Compelling Pro Life Argument
- Thread starter Hotdog
- Start date
jimmy eat jazz
Well-Known Member
I'm more than willing to listen to arguments about the sanctity of protecting unborn life. I have a great deal of sympathy for the argument. However, I have yet to meet a pro life person who is willing even to entertain arguments related to concerns the state's intrusion on a woman's most intimate decisions about her life and control of her own reproduction. In my view, women can never truly be free until they have freedom over their bodies and their own reproduction. On the other hand, at a certain point, I do believe there's a valid argument that the state has a compelling interest in protecting what would otherwise be a viable life. It's hard to find pro lifers willing to meet you even part way to begin this discussion. I imagine pro lifers say the same about pro choicers.
Heathme
Guest
It is usually more simple for pro-lifers. Take responsibility for yourself and your actions. If you have sex there is a chance you can get pregnant regardless of the contraception you use. If that happens, take responsibility for your actions and do not kill the unborn baby inside of you. Give it up for adoption or take care of it. Abortion is not contraception. The man and the woman that make this baby have a responsibility not to kill it. In my own personal opinion, only endangering the life of the mother, incest or rape would be an option to have the abortion and even that would be after a lot of consideration.
Last edited:
candrew
Well-Known Member
Whenever you see "DESTROYS" or "COMPLETLY OWNS" in a video title, it's a safe bet it contains nothing but a bunch of confirmation bias ******** - if it's from the left or right.
As for content just listen to the disdain in this suburban white boy's voice when he says "reproductive rights"
This is all about controlling women because that's what he learned from whatever religious indoctrination he was subjected to . He can't say that so he just dresses it up in a bunch of straw man and slippery slope arguments.
As for content just listen to the disdain in this suburban white boy's voice when he says "reproductive rights"
This is all about controlling women because that's what he learned from whatever religious indoctrination he was subjected to . He can't say that so he just dresses it up in a bunch of straw man and slippery slope arguments.
jimmy eat jazz
Well-Known Member
You do realize it's not this simple, right? There are any number of reasons where women are disempowered where it comes to sex and getting pregnant that don't involve rape or incest. You are positing a overly simplistic, reductionist worldview more consistent with a ideology or dogma that what is actually happening on the ground in so many of these cases.
Taking responsibility also for one's self also involves taking responsibility for one's one healthcare and taking control of one's body. The state intruding on women's own health care choices and decisions about their reproduction is a particularly egregious form of state intrusion. That so many have such as hard time conceding this self-evident point is a real stumbling block to this discussion. And I concede that from the other side, an unwillingness to concede legitimate concerns about the sanctity of "life" is also a stumbling block. (How "life" is defined is, IMO, a debatable point and far from self-evident.)
jimmy eat jazz
Well-Known Member
Agreed, I avoid any thing, regardless which side, which claims to "Destroy" or "Completely Own" etc. Anyone can cherry pick a video showing, presumably, one side destroying or owning the other. It's the nature of social media 'debate,' it's all about the gotcha win, almost never about honest discussion/debate.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
Its so disingenuous to say its about controlling women. How about its just because the person cares about the life of a baby?
What a lazy and stupid argument.
Ya bro, its all because the evil white man wants controll women and their bodies. No woman in the history of the planet has been anti abortion. Its all those evil controlling white men. It couldnt be be because some people get a sick feeling thinking about killing a baby in its woom.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
Why is that an idiotic statement?
You know, its you who looks stupid when you cant or wont give a logical rebuttal.
Trust me bruh. You dont look smart with your one liners calling other people stupid. It just looks like you have nothing else rattling up there, so you resort to insulting someone. Its the mark of a dunce.
Abortion is probably the most complex divisive issue in politics. Imo the core is in where does life begin and which life do we value most. Heavily simplified it's like the "women and children first" concept for life rafts, as in it is more important to save women and children over men, and a discussion around where that idea came about is fascinating. Is the life of the baby or the mother more important? And not just in terms of physical threat to life, but quality of life. It is ridiculous to assert that women would choose something at invasive as abortion as a preferred form of contraception, but it's also ridiculous to try to say that decision affects only the mother. Also is it really so dumb to say that people should know what the possible results of sexual activity are and be prepared to accept the results? This isn't even getting into the side of the debate centering around when life begins, and if that really even matters. It is really a very difficult topic to ever make any headway on agreement or consensus, even before we bring things like religion into it, and changing scientific understandings of when life begins. I know my personal beliefs have morphed over the years as well. It's a very tough nut to crack.
