| robustpuppy |
07-12-2005 03:07 PM |
Das anti-Kapitalists!
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
FTR, my position is on this issue is evolving. towards the right(eous), but to date I am not anti-any abortion because I am not coming at the concept of a distinctly separately life coming into being and a "soul" taking at conception. I would say the line is at some point near the end of the first trimester or if the pregnancy objectively materially jeopardizes the health of the woman at any time following that. If its an either/or and the baby is not viable then I think it is in society's interest to let the mother choose (intentionally ignoring the issue of whether or not there should be any paternal rights at that point).
|
I don't know how people can even stand to have this argument. More so than any other political debate (and it's a crying shame that this issue is so central to American politics), you can never change anyone's mind on it, each side finds the other's viewpoint offensive because the rights on the other side are considered so fundamental, and any compromise point (such as "on demand" versus "when health is at risk")* is utterly arbitrary. It's just exhausting even to witness this debate, let alone to contemplate how it has shaped (or grossly distorted) American political life.
(*Although I will throw in here that this line seems impossible to draw if you concede -- and not everyone does -- that the health risks to women who seek to terminate pregnancies when on demand abortion is not available are relevant.)**
** (Just doing this made me tired.) |
