But as CMAC pointed out, they're not sticking to their guns if their view on abortion is based on the idea that every life is sacred. They're only sticking to their guns if they have an arbitrary absolute rule that all abortions are wrong. If their view is based on the sanctity of life, the mother's innocent life should be the equivalent of the fetus's innocent life and at best there is no reason to prefer the life of either one and it's easily argued that the mother's life is to be preferred because death is being caused by the injustice of rape.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

I agree with all of that, except the last part. If the rape creates a situation where one or the other is going to die, then whichever way you go the rape caused the death of an innocent person.

I think the guns they are sticking to is the hard core religious propaganda I do remember this topic at many Young Republican meetings and even at a young age I was the most center on the issue, today I see that many of the hard core no abortion in any case people have moved closer to my position. When we are young thinks are black and white and grey comes with age, I think this is why we have a minimum age to be President. I will let it be known that I am firmly against abortion but in cases when the mothers life is in danger or other circumstances I am OK.

I guess one thing that you noticed is that the perception that right wingers are the ones that suppress other peoples thoughts is incorrect, I had an almost literal hatred of Pseudo hippies in college because of this exact same issue. I got out of the military for school and went back in for Desert Storm. While attending classes anti-war students challenged me whenever they could in classes that allowed open conjecture. Usually the prof was spear heading the hippie assault but I stuck to my guns and found that if I moved in any direction they would pounce on me for being inconsistent. I got laid all the time as a result the chic's really dug my courage even the hippie chic's.

Nobody was supressing anyone's thoughts or speech in these circumstances. I think the anger in the class was generated by the fact that many women in the class were outraged at the fact that a group of people were arguing that if raped and pregnant and threatened with death, they were less important than a fetus that was likely to die anyway. This contained the implicit belief that a women consciously controlling her reproductive processes was wrong and that having sex for enjoyment as opposed to explicity to reproduce was immoral.

Connected with that whole line of thought was the idea that the individual should be subservient to God (State). We had read Augustine the day before and the students were making the connection.

Does anyone know a non-religious person who would hold this extreme view? It strikes me that the denial of a woman's choice to preserve her life in this instance is closely connected to the acceptance of an absolute authority to which the individual must submit. The way to assure that this submission is clear in an individual's mind, is to take his or her strongest desires (sex) and discipline it in the name of the authority.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

It's definitely a nasty business. I heard on NPR that while people say late term is only to be used in cases where the baby would only survive a few painful weeks or months due to massive birth defects, or when the mother's life is in danger, the truth is that it's used more often like every other abortion: a form of birth control.

But in cases where it's discovered that the fetus has its brain on the outside of its skull, etc., late term should still be allowed, IMO.

__________________
Te futueo et caballum tuum

1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

That's the point the rabbi was making to the class I had in college. For the Jew, the answer is easy: The life of the mother is more important than nascent life.

__________________
Paul S.

2001 E430, Bourdeaux Red, Oyster interior.
79,200 miles.

1973 280SE 4.5, 170,000 miles. 568 Signal Red, Black MB Tex. "The Red Baron".

Call it what you will, late term abortion / partial birth abortion, many of these fetuses that are aborted when the life of the mother isn't at stake, and are of fetuses that can exist outside of the womb.

Babies born at 26 weeks routinely survive. 26 weeks is at the end of the second tri-mester.

There have even been a few babies that have survived at 24 weeks.

With the Left in this country in favor of legalised abortion at any time at the will of the mother, I wonder how many democrats would vote against a bill that would make abortions illegal in the second tri-mester when the health of the mother isn't at risk.

__________________
Paul S.

2001 E430, Bourdeaux Red, Oyster interior.
79,200 miles.

1973 280SE 4.5, 170,000 miles. 568 Signal Red, Black MB Tex. "The Red Baron".

I'm for making it so no one wants an abortion...

But anyone who is against them raise their hand when they are ready to adopt the unwanted.

__________________
300TD W124, Two VW TDI Passat Wagons,Cummins Ram 250, Kubota Tractor
23 cylinders sipping the sweet sauce of the soy bean

Here we go I know many non-religious pro-lifers I don't know if they hold this extreme viewthat you speak of and have not bothered to ask.

That is the lamest pro-abortion opinion out there, I know that it is the most common but it's totally lame IMO. I love it when husbands pipe up with a similar response to satisfy thier wives or women in the room. If a person kills a pregnant women they get popped with double-murder but for some reason the rights get turned around when the baby is in "her" womb.

There was nothing in what I wrote that was an attempt to explain pro-abortion. I was elaborating on what the extreme anti-abortion position I was explaining was based upon.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

The entire post was a text book pro=abortion argument.

Their views are extreme; there is no question about that but I do applaud them for having the courage to voice their opinion.

One piece of advice, don't discuss race issues I saw that one get real ugly during the Rodney King era.

I think I agree with that in practical terms but if one were to pursue consistency at the expense of common sense, then the rabbi's position is a poor one.

The most consistent position is the Roman Catholic one, in which life begins at conception and every life is equally important. Any other position requires that some arbitrary definition of value be imposed on life. "Nascent life" is just such a value judgment. To put it crudely, if one can arbitrarily decide that life at one stage is more valuable than life at another, why not use some other arbitrary criterion for value of life ... say, race. Thus justifying Hitler's argument against Jews, for example.

In contrast, the Roman Catholic position allows no possibility of arguing for any form of eugenics. Genocide would be impossible under strict Roman Catholicism. Genocide could be a legal form of population control under a strictly secular government. Like the USSR, North Korea, and Cambodia, for example.

For the record, I am in favor of abortion-on-demand and some forms of infanticide at the discretion of the parents. Both parents (that oughtta stir the pot!).

Bot

I don't think there is anything non-sensical about the rabbi's position. One, for him, the answer is found in the Torah, IIRC, and the reasoning is that the mother's life is more important than the fetuses life as long as the fetus is in the womb.

Listen, I had this class about 20 - 21 years ago, so it is a distant memory, but that is the jist of the argument as far as I remember.

And for the record, I'm against abortion personally on moral grounds, but am in favor of it being legal, with restrictions.

__________________
Paul