WATCH: Students sign petition to legalize abortion after childbirth

  • Thread starter Thread starter markomalley
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Prodigal_Son1 said:
There is no such thing as ‘after birth abortions,’ when one truly understands the definition of ‘abortion.’ If we can’t show an educated argument against abortions, it might be perceived as an argument based on emotions only.
Click to expand...
theblaze.com/stories/2012/02/27/ethicists-argue-in-favor-of-after-birth-abortions-as-newborns-are-not-persons/
The two are quick to note that they prefer the term “after-birth abortion” as opposed to “infanticide.” Why? Because it “[emphasizes] that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus (on which ‘abortions’ in the traditional sense are performed) rather than to that of a child.” The authors also do not agree with the term euthanasia for this practice as the best interest of the person who would be killed is not necessarily the primary reason his or her life is being terminated. In other words, it may be in the parents’ best interest to terminate the life, not the newborns.
Click to expand...
 
maryjk said:
theblaze.com/stories/2012/02/27/ethicists-argue-in-favor-of-after-birth-abortions-as-newborns-are-not-persons/
Click to expand...
Semantics never plays well, in my opinion. Infanticide and abortion are two different things. If we consider them as the same, the results can be devastating in more ways, similar to the sad results we see on abortion. We have to maintain the difference, or else we may find pro choice people associating all neonates, the same as they consider the unborn, and we sadly know how that fight is going currently.
 
maryjk said:
You don’t really think that do you?

If no one that thought that, we wouldn’t need a “Babies born alive law.” And yet we do.

If no one that thought that, there wouldn’t be people writing articles about “after birth abortions.” (Do a search, articles are out there.)

And if no one thought that, teens wouldn’t dump babies in dumpsters to hide the fact that they are having sex.
Click to expand...
It is all murder. Simply using different terms does not change the essence of the act.
 
fix said:
It is all murder. Simply using different terms does not change the essence of the act.
Click to expand...
In a legalistic society, recognition of differences can make some difference. The differences can be defined by when people actually believe life begins; conception, heartbeat, formations, or birth. As those differences take place, more and more people come to agree life has began. The greatest majority being at the end of the process. I think it would be dangerous, for neonates, if we agree with no difference between infanticide and abortion.

While Catholics believe in life beginning at conception, we shouldn’t alienate those who believe it begins with actual heartbeats. It should be our hope that we could include them in our numbers eventually, through truth. The same holds true for all who recognize the beginning of life, at whatever point they claim, whether true or not. Our goal, as the opposing side’s, is to move their beliefs in our direction. How we make our arguments will, or will not, have impact.
 
An aside: So let’s see… the wingnutty MRC sends out a fake pollster, with a fake petition, but I am supposed to believe all those 14 (14? Out of a student body of 32,000?) “signatures” are 100% authentic? Even the one from the kid he told " Y’know… don’t even read it, just sign it."

Sure.

Just sayin’.
 
Cricket123 said:
An aside: So let’s see… the wingnutty MRC sends out a fake pollster, with a fake petition, but I am supposed to believe all those 14 (14? Out of a student body of 32,000?) “signatures” are 100% authentic? Even the one from the kid he told " Y’know… don’t even read it, just sign it."

Sure.

Just sayin’.
Click to expand...
Wingnutty? Do you know anything about them? And you have no evidence it was fake at all, but choose to believe it because you dislike the group, apparently.

Does leave you with any credibility, frankly. The fact that you didn’t even mention the disgust at the notion of people possible endorsing it (even through their own low intellect) is distressing.
 
The signatures are authentic, watch the video. The fake pollster is just trying to show how many students have knee-jerk reactions to supporting abortion without thinking about the issues at all.

It shows that you just need to mention “a woman’s right to her own body” or “right to choose” and people will sign anything without thinking. A few students did get it and walked away in disgust.

Fourteen signatures gathered in an hour is a huge number, it doesn’t matter how many students are at the school. This is frightening, that so many students are brain washed into pro-abortion propaganda.
 
Julian_Bashir said:
Wingnutty? Do you know anything about them?
Click to expand...
Well, I watched the video to the end and noticed it was produced by MRCtv, so I looked them up, skimmed over their website, and found them somewhat to the right of FOX, the usual gateway to the conservative alternate universe. So yes, wingnutty… though not as far-right as they could be.
Julian_Bashir said:
And you have no evidence it was fake at all, but choose to believe it because you dislike the group, apparently.
Click to expand...
This is not precisely my meaning, I do have evidence the pollster and petition were fake. I have no evidence regarding the signatures. Perhaps they were real, perhaps not. I do find the “don’t read it… just sign it” episode suspect. Even if that is real, it’s hard to attribute much motive either way to anyone who would sign a petition under those conditions.

It is true I question it based on its source. It certainly wouldn’t be the first fake out there. On the other hand, it would seem its intended audience readily accepts it because it fits their own preconceptions. It works both ways.
 
@Viki63 -

What if you needed a license to have a baby? Then conservatives would protest that as an unwarranted government intrusion into individual rights. Any fee for the license would be scorned as a baby-tax. There would be dire warnings of “baby panels” where “faceless bureaucrats” would determine who could and could not procreate. And it would all end in scandals where conservatives claimed they were being denied their “Constitutional right to breed” based on their political beliefs.

And I’m only partly joking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top