39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Ugh.
Why is this such a victory for "women's health?" What's healthy about getting an abortion? I would be tempted to say that it's got about the same health benefits as a Fench breast implant. Last time I checked, it wasn't generally healthy to jab instruments, etc... into your body. Given the choice, you wouldn't do it, right? But you know what? At least most surgeries are something you have done to yourself, not another person.
Something like 50 million abortions since 1973 - and that's in the U.S. alone. I hate math, but I'm pretty sure that statistically guarantees that I know someone who's had an abortion. Of course, they don't talk about it, so I have no idea who they are. I bet they would be surprised, maybe hurt, if they saw this blog. If it's you, I'm sorry.
50 million doesn't really work as a meaningful statistic - it's just too big. That knowledge alone should put some perspective on it. Everything's got a number attached to it, so it doesn't do any good to implore people to avoid becoming a statistic. But still, can anyone honestly say that they want to be a part of that number?
Please, don't get an abortion. Don't let loved ones get abortions. There's an innocent life in there, just waiting to be born - waiting to learn how to talk and ask those sweet little questions like "why is the sky blue", waiting to make friends on their first day of school, waiting to see a beautiful sunset or listen to Beethoven's 9th symphony for the first time. Everything we are as people, everything we have or want and have learned or forgotten, everything that brings us sadness or joy, every last speck of what it is to be a living, breathing and feeling human being is in that little child. Don't take it away.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Your Baby is a Person
That's a baby in there. A real, live human person. I guess (I hope really) that's where the confusion starts. Because if there's no argument on that point, how can you justify an abortion?
Well, the truth is that some people will justify it anyway. But for now, I'm willing to assume most people really, truly believe that "fetus" does not equal "baby."
Is a fetus the same thing as a baby or not? I mean, we've got to have some definitions here. What is a fetus? What is a baby? What's a person? It can be confusing. But it doesn't have to be.
Here's the problem. If you believe that abortion is OK because it's not really a person in there, then tell me - when does a person begin? You're a person. I'm a person. When did we start being people? When did we start having the same rights as everyone else?
Was it when the cord was cut?
Was it when your head entered the birth canal?
Was it the instant that the C-section incision was complete?
If it was none of these instants, then when? Where do you draw the line? We're not talking about a machine here. We're talking about an organism that is changing and growing at every instant. You can't say "exactly between steps j and k, the fetus is now a person with all the rights and protections of a U.S. citizen." Just saying it out loud sounds ridiculous, which is, of course, why certain people are careful to dance around it and never say it out loud at all.
If you have comments on this one, I beg you to share them. I honestly want to hear what people think. When does a person become a person? I mean, a real human person who's life cannot be ended with any more justice than yours or mine. Where does that start?
Think about it. Your baby is a person. You can try to draw a line, but if you really think hard and are honest with yourself, you will recognize the warning signs. Because we all know what it's like trying to justify something that's wrong. We've all done that and we know what it feels like. But here, it's not just about an extra piece of cake or all that time on Facebook at work or even something you "borrowed" from that guy down the street two years ago. If one side of the argument is right, then this is something deadly. People are dying.
Your baby is a person. And if your baby could hear you and understand the question "do you want to live?"... your baby would say yes.
Well, the truth is that some people will justify it anyway. But for now, I'm willing to assume most people really, truly believe that "fetus" does not equal "baby."
Is a fetus the same thing as a baby or not? I mean, we've got to have some definitions here. What is a fetus? What is a baby? What's a person? It can be confusing. But it doesn't have to be.
Here's the problem. If you believe that abortion is OK because it's not really a person in there, then tell me - when does a person begin? You're a person. I'm a person. When did we start being people? When did we start having the same rights as everyone else?
Was it when the cord was cut?
Was it when your head entered the birth canal?
Was it the instant that the C-section incision was complete?
If it was none of these instants, then when? Where do you draw the line? We're not talking about a machine here. We're talking about an organism that is changing and growing at every instant. You can't say "exactly between steps j and k, the fetus is now a person with all the rights and protections of a U.S. citizen." Just saying it out loud sounds ridiculous, which is, of course, why certain people are careful to dance around it and never say it out loud at all.
If you have comments on this one, I beg you to share them. I honestly want to hear what people think. When does a person become a person? I mean, a real human person who's life cannot be ended with any more justice than yours or mine. Where does that start?
Think about it. Your baby is a person. You can try to draw a line, but if you really think hard and are honest with yourself, you will recognize the warning signs. Because we all know what it's like trying to justify something that's wrong. We've all done that and we know what it feels like. But here, it's not just about an extra piece of cake or all that time on Facebook at work or even something you "borrowed" from that guy down the street two years ago. If one side of the argument is right, then this is something deadly. People are dying.
Your baby is a person. And if your baby could hear you and understand the question "do you want to live?"... your baby would say yes.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Where to Start...
