I did it again.
Once again I entered a thread over at BlogHer regarding abortion and the latest ruling by the Supreme Court. Of course, the two main posts regarding the ruling were from a pro-choice perspective, and the commenters echoed the same opinions. I still am perplexed about why there are hardly any conservative contributing editors in the news category on the site. I can think of only one, but she only posts once in a while.
Of course, I have wondered the same thing aloud before in my post on abortion that also referenced BlogHer. I was reassured that there really are more conservative members on BlogHer, and yet I never see them post on anything that is remotely controversial. Is it out of fear that they say nothing? Is it simply a desire to avoid an argument? I'm not sure. So, there's nothing new there.
Why do I get roped into these discussions?
Mainly because I read all the viewpoints and rhetoric of the opposition and see no one offering logical, thought-out responses to them. I get tired of the one-sidedness of it all.
My question remains to those who are so outraged about the ban on partial birth abortion that was upheld by the supreme court. Is there ever a time, place or procedure that should be unacceptable for abortion? Are there ever circumstances in which abortion is viewed as wrong by the pro-choice community?
They keep telling me that they don't take abortion lightly, that they wish it didn't have to happen. They say that, but when pressed further refuse to agree that some abortion methods are too ghastly to perform.
The procedure which has been banned involves giving birth to a late-term baby until its head is still in the birth canal and then crushing its skull before the birth is finished. Another method covered by this ban involves dilating the cervix and literally dismembering the baby for removal. Their nervous systems are fully developed.
We don't even put down animals in such a brutal fashion. Why is it OK to end a human life in this manner?
It is like being for euthanasia and end-of-life decisions, but letting doctors club someone to death, or hack them up with a machete.
Yes, that's graphic wording and imagery, but unfortunately, it is truthful imagery.
Wake up people!
Showing posts with label blogher. Show all posts
Showing posts with label blogher. Show all posts
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
A Heavy Departure
I occasionally comment at BlogHer on various posts. Although I know that most of the bloggers there are of the liberal variety, I usually choose to ignore their political speech and participate in an objective manner. I usually wind up being the only opposing viewpoint.
Today, I read a post titled Is Christmas About Reproductive Rights? I responded there briefly, but didn't have time to fully put together all the thoughts that I had about the subject. I was very frustrated by the answers of most of the commenters who only seemed able to pat each other on the back and not seriously consider what was being said. It was disturbing to me, not because of what the blogger had written, but because no one had an issue with the way she portrayed the opposition. It is one thing when someone says something extremely offensive, and quite another when everyone else high-fives them for it.
Anyway, it got me thinking.
Abortion does not add value to the life of children; it steals any intrinsic value life has and makes it arbitrary. Abortion advocates state that pro-life people don't care about the children they are trying to save. They say that those children are denied education, social services, and the esteem afforded to children of traditional families. It simply isn't true.
Abortion devalues children. In a society where a baby is a problem to be eliminated, an obstacle to overcome, and a nuisance that happened too early in the life of a woman, abortion becomes the "easy fix." It is not pro-life people that are the cause of neglect, child abuse, and the general lack of love for children. Children are abused and neglected by people who are absorbed with themselves and their problems. The inability to empathize, the sense that children are "lesser" beings and somehow not worthy of consideration, in comparison to the "needs" of the parent, and the lack of value placed on life, in general, are the sources of these problems.
People always want to debate about when life really begins. Is it at fertilization? implantation? after the first trimester? I find this interesting in an age that has developed such a precise record of life's beginnings. Every obstetrician's office is full of color photos of pregnancy at every stage. Everyone knows that the whole process begins when the sperm and egg unite; yet, we close our eyes to this very plain fact and complicate the process with ponderings, what-ifs and philosophical meanderings.
It is this very adamant denial that conception possesses any meaning, in and of itself, that lies at the heart of most abortion advocates. They will state over and over, "it's just a mass of cells, not a person." It's a humorous statement when viewed through the scientific fact that that is all any human is: billions of cooperating, fascinating cells. All our thoughts, memories, sensations, and urges rise from this mass of cells that we reside in. What is the threshold at which a being has enough cells to be considered human? Where is the tipping point at which we can say, "Today, you have value. Yesterday, there wasn't quite enough of you to be of worth."
It is very simple to ignore the bald facts that are readily available to anyone who chooses to search them out. If we begin to see things as they really are, then what regret and horror would await our society?
Today, I read a post titled Is Christmas About Reproductive Rights? I responded there briefly, but didn't have time to fully put together all the thoughts that I had about the subject. I was very frustrated by the answers of most of the commenters who only seemed able to pat each other on the back and not seriously consider what was being said. It was disturbing to me, not because of what the blogger had written, but because no one had an issue with the way she portrayed the opposition. It is one thing when someone says something extremely offensive, and quite another when everyone else high-fives them for it.
Anyway, it got me thinking.
Abortion does not add value to the life of children; it steals any intrinsic value life has and makes it arbitrary. Abortion advocates state that pro-life people don't care about the children they are trying to save. They say that those children are denied education, social services, and the esteem afforded to children of traditional families. It simply isn't true.
Abortion devalues children. In a society where a baby is a problem to be eliminated, an obstacle to overcome, and a nuisance that happened too early in the life of a woman, abortion becomes the "easy fix." It is not pro-life people that are the cause of neglect, child abuse, and the general lack of love for children. Children are abused and neglected by people who are absorbed with themselves and their problems. The inability to empathize, the sense that children are "lesser" beings and somehow not worthy of consideration, in comparison to the "needs" of the parent, and the lack of value placed on life, in general, are the sources of these problems.
People always want to debate about when life really begins. Is it at fertilization? implantation? after the first trimester? I find this interesting in an age that has developed such a precise record of life's beginnings. Every obstetrician's office is full of color photos of pregnancy at every stage. Everyone knows that the whole process begins when the sperm and egg unite; yet, we close our eyes to this very plain fact and complicate the process with ponderings, what-ifs and philosophical meanderings.
It is this very adamant denial that conception possesses any meaning, in and of itself, that lies at the heart of most abortion advocates. They will state over and over, "it's just a mass of cells, not a person." It's a humorous statement when viewed through the scientific fact that that is all any human is: billions of cooperating, fascinating cells. All our thoughts, memories, sensations, and urges rise from this mass of cells that we reside in. What is the threshold at which a being has enough cells to be considered human? Where is the tipping point at which we can say, "Today, you have value. Yesterday, there wasn't quite enough of you to be of worth."
It is very simple to ignore the bald facts that are readily available to anyone who chooses to search them out. If we begin to see things as they really are, then what regret and horror would await our society?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)