Arkansas Blog

This is a nice "sound-byte" (or word-byte I guess), but for me, taints the credibility of the author's argument.

Assuming you believe a fetus (after conception) is a life (as Mr. Bush does), an abortion is a deliberate killing of an innocent person. If the act was for convenience of the mother, it would be comparable to murder. If the mother's health is genuinely threatened, it is arguably an act done to protect others (the mother).

The deliberate killing of a child in warfare is murder. The knowing, intentional deaths of children when a building is bombed in an attempt to kill terrorists is arguably an unfortunate consequence of trying to protect others (by killing the terrorists who, if allowed to live, would kill more innocent men, women and children).

Is it hard to reconcile the absolutism of Mr. Bush's argument? For many people, yes. Is it impossible? No, unless you are as close-minded as you say Mr. Bush is.

DK, I enjoy reading your cogent arguments. They are much easier to digest than the rancid ravings that Anonymous occasionally spouts. This issue is a very difficult one for me since it involves the nebulous understanding of when a soul is developed in a human embryo or child and what steps can be taken to prevent the need for abortions.
Two aspects disturb me: the refusal of some right-to-lifers in supporting a broad spectrum of contraception methods which could greatly reduce the number of abortions needed; the need for population control to balance humankinds existence on this planet with other life; the tricky definition of killing vs murder; the claim to be a Christian yet shying away from the message of peace, charity, and forgiveness that was at the core of Christ's teachings.
I kill daily. Sounds rather ominous but most of us do. We slaughter a variety of insects and microscopic lives every second either because they bother us or pose a health risk to us or simply through accident. I cannot deny that abortion is killing but I find it hard to call it murder.
Still, I agree that to use the phrase "Sanctity of Life" does seem tarnished when you support war over diplomacy, invasion of privacy over individual freedom, torture and denial of habeas corpus, and lying to your fellow countrymen.
I hope I want let Bush's hypocrisy shade my judgment on the matter, However, he is making it very hard to do.

DK, I enjoy reading your cogent arguments. They are much easier to digest than the rancid ravings that Anonymous occasionally spouts. This issue is a very difficult one for me since it involves the nebulous understanding of when a soul is developed in a human embryo or child and what steps can be taken to prevent the need for abortions.
Two aspects disturb me: the refusal of some right-to-lifers in supporting a broad spectrum of contraception methods which could greatly reduce the number of abortions needed; the need for population control to balance humankinds existence on this planet with other life; the tricky definition of killing vs murder; the claim to be a Christian yet shying away from the message of peace, charity, and forgiveness that was at the core of Christ's teachings.
I kill daily. Sounds rather ominous but most of us do. We slaughter a variety of insects and microscopic lives every second either because they bother us or pose a health risk to us or simply through accident. I cannot deny that abortion is killing but I find it hard to call it murder.
Still, I agree that to use the phrase "Sanctity of Life" does seem tarnished when you support war over diplomacy, invasion of privacy over individual freedom, torture and denial of habeas corpus, and lying to your fellow countrymen.
I hope I won't let Bush's hypocrisy shade my judgment on the matter, However, he is making it very hard to do.

Don,

Your points are valid if you believe the war was the last and only available option.

Innocents can justifably be sacrificed but not cavalierily.

Sealing off portions of a ship in the area of a catastrophic leak and dooming those in the area to drowning is acceptible as a last resort to save the rest. But if the captain was operating wrecklessly and put the ship at risk by steaming through the night without navigation equipment in an iceberg field. Then the captain is guilty of manslaughter or worse.

I am of the oppinion that the Iraq portion of the War on Terror was , at best, ill advised. At worst, it was crimminal. Other less drastic options had not been exhausted and obviously planning was lacking.

I was told as a child that people of India didn't eat the flesh of cattle because they believed them to be holy religious objects...for lack of a better word. Of course I thought they were nuts then and now.

But it's not a big jump to Bush seeing little Republican voters in every aborted fetus. My advice to him is to never have an abortion. The amazing thing is that people like Bush can't sleep at night because of what is happening to a tiny bit of goo, yet proudly and loudly send off grown people to die in a war for oil. And let's not forget that a loving Bush executed more people than any Governor in history. It's a puzzle!

I've spent many lovely fuzzy warm Christmases with people after they were born and loved every moment. I have never so much as had a glass of milk with a fetus, therefore you have to forgive me for placing more importance in post-birth people than pre-birth people. Every abortion is a tragedy...I agree. But far worse than abortion is an unwanted child born into a bad place to be abused, neglected and kicked around for the rest of it's life. Visit Tucker sometime.....go on.

Perhaps Republicans are most friendly and compassionate when they themselves are fetuses and that's why they can't sleep at night because of abortion thoughts.

Republicans certainly harden up quickly after birth and think nothing of killing our troops and Iraqi civilians, after all they'll fly to Jesus, no virgins of course, but lots and lots o' Jesus. It's a puzzle!

But far worse than abortion is an unwanted child born into a bad place to be abused, neglected and kicked around for the rest of it's life. - Posted by: Deathbyinches
******
This argument always sounds good - but then I consider my co-worker who throughout her childhood was physically and sexually abused by her father, later became an addict . . . but now is clean, happily married and a mother.
There are too many real-life examples like this to buy your argument.

Kind of the opposite of the death penalty argument - don't kill any convicted murderers because you can never be sure - you might kill a good, innocent person - yet you advocate killing a fetus even though you can never be sure - you might be killing a good, innocent person?

Sorry DK, but unfortunately you're overlooking a point that may play a bigger part than any of us would like.

How much is Mr. Bush's situational ethics affected by the genetic inheritance, skin color, appearance and religious background of the innocent child, woman, or man?

I would like to believe it can't happen, but after serving in Vietnam to protect the Constitution in a war I did not agree with, I thought the United States Congress authorizing torture and imprisonment without due process was inconceivable.

Sadly, I was wrong. Now, I can only depend on a tainted Supreme Court to uphold the Constitution.

GSUSA