"Pro-lifers" are not

[pecksniff]

I am not here quibbling over the definition of "life." Rather, I am convinced that practically nobody in America is sincerely "pro-life" in the sense that term is used in political discourse. Nobody who contests the abortion issue really gives a rat's ass for the life of any fetus. It only remains alive as a culture-war issue to fight -- a position to hold as long as possible before falling back. The abortion issue would have faded away long ago if it were not associated with the whole package of social/religious conservatism. Before the 1970s, American Protestants largely ignored abortion, which they dismissed as a Catholic issue -- but then conservative Catholics and Protestants formed an unprecedented alliance, which has more or less held together ever since. That is remarkable, considering the history of Protestant anti-Catholicism in America (even now, there are Protestants of the Jack Chick stamp who are convinced all Catholics go to Hell).

 

[pecksniff]

Specifically, what the "pro-lifers" want and will not admit is to control women's sexual behavior.

 

[nowisthetime]

I agree, I think if they were truly pro-life all the way, such as supporting government programs which benefit children, being anti-death penalty, anti-war, then they have a legit ground to stand on, but they are really not pro-life. They are malicious, all about power and control. Sadly, so many of their working class white base continue to put these people in power, when it's really also biting them in their asses, but they don't care, so as long as "those folks who are different" get punished, it is all right. That's what's killing this country.

 

[icanhelp1]

I am not here quibbling over the definition of "life." Rather, I am convinced that practically nobody in America is sincerely "pro-life" in the sense that term is used in political discourse. Nobody who contests the abortion issue really gives a rat's ass for the life of any fetus. It only remains alive as a culture-war issue to fight -- a position to hold as long as possible before falling back. The abortion issue would have faded away long ago if it were not associated with the whole package of social/religious conservatism. Before the 1970s, American Protestants largely ignored abortion, which they dismissed as a Catholic issue -- but then conservative Catholics and Protestants formed an unprecedented alliance, which has more or less held together ever since. That is remarkable, considering the history of Protestant anti-Catholicism in America (even now, there are Protestants of the Jack Chick stamp who are convinced all Catholics go to Hell).

Even our forefathers believed in the sanctity of life within the womb.

 

[ll74]

Even our forefathers believed in the sanctity of life within the womb.

The forefathers didn't have the scientific understanding of what life is.

Hence viability

 

[icanhelp1]

The forefathers didn't have the scientific understanding of what life is.

Hence viability

You should put the word viability in your pocket and exercise the word person.

 

[ll74]

You should put the word viability in your pocket and exercise the word person.

A person is what happens at birth.

Viability is what happens when birth can result in viable life before actual labor might occur.

You should put the word moron on the label on your pocket

 

[LittleDixie]

You're completely discounting the actual argument pro life people are making and substituting a weak argument that you can easily beat.

...there's a name for this tactic.

 

[phrodeau]

Even our forefathers believed in the sanctity of life within the womb.

Our forefathers thought that mercury was good medicine.

 

[pecksniff]

You're completely discounting the actual argument pro life people are making and substituting a weak argument that you can easily beat.

...there's a name for this tactic.

I'm not attacking the argument, I'm denying their stated motives for making it. The merits of any argument on either side of this issue would be a completely different question, and not at issue here.

 

[pecksniff]

Even our forefathers believed in the sanctity of life within the womb.

Doubtful. There were no abortion laws in America before 1800.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Our forefathers thought that mercury was good medicine.

It was sold as a cure for gonorrhea in the 19th century

 

[pecksniff]

Awesome SNL skit.

 

[pecksniff]

It was sold as a cure for gonorrhea in the 19th century

You mean syphilis, and mercury is an effective treatment for syphilis -- that has been known since the time of Paracelsus. But there might well be very dangerous side effects.

Shih Huangdi, the First Emperor of China, died insane because his Taoist physicians prescribed him mercury-based longevity drugs. And he was not the last emperor to die of that treatment. (The Taoists had an alchemical theory in which mercury is the highest metal, so of course it should confer longevity. And Shi Huangdi was so desperate to live forever that he was willing to believe anything.)

 

[Sean Renaud]

Where did the FF mention the unborn?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

You mean syphilis, and mercury is an effective treatment for syphilis -- that has been known since the time of Paracelsus. But there might well be very dangerous side effects.

Shih Huangdi, the First Emperor of China, died insane because his Taoist physicians prescribed him mercury-based longevity drugs. And he was not the last emperor to die of that treatment. (The Taoists had an alchemical theory in which mercury is the highest metal, so of course it should confer longevity.)

I’ve seen advertisements for 19th century patent medicines where it was claimed to cure gonorrhea.

 

[pecksniff]

I’ve seen advertisements for 19th century patent medicines where it was claimed to cure gonorrhea.

Plausible. There were contemporary advertisements for "snake oil" as a cure for anything. Probably most such elixirs sold on their alcohol content and contained no snake-derived ingredients at all.

 

[icanhelp1]

Where did the FF mention the unborn?

A quote from an original Supreme court justice: 1789


James Wilson, founding father, signatory of the Declaration of Independence and an original Supreme Court justice wrote;

“With consistency, beautiful and undeviating, human life, from its commencement to its close, is protected by the common law. In the contemplation of law, life begins when the infant is first able to stir in the womb. By the law, life is protected not only from immediate destruction, but from every degree of actual violence, and, in some cases, from every degree of danger”

 

[Sean Renaud]

Interesting. Though that would pretty much put him in the camp of its not a baby till it starts kicking.

 

[icanhelp1]

Interesting. Though that would pretty much put him in the camp of its not a baby till it starts kicking.

Do you see anything in his statement that would lead anyone to believe abortion is a right.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Until it starts kicking he doesn't seem to have an opinion. And he's just one guy anyway.

 

[pecksniff]

The original Hippocratic Oath does say, "I will never give any woman a pessary to induce abortion."

Of course, we're talking about a time and place when medical theory was based on the Four Humors, two of which do not even exist.

 

[Rotadom]

 

[YDB95]

Even our forefathers believed in the sanctity of life within the womb.

Actually, abortion wasn't outlawed until the 1820s at the earliest. Before that, even church leaders considered it acceptable for the first trimester.

 

[LittleDixie]

I'm not attacking the argument, I'm denying their stated motives for making it. The merits of any argument on either side of this issue would be a completely different question, and not at issue here.

I know you are not attacking their argument. That's what I'm saying. You are assigning their motives and in so doing, creating an entirely fabricated argument.

Pro-life people are arguing that a fertilized egg is a distinct life form. It is a human being, and it deserves human rights. To them, an abortion is a murder of a human being.

The loggerhead that pro-life and pro-choice people come to is that they don't agree when life actually begins. Pro-choice people do not agree that life begins at conception, and pro-life people do.

If you want to be honest about the debate, you should start there, and not try to fabricate motive as a shortcut to avoid the actual issue.