Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
a. Abortion is murder. It is the destruction of a human being, the same as murdering you or I.
b. The doctor is the murderer. (They exempt the woman paying for the murder, but I'll get to that later.)
c. There are thousands, perhaps millions of murders of unborn "babies" every year by these murderers.
Now, on occasion, we have anti-abortion zealots who decide to kill "abortionists." When this happens, the anti-abortion lobby comes forward and condemns the killer of the "abortionist" as being morally unjustified.
It makes no sense. Not if one believes "abortionists" are "murdering babies." Imagine for a second a madman who has murdered hundreds of people. Nothing is done about it. The authorities state they have no intention or cannot stop him The killer clearly states that he intends to murder hundreds...thousands...more innocent people. You have the capability to kill this murderer and save hundreds or thousands of lives. Do you say, "I will wait to change the hearts and minds of the people and convince the state that this killer should be stopped" or do you decide to kill the killer to save all those people? Using the logic of the leadership of the anti-abortion lobby, you should try to change the hearts and minds of the people. Meanwhile, thousands die.
One of two things are happening here:
1. These people don't really believe abortion is murder. If they did, they would, of course, want someone to prevent thousands or millions of babies to be saved rather than waiting for the law to change.
2. They're too cowardly to come out and defend what should be a justifiable homicide because they fear public backlash and know it to be a politically incorrect stance to take.
Notice they can't use the "I'm pr-life therefore I'm against killing" argument. THe vast majority of them support the death penalty and have supported wars at various points. They have probably supported killing foreign leaders outside of the law who have murdered their own citizens. Most will even defend the killing of innocents in the midst of war, that "collateral damage," so long as it protects their lives. (How altruistic) No, no, that argument just won't fly. They would never argue that stopping a serial killer before he kills more is immoral or "anti-life."
I think for most anti-abortionists, they fall into category 1. They don't really believe that fetus is the same as you or I. They would act differently if they did. I think there is a sizable minority in category 2, who probably think it is the moral thing to do and have logically extended what they believe about abortion. They just know that most Americans will be appalled because too many of them realize abortion is not murder. This is the same reason nearly all of them refuse to entertain the idea of arresting the woman who arranges and pays for someone to "murder" her "baby." They know most Americans would be appalled at that, so they claim her to also be a victim, easily bamboozled by the "abortionist." (Oh, those foolish females)
I didn't expect any anti-abortionists to actually attempt to explain any of this. They never do. I can't even get any of them to rationally explain why the woman shouldn't be prosecuted. As I said, most of them don't really believe abortion is murder. Not deep down. They would act entirely different if they truly did believe that.
It makes no sense. Not if one believes "abortionists" are "murdering babies." Imagine for a second a madman who has murdered hundreds of people. Nothing is done about it. The authorities state they have no intention or cannot stop him The killer clearly states that he intends to murder hundreds...thousands...more innocent people. You have the capability to kill this murderer and save hundreds or thousands of lives. Do you say, "I will wait to change the hearts and minds of the people and convince the state that this killer should be stopped" or do you decide to kill the killer to save all those people? Using the logic of the leadership of the anti-abortion lobby, you should try to change the hearts and minds of the people. Meanwhile, thousands die.
Pro-choice myself. It is mainly future liberals being aborted and the more of that the better.
Now to answer your questions.
First, the Roman Catholic Church is arguably the most influential pro-life organization worldwide. They also oppose the death penalty and euthanasia. They have a consistent pro-life stance and are quite liberal on economic issues.
Secondly, you kill one doctor another will replace him.
Thirdly, and most importantly, terrorism does not work in democratic societies. Ultimately you must win the hearts and minds of the American voters if you wish to get your position enacted into law. Killing people does not help accomplish this goal. Killing people tends to turn off most people on your positions.
Had it not been for Roe v. Wade Al Gore would have been elected President. Keep chopping up them fetuses.
Pro-choice myself. It is mainly future liberals being aborted and the more of that the better.
Now to answer your questions.
First, the Roman Catholic Church is arguably the most influential pro-life organization worldwide. They also oppose the death penalty and euthanasia. They have a consistent pro-life stance and are quite liberal on economic issues.
Secondly, you kill one doctor another will replace him.
Thirdly, and most importantly terrorism does not work in democratic societies. Ultimately you must win the hearts and minds of the American voters if you wish to get your position enacted into law. Killing people does not help accomplish this goal. Killing people tends to turn off most people on your positions.
Had it not been for Roe v. Wade Al Gore would have been elected President. Keep chopping up them fetuses.
1. Most anti-abortion Catholics do not share the positions of the Church on the death penalty, war or social justice. I have always recognized the radical priests who support social justice and oppose all war, the death penalty, abortion and so on. Most anti-abortion Catholics simply do not share those positions. They have moved to the Republican Party, which derides the entire concept of social justice, supports the death penalty and supported every war of recent memory. Of course, what about all the non-Catholic anti-abortionists whose leadership does not commit to those other principles?
2. Actually, we have precious few docs willing to perform abortions. It's not as if there is some large supply waiting to "replace" the others. Besides, what kind of logic is that - "Why bother stopping the serial killer because another serial killer will probably come along." That's a feeble argument.
3. It's now been 40 years since Roe v Wade. Who on Earth are you kidding? You're willing to allow millions more "babies" to die in the hope that someday, correction, some decade in the future, there might be a slim chance that the law will be changed? Am I not supposed to giggle at that idea? Would anyone take this argument seriously if we substituted a "born person" (In other words, an actual person) instead and you argued that in some backwards corner of the Earth where a leader is executing millions of his people that rather than taking out this despot who is supported by many of the people, we must instead try to change their hearts and minds, lest we turn off those torn in the middle? Meanwhile, millions die. C'mon, can no one do better than this?
1. Most anti-abortion Catholics do not share the positions of the Church on the death penalty, war or social justice. I have always recognized the radical priests who support social justice and oppose all war, the death penalty, abortion and so on. Most anti-abortion Catholics simply do not share those positions. They have moved to the Republican Party, which derides the entire concept of social justice, supports the death penalty and supported every war of recent memory. Of course, what about all the non-Catholic anti-abortionists whose leadership does not commit to those other principles?
Life is full of appearent contridictions on the surface. Unfortunately for the OP life isn't that simple. Life itself is contradiction but it happens anyway.
As an anti-aboortion (used as birth control) Catholic I would say the OP is correct on several accounts.
The OP is completely off based on other points as well.
America's least attractive attribute is that a significant percentage of the people are still obsessed with Jesus, some fictional person who died thousands of years ago and is not relevant to 21st world whatsoever.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
