Abortion. It's a fun topic and no one seems to agree on it. What is interesting is that pro-choice advocates sometimes see abortion as bad. For example, a scholar recently had this to say about the millions of female babies that are being aborted (or killed after being born) in India, China and Eurasia. Remember, only female fetuses are the ones being aborted:
"'Ms. Hvistendahl is particularly worried that the "right wing" or the "Christian right"—as she labels those whose politics differ from her own—will use sex-selective abortion as part of a wider war on abortion itself. She believes that something must be done about the purposeful aborting of female babies or it could lead to feminists "worst nightmare" - a ban on all abortions.'"
Following this bit of logic through to it's conclusion... Abortion should be acceptable but abortion of females, specifically, is bad. Ultimately, it seems this well thought position leads to the conclusion: "Abortion is ok, if it is a male fetus." Thanks Ms. Hyisterndahl for clearing that up. I think I now understand. Abortion, generally, is good and abortion of females is bad but willful abortion of males is probably ok?
Another brilliant mind recently made the argument that abortion itself is a good response to a bad situation. Not that abortion itself is ever sad or tragic, rather it is a "moral good" and the procedure is as inconsequential as an appendectomy. Interesting analysis. I didn't realize the appendix could become a living sentient being. It's also interesting to contrast the positions of these pro-abortion scholars.
If abortion is generally good and the procedure itself is inconsequential because it is a good response to a bad situation.... how then are the females aborted in India and China a bad thing? A family in India and China wants to abort females so they can have more money and better economic status. That's actually an argument used by the people above in the "Yahoo Answers" article as a good reason for aborting children. Seems to me, abortion from the progressive mind is either always good, or only good when it involves the male fetus? Either way it seems kind of hard to reconcile the positions.
Another brilliant mind recently made the argument that abortion itself is a good response to a bad situation. Not that abortion itself is ever sad or tragic, rather it is a "moral good" and the procedure is as inconsequential as an appendectomy. Interesting analysis. I didn't realize the appendix could become a living sentient being. It's also interesting to contrast the positions of these pro-abortion scholars.
If abortion is generally good and the procedure itself is inconsequential because it is a good response to a bad situation.... how then are the females aborted in India and China a bad thing? A family in India and China wants to abort females so they can have more money and better economic status. That's actually an argument used by the people above in the "Yahoo Answers" article as a good reason for aborting children. Seems to me, abortion from the progressive mind is either always good, or only good when it involves the male fetus? Either way it seems kind of hard to reconcile the positions.
No comments:
Post a Comment