Surely A Large Human
Date registered: Jun 2006
Vehicle: '08 C219
Location: Between Earth and Mars
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 482 Post(s)
I'm not picking a fight, honest - I'm not even very religious. That said, I thought the part of the bible upon which the Pro-Life movement was based is "Thou Shalt Not Kill". The argument seems to me, based on whether or not an unborn child is "alive", and at what point does it reach the "living" stage? Conception? Second trimester?
I think the other arguments against abortion are a little less black & white...moderates would concede that in certain circumstances (something a bit more substantive than "A baby would be inconvenient" or "It won't go with my shoes"), abortion could be viewed as the right of a woman to carry out. But it's the hard-line pro-abortion stuff that's hard to swallow, even for the more moderate conservatives. Opposing informed consent for minors, opposing bans on partial-birth abortions, etc. - if you're really interested in the health and well-being of a woman, these things shouldn't be argued.
I still contend that you cannot and should not legislate common sense. I think technology will end up playing a pretty important role in the abortion debate, since it seems like the point in time that a child is considered "alive" pre-birth is what has some of the pro-abortion crowd rethinking their position. Without having some kind of concrete technology that says "Yes the child is alive at this point", or "No, the child is basically just a 'growth' until this point", it's tough for anyone to base their arguments on something other than emotions.