Degrees of Development

[Buc McMaster]

Saw a news story late last week that said America is turning pro-life. Polling showed that 51% of Americans consider themselves to be pro-life, a slim majority for sure, but the first time the numbers have gone that way in a couple decades. This is a terribly devisive issue. Some say it's about women's rights to choose and hold power over their own bodies. Some say it's about the rights of the unborn who can't speak for themselves. I say that it's about our definition of 'human' and murder.

 

Degrees of development do not separate a species from itself. It cannot be denied that life begins at conception. Zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, child, teenager, adolescent, etc. are all names given to describe stages of development of the human species. Is any one of these stages not human? The earliest stages may not physically appear to be human, granted, but they are human nonetheless. A zygote or embryo may not yet be able to communicate effectively or go for a Sunday stroll in the park, but it is absolutely alive, human and, given the opportunity, it will grow to be able to do these things and more. Is there any possibility that a zygote in the womb of a female human will grow to be an alligator? A chicken? Absolutely not. It is from conception and will always be human. Degrees of development do not separate a species from itself. This cannot be denied. It is undisputable fact. Therefore, abortion is in fact the murder of a human in it's early development.

 

Now you can argue with emotion from many different points of view and rationalize abortion to be something other than murder, but you cannot make any such argument with logic and fact. I submit that we have modified our definition of murder and what it means to be human to accommodate abortion, just as we have done to provide for capital punishment. Both are the taking of a human life......in neither case can this be denied. One is killing in the name of punishment for crimes committed against others, the other is killing in the name of conveniece. Both are lawfully sanctioned in America. Both are exceptions made to laws otherwise prohibiting murder. One is exercised against an adult that made a choice contrary to law. One is exercised upon an innocent without a voice, but it cannot be argued with fact that this innocent is something other than human.

 

Indeed, I have opened a can of worms here that, if the forum holds true to form, will not go quietly. It is my intent to give us all pause for thought and truly consider the fact that degrees of development do not separate a species from itself. If you can tear that truth to shreds then my position crumbles. If you cannot, then the pro-choice position falls apart at it's heart. What say ye?

[ChanMan]

As long as "pro-life" means "absolutely no abortions under any circumstances", I'll remain pro-choice.

 

 

My first son attached low in my wife's uterus, riding on an already weak cervix. YOU spend 8 months with your wife flat on her back, with death for both of them only minutes away if the baby ever broke loose.

 

Tell me I HAVE to sit there and watch her die because there are no abortions under any circumstances, you'd best be ready to acompany her. ****** idiots.

 

 

You want to moderate that, and make it where abortions are only legal when it is medically necessary to preserve the health of the mother, I'm with you. Otherwise... well, I think I was pretty clear on my standpoint.