Originally posted by CliffLandinThis whole elitism thing on this website is the funniest thing of all coming from a forum of chess players who play to improve their rankings. What's that all about anyway??
Calling it elitism implies that he is elite. The chances are he is just some middle manager driving a Ford, but believes himself to be better than most 'cuz he scored 1200 on his SATs.
Originally posted by irontigranThe irony obviously being that Palin and McCain are, themselves, failed abortions.
i think if a 16 year old gets raped, and becomes pregnant, that she should still be but to death (in states that those rules apply) if she chooses to abort for baby murder. no more victim card. the rapists child must be born, or else he wouldve killed her if he wanted the girl dead.
mccain/palin 08
Oh. That's not irony, that's actually their defence. Damn it.
As a lawyer, I am opposed to government regulation of abortion on substantive due process grounds -- to insert government into this matter is a violation of basic human rights.
The decision should rest with the woman, her husband, doctor and clergy.
That said, all should recognize that the decision to have an abortion is a difficult one, and is not to be undertaken without considerable thought.
I hold with the ancient view that the fetus is part of the pregnant woman's body. While there are values and ethics that should be considered, there should be no government interference with a woman's choice regarding her own body. Nobody ought to dispute a woman's "free choice" over her body - to cut her hair, or to undergo liposuction if she chooses.
On the other hand, everybody ought to agree that there are limits to "choice" - i.e. a woman does not have the right to commit murder.
So the abortion debate really comes down to one basic question: Does abortion constitutes murder? In other words, does a fetus have the status of human life?
I would take a rational, middle ground, taking into account both the quest for spiritual greatness and the realities of everyday life.
I would hold with the ancient view that a baby becomes a full-fledged human being when the head emerges from the womb. Before then, the fetus may be considered a "partial life."
So is it permitted to destroy this partial life?
Generally, no; even a doubtful, partial human life - has infinite value.
I would take the following positions in the specific instances enumerated below, but would not support government involvement in these matters:
1. An abortion could be considered an appropriate decision if
A. a woman's life is endangered during childbirth. If the fetus placed its mother's life at risk, then it is appropriate for the mother to have the option to kill the fetus to save herself.
B. the woman was suicidal because of her pregnancy.
C. a pregnancy resulted from a rape, an abortion may be appropriate if needed in order save her great mental anguish.
D. a woman who becomes pregnant while nursing a child. Her milk supply would dry up. If the child is allergic to all other forms of nutrition except for its mother's milk, then it would starve. An abortion would be an appropriate option in this case. An abortion of the fetus, a potential person, would be justified to save the life of the child, an actual person.
2. An abortion should not be considered an appropriate decision:
A. in the event that the fetus is genetically defective or will probably pick up a disease from its mother, with the exceptions that abortion should be considered appropriate in the first trimester if the fetus would be born with a deformity that would cause it to suffer, and termination of a fetus with a lethal fetal defect such as Tay Sachs up to the end of the second trimester of gestation. How should we think about this sort of choice? Some argue that abortion of any handicapped fetus spares the child a "poor quality of life." Yet who said that having one arm constitutes a poor quality of life?! Every time someone loses a limb in an accident, should we kill them? Or how about mental retardation? If a set of highly intelligent parents are appalled to discover that their fetus has an IQ of "only" 100, is abortion justified? I think that this type of selection process, eugenics, is evil. It hearkens to the Nazi program called "T-4," which systematically set out to kill all physically and mentally disabled persons.
B. for economic reasons, to avoid career inconveniences, or because the woman is unmarried. Of the approximately 2 million abortions performed annually in the United States, about 75 percent are attributed to matters of convenience (i.e. having a baby would interfere with the mother's school or work), or to financial considerations (i.e. a baby is not affordable at this time). I think these constitute unacceptable reasons for killing the "partial life" fetus. When one's parents become old and require costly medication, should we then kill them also for financial considerations?!
If the issue of abortion seems morally clear, so why is there such a bitter public debate?
Often it is difficult to accept responsibility for the consequences of actions. When you get behind the wheel of a car, there are a variety of risks involved. Even if you are careful, you might accidentally run somebody over and kill them. And you'd have to live with that consequence.
So too, when a man and woman engage in intercourse, there are a variety of risks involved - among them transmitted diseases, emotional attachment, and pregnancy. It is not a question of being careful. It's a question of taking responsibility for one's actions.
So what's the right thing to do. In the absence of severe health danger, a woman ought to carry the fetus to full term. With 1-in-6 American couples infertile, giving up the baby for adoption is an obvious option.
But we do not need government to make these decisions for us, for that does not encourage individual responsibility -- better we should pursue policies that make the choice to have an abortion for economic reasons unnecessary and culturally repugnant.
Given this morning's news, we can see just how difficult that will be. We've yet to choose policies that allow capitalism to operate responsibly and the consequence is evident in today's headlines. Those who brought this crisis on us ought to be held accountable and their irresponsibility be made the subject of stricter regulation in future.
The key issue for us today is NOT abortion -- it is economic behavior, something that is within the province of government. After all, it is government that prints the money!!!