J
JAZZGASM
Guest
I am one of those people. I am personally pro-life, and will advocate for such, but I also won't vote for making abortion illegal, at least not as things stand now in this country.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey sets "viability" at 23 weeks as the standard for life (Roe v. Wade was 28 weeks), and there have been babies born that have survived earlier than that standard, as early as 21 weeks.This standard is a logical fallacy IMO. Especially since that same fetus is considered a life if the mother is shot or if the fetus is killed by a drunk driver. I've even heard pro-choice advocates go so far as to say those babies who die due to drunk driving/being shot/etc. should have no rights just to push their pro-choice argument. A fetus is a life with rights tomorrow, but not today, unless it is killed in certain ways by certain people. Let's just call a spade a spade. Our case law allows for the killing of babies at a certain stage to project a mothers rights. I think that devalues human life, and I will argue for the sanctity of life, but I will respect a woman's right to choose, even if the case law that got us there doesn't make a lot of sense to me. There is a lot involved in that choice for the mother, and it is almost never an easy one.
The young man in the video OP posted makes the argument that we are practicing a form of eugenics by allowing abortions, as a disproportionate number of poor people get abortions (I was surprised he didn't mention the black abortion rate which raises a similar argument). However, until we make it easier for this mother's to raise their children by providing them with support or opportunities for their children to thrive, who are we to condemn their choice? Until we provide these women with better education and learning opportunities how can we force them into parenthood (unplanned pregnancy rates are disproportionately higher with uneducated women).
Heathme
Guest
I agree with most of this, but the science of when life begins is proven:
https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html
Heathme
Guest
Not a big fan of science and personal accountability I see...
Heathme
Guest
We obviously disagree on the specifics of this, but having an abortion is killing a baby. They have every right to live as does the woman to have their "own health care choices". We are not animals that have to have sex because of instinct. Having sex is usually a choice. (this DOES NOT include rape and incest) Every person, whether poor or "disempowered" knows that they can get pregnant from having sex. You guys get so worked up about the science of climate change but seem to overlook or ignore the science of when a baby is created. This is NOT a religious argument. It is science.
One Brow
Well-Known Member
Sorry, but not early enough. The sperm and egg were both alive, as well. They passed life onto the zygote, it did not spring up from unliving matter.
Life began some 4 billion years ago, and since then, has passed on from organism to organism in a continual process.
jimmy eat jazz
Well-Known Member
Holy hell, but you are naive about the world. I strongly suggest that you get out and actually do some observation and learning about what life is like outside your bubble.
My work takes me all over the world dealing with issues related to economic development, health, food security, HIV/AIDS, poverty, often working with policy makers to construct initiatives to address these issues. I can tell you as a fact that sex IS NOT usually a choice for much of the world's female population, particularly among the poorer classes and/or in traditional societies (particularly traditional religious societies). The degree of female disempowerment throughout the world (and even in the US) is staggering with regards to sex and reproduction, and access to birth control, which might give them some power over their reproduction, is sadly lacking, as is in many cases basic knowledge about birth control, birth spacing, etc. For example, the 14 year old girl wed without her consent to the middle-aged man in Yemen IS NOT having sex with this guy, and bearing his children, by choice. That's just one of millions upon millions of examples.
I might be inclined to give your words more weight, but you'll forgive me if I conclude that you don't know what the hell you're talking about being sadly lacking in life experience and/or insight into life lived on the ground by common folk throughout the world, in which case, I judge what you say on this basis. Which is to say, I judge what you say as next to worthless.
One Brow
Well-Known Member
Do said health care choices involve not choosing to use your own body to support another person?
It's neither science nor religious, it's a legal argument.
Heathme
Guest
If a woman is disempowered and being forced to have sex, that is rape. If a 14 year old is being married off to an old man and forced to have sex, that is rape.
Anytime a man and woman decide to have sex and get pregnant and then have an abortion, that is killing a baby.
Is that more clear?