Thursday, February 05, 2004
Abortion
John Strain has started a very interesting and controversial topic
I have made comments to his topic and repost them here.
Feel free to respond with your views and comments.
Constructive arguments will be appreciated. Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
My Comments
First of all congratulations John on starting a post on such a controversial and emotional topic.
The most intriguing thing to me after reading through the 18 comments above is the restrained and intelligent nature of the debate / comments.
In such a hotly contested topic, with such good points on both sides of the argument this is excellent. Congratulations to all posters on not blazing away or making personal attacks on other posters..
My comments are addressed to the actual nature of the debate. I personally don't believe that the actual debate is Pro Choice vs. Pro Life. Let me explain. Debate is usually one topic and a for or against stand. Eg Pro Choice. Who's for Pro Choice, and why, and who's against and why. Then second round is a chance to deconstruct the initial arguments posed by the other side, then to a summary.
Likewise we could have Pro Life as the topic.
I believe it is unfair to the proponents of these two topics to set them against each other because they are not debating the same thing. Pro Choicers all make great arguments, but these arguments do not address the Pro Life concerns about the personal and legal nature of an unborn child. Likewise the Pro Choice argument that ALL life has right to live (regardless of origin, rape, incest etc) does not address the Pro Choice arguments relating to the mental wellbeing of the mother.
I am not trying to muddy the waters. How about a solution.
Maybe you could create a post on each of these topics, and call for comments on a for and against basis. This cold provide some really constructive and thoughtful debate.
I would be happy to mirror this on my blog also.
Finally I am not trying to say that there is not a connection between the two schools of though and the subject of abortion. Obviously they are connected and an extremely complex social problem that we have to deal with. Sure Roe Vs Wade has provided a "constitutional" position in relation to the mother that is doubtful will be overturned. However the theoretical legal standpoint that a terminated child could sue his mother for wrongful death (brought to court by a proxy - eg grandparent, father etc) could possibly challenge this position.
My personal thoughts and position. Morally I believe in the sanctity of all life. I also believe there are justified times to kill (eg self defence). Practically I do struggle with how to apply those two opposing points of view to the subject of abortion. I understand we live in an imperfect world, and so events like the case of P Brett who was apparently raped when passed out drunk do occur. I believe that ultimately each individual has to stand by their own choices and actions and the consequences of them.
John Strain has started a very interesting and controversial topic
I have made comments to his topic and repost them here.
Feel free to respond with your views and comments.
Constructive arguments will be appreciated. Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
My Comments
First of all congratulations John on starting a post on such a controversial and emotional topic.
The most intriguing thing to me after reading through the 18 comments above is the restrained and intelligent nature of the debate / comments.
In such a hotly contested topic, with such good points on both sides of the argument this is excellent. Congratulations to all posters on not blazing away or making personal attacks on other posters..
My comments are addressed to the actual nature of the debate. I personally don't believe that the actual debate is Pro Choice vs. Pro Life. Let me explain. Debate is usually one topic and a for or against stand. Eg Pro Choice. Who's for Pro Choice, and why, and who's against and why. Then second round is a chance to deconstruct the initial arguments posed by the other side, then to a summary.
Likewise we could have Pro Life as the topic.
I believe it is unfair to the proponents of these two topics to set them against each other because they are not debating the same thing. Pro Choicers all make great arguments, but these arguments do not address the Pro Life concerns about the personal and legal nature of an unborn child. Likewise the Pro Choice argument that ALL life has right to live (regardless of origin, rape, incest etc) does not address the Pro Choice arguments relating to the mental wellbeing of the mother.
I am not trying to muddy the waters. How about a solution.
Maybe you could create a post on each of these topics, and call for comments on a for and against basis. This cold provide some really constructive and thoughtful debate.
I would be happy to mirror this on my blog also.
Finally I am not trying to say that there is not a connection between the two schools of though and the subject of abortion. Obviously they are connected and an extremely complex social problem that we have to deal with. Sure Roe Vs Wade has provided a "constitutional" position in relation to the mother that is doubtful will be overturned. However the theoretical legal standpoint that a terminated child could sue his mother for wrongful death (brought to court by a proxy - eg grandparent, father etc) could possibly challenge this position.
My personal thoughts and position. Morally I believe in the sanctity of all life. I also believe there are justified times to kill (eg self defence). Practically I do struggle with how to apply those two opposing points of view to the subject of abortion. I understand we live in an imperfect world, and so events like the case of P Brett who was apparently raped when passed out drunk do occur. I believe that ultimately each individual has to stand by their own choices and actions and the consequences of them.
