon as you have a new human life (union of sperm and egg) you have a valuable, unique, precious life.
And thus, I am pro life.
BTW, the same arguments go for euthanasia.
M
mVitus
Guest
I’ll admit that freshmen year of high school, in English we read an excerpt from a book that dealt with looking at things from another perspective. The particular excerpt dealt with the (either 70s or 80s) crime wave amd fall off. In it he mentioned some credited that drop off with new police tactics and other measures. He pointed out an alternative that Roe v. Wade could have been a cause as the people that would have been coming of age for crime were not as populous. Without really thinking about it any more, I was full pro-choice in that respect for a year or so.
When I thought about it one day and realized, wait a second, we’re talking about human lives here. Innocent people that haven’t even committed crimes yet, I fell to the position if pro-life, except for cases of rape and danger of death. Incest and the child having deformities might have lingered for a little bit before the human life aspect came in.
Pro-choiceness in cases of rape dropped later on when I was thinking and it finally struck me that the child of rape is not guilty of rape and that a death sentence for them is not appropriate, even more so when the rapist themself is not executed.
So overall, it was really a question of do we have the right to take innocent lives.
Further nuance came about a year and some months ago when reading Ask An Apologist and I realized the error in the statement: The Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ with his authority, but I’m the one that’s right.
When I thought about it one day and realized, wait a second, we’re talking about human lives here. Innocent people that haven’t even committed crimes yet, I fell to the position if pro-life, except for cases of rape and danger of death. Incest and the child having deformities might have lingered for a little bit before the human life aspect came in.
Pro-choiceness in cases of rape dropped later on when I was thinking and it finally struck me that the child of rape is not guilty of rape and that a death sentence for them is not appropriate, even more so when the rapist themself is not executed.
So overall, it was really a question of do we have the right to take innocent lives.
Further nuance came about a year and some months ago when reading Ask An Apologist and I realized the error in the statement: The Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ with his authority, but I’m the one that’s right.
W
Wesrock
Guest
It was moreso coming to accept that the distinctions I was making were arbitrary and recognizing that it is the killing of a human life who is the child of the parents. The child is already in this world after it’s been conceived, and euthanizing it isn’t a cure to life’s hardships. A fetus is a who not a what. Stage of development and what abilities are currently manifested doesn’t change that.
E
Elf01
Guest
@StephieNorthCo, @mVitus, @Wesrock and others, the common thread seems to be recognizing the humanity of the unborn but what got you to that point?
S
StephieNorthCo
Guest
Thought I splained that…
The science. We have life of some sort… the zygote grows, divides, multiplies. It is life. But what life is it? We can tell from the chromosome content. It is not identical to the mother nor father. It is unique. From the structure and content, it is human. Only human.
So we have a unique life. We have a baby. Looking exactly like any human should at that point in its development.
The science. We have life of some sort… the zygote grows, divides, multiplies. It is life. But what life is it? We can tell from the chromosome content. It is not identical to the mother nor father. It is unique. From the structure and content, it is human. Only human.
So we have a unique life. We have a baby. Looking exactly like any human should at that point in its development.
N
nightshade
Guest
I leaned pro-choice in college but of the mindset that I would never be involved in an abortion. If I ever got someone pregnant I would man up and take responsibility for my actions. That completely changed when my wife got pregnant and we felt our little bitty baby kicking and moving around in there. To think that someone would want to kill the sweet little innocence that was moving around in there, especially solely for the reason that “they weren’t ready” really bothered me and we both became pro life. This was solidified once our daughter was born. This sweet, goofy, precious little baby is a gift from God. I just can’t fathom the idea of abortion anymore. So no arguments really persuaded me, it was all first hand experience of the gift of childbirth.
H
Hideyplace
Guest
I converted to Catholicism as an adult, then got married, then had first child. When first child was still very young I realized that this unique individual was never anyone else, even from the point of conception. Also my formation as a Catholic was ongoing (still is). I think another thing that influenced me was listening to Helen Alvare being interviewed on the radio.So the real answer hit me. As soon as you have a new human life (union of sperm and egg) you have a valuable, unique, precious life.
C
chieft
Guest
Outstanding question !
P
pocaracas
Guest
Can I say that I’m pro choice and pro life?
In an ideal world, there’s no need for abortions and they don’t get made.
In the real world, when illegal, they lead to clandestine operations that obviously kill the fetus anyway, but also elevate the chance of complications and even death of the woman… Not to mention the absence of family planning and sexual education that seem to go hand in hand with such prohibitions which only serve to increase the number of women who feel the need for aborting.
While I understand we’re talking about a human being and potential person, we are talking about one who, in both cases (legal or illegal), ends up dead. So I prefer the position that leads to the least loss of life.
In an ideal world, there’s no need for abortions and they don’t get made.
In the real world, when illegal, they lead to clandestine operations that obviously kill the fetus anyway, but also elevate the chance of complications and even death of the woman… Not to mention the absence of family planning and sexual education that seem to go hand in hand with such prohibitions which only serve to increase the number of women who feel the need for aborting.
While I understand we’re talking about a human being and potential person, we are talking about one who, in both cases (legal or illegal), ends up dead. So I prefer the position that leads to the least loss of life.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.