"If you don't want to answer the questions, don't bother commenting."
When someone who has failed to acknowledge the existence of the multitude of questions they've ignored, makes this statement, I can't help but laugh.
Pot, meet kettle.
Physician, heal thyself.
Etc.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Craig, on his blog, talking about ectopic pregnancies...
" It seems like using these tragic circumstances as justification for abortion for convenience is just compounding the tragedy. "
It's not "using" these tragic cases as "justification" for abortion. It's noting that reasonable people can agree that there are at least SOME cases where abortion is a legitimate medical procedure. Craig agrees with it, as do we, as do most reasonable people, not to mention medical experts.
The point is not to "use" these cases to "justify" anything. It's noting that, given this example, we can see that we're talking about specific medical conditions and specific medical advice given to specific real women/families where THOSE people (the medical experts, the women, the families) are the ones in the best place to make these sorts of calls.
AND to point out that those who stupidly reduce the question down to bumper sticker sized "abortion is murder..." are just speaking from a place of ignorance and arrogance.
Yes, reasonable people can agree that IN THAT CASE, there is legitimate reasons to use the medical procedure of abortion. GIVEN that there are, what reasonable people can agree, legitimate reasons for abortion, FROM THERE, then, the question becomes WHO is in the best place to decide what is and isn't a legitimate reason for abortion? The people involved? Medical experts? Or some guy on the internet who has never been pregnant?
The reasonable answer is obvious.
Dan,
"It's not "using" these tragic cases as "justification" for abortion."
Sure it is. You yourself are arguing that it's not a "health" issue at all, it's a "self determination" issue. Just look at the pro abortion laws that are being passed, they are expanding abortions up to birth in some cases. The fact is that when the pro abortion crowd wants to defend all abortions, they use a tiny minority of abortions to do so.
If you want to ignore what folx on your side are doing and saying, that's your prerogative. Just don't pretend that this comment represents a widely held view.
If a law was put forth that allowed abortions only in the cases of rape, incest, ectopic pregnancy, or in cases where the physical health or life of the mother was at significant and immediate risk, would you support that law?
Pretty cowardly of you to respond to my post in your safe space.
Can you differentiate between the removal of an nonviable fetus that will likely cause direct physical harm to the mother, and a viable pre born child that poses no threat to the mother's well being?
Can you not understand that those situations are different, and unrelated in a moral sense?
Pretty cowardly of you to respond to my post in your safe space.
No, smart. I JUST ANSWERED some of your questions and you've opted not to post the correct answers (perhaps because it points out your cowardice that you won't ask the experts and the people involved and are opting to go with ignorance and arrogance instead), and those answers did not get posted.
I don't care to play your games so if I want to address some of your comments, the reasonable place to do it is my own blog, where you won't play games.
Post a Comment