Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I have stated my position on that one here several times, but saving a mother's life does not fall into "the burden of caring for the child is beyond the mother's economic, emotional..... resources".
If being beyond economic or emotional resources is an acceptable standard then killing a 4 year old would be as justified and morally acceptable as killing a 4 month old unborn child.
|
That's valid if life begins at conception. I don't accept that premise. Furthermore, there is a difference between a medical treatment to prevent an event from occurring and the act of killing a four year-old.
Affirmative homicide aside, we make choices between one life and another all the time in the allocation of scarce resources. Ask anyone on an organ donor list.
We also make economic allocation resource decisions that may affect human life on a daily basis. I show up at the hospital with angina and I'm rushed into the operating room for an angioplasty at once. The waitress at a place I eat a lot has heart trouble but she doesn't have health insurance. She waited six months to have her angioplasty done at County.
I generally don't favor abortion. But I also believe that each decision to abort or not is so particular to the mother and the fetus that the procedure is not susceptible to regulation by the state or federal government. So you could say that, while I'm generally anti-abortion, I'm also pro-choice.
By declaring itself pro-life, the anti-abortion movement hurts itself by coming off as hypocritical and by politicizing what is a social, not a governmental problem.