We might as well deconstruct this thing. What's one of the fundamental sticking points? Rights? Life? Money? (gasp!).
Well... I like to try and start where people can agree.
Unless they're just trying to be difficult, most people will agree that you can't kill another human for no good reason. It's only fair to state that the threshold for "good" and the definition of "reason" can change according to time and place. But if you look at the human experience as a whole, starting, whenever, let's say ten thousand years ago, life has been taken pretty seriously. Without getting into some of our more horrible historical idiocies (many of which continue in our day) murder is, and always has been judged a crime. You don't just kill someone because you feel like it. So, the premise is that murder is seen as wrong by every culture that I'm aware of. That's where I'd like to start. Personally, I'm not a fan of "morality by consensus," but I think it's the best we can do at this point in time.
Now, we don't get the same pan-human morality when it comes to killing animals, or plants. There is, undoubtably disagreement on that. And that's the point. Taken as an expiriment in statistics or whatever you want to call it, the inborn ban on killing other humans seems to be in a whole different realm of moral certitude than making hamburgers.
So it gets interesting when you observe that, throughout history, entire nations have adopted policies that seems to countermand that overarching directive against killing humans. Even more so, when it's not just a political power structure mainainting those policies, but that, in time, they come to be embraced by huge swathes of the citizens, regardless of what the government were to teach or preach after that point. You can basically fill in the blank for what policies I'm talking about here - there are endless examples. And every time something like this happens, we swear, as a country, or sometimes even as a world, that such and such a thing will never happen again.
With respect to the current stance on abortion, the conclusion that I've come to - and I think this is correct - is that we've been educated to draw the line of where a human life begins (and ends), wherever it happens to be convenient for the argument at hand. So, for example, if a pregnant woman and her unborn child are killed in a hit-and-run accident, the perpetrator is charged with two counts of manslaughter, or negligent homicide, or whatever the case may be. But, if that woman had been on her way to an abortion clinic at that very moment, she left home not only free from legal guilt of murder, but maybe even celebrated as a hero and congratulated for her bravery in the face of so many people who would trample her rights if they had half a chance.
So let's start the argument there. Obviously, I maintain that to request, procure or assist in an abortion is a terrible crime, because you are killing a person. Not only that, but a person who is totally free from guilt, who has never committed a crime, and who is utterly defenseless - a posture that, in most cases, elicits only the best of human sympathy. So where is the disconnect? What's the justification that makes it acceptable? Let's talk about that next time.
And, as I hope to always remind you, your baby would want to live.
Well... I like to try and start where people can agree.
Unless they're just trying to be difficult, most people will agree that you can't kill another human for no good reason. It's only fair to state that the threshold for "good" and the definition of "reason" can change according to time and place. But if you look at the human experience as a whole, starting, whenever, let's say ten thousand years ago, life has been taken pretty seriously. Without getting into some of our more horrible historical idiocies (many of which continue in our day) murder is, and always has been judged a crime. You don't just kill someone because you feel like it. So, the premise is that murder is seen as wrong by every culture that I'm aware of. That's where I'd like to start. Personally, I'm not a fan of "morality by consensus," but I think it's the best we can do at this point in time.
Now, we don't get the same pan-human morality when it comes to killing animals, or plants. There is, undoubtably disagreement on that. And that's the point. Taken as an expiriment in statistics or whatever you want to call it, the inborn ban on killing other humans seems to be in a whole different realm of moral certitude than making hamburgers.
So it gets interesting when you observe that, throughout history, entire nations have adopted policies that seems to countermand that overarching directive against killing humans. Even more so, when it's not just a political power structure mainainting those policies, but that, in time, they come to be embraced by huge swathes of the citizens, regardless of what the government were to teach or preach after that point. You can basically fill in the blank for what policies I'm talking about here - there are endless examples. And every time something like this happens, we swear, as a country, or sometimes even as a world, that such and such a thing will never happen again.
With respect to the current stance on abortion, the conclusion that I've come to - and I think this is correct - is that we've been educated to draw the line of where a human life begins (and ends), wherever it happens to be convenient for the argument at hand. So, for example, if a pregnant woman and her unborn child are killed in a hit-and-run accident, the perpetrator is charged with two counts of manslaughter, or negligent homicide, or whatever the case may be. But, if that woman had been on her way to an abortion clinic at that very moment, she left home not only free from legal guilt of murder, but maybe even celebrated as a hero and congratulated for her bravery in the face of so many people who would trample her rights if they had half a chance.
So let's start the argument there. Obviously, I maintain that to request, procure or assist in an abortion is a terrible crime, because you are killing a person. Not only that, but a person who is totally free from guilt, who has never committed a crime, and who is utterly defenseless - a posture that, in most cases, elicits only the best of human sympathy. So where is the disconnect? What's the justification that makes it acceptable? Let's talk about that next time.
And, as I hope to always remind you, your baby would want to live.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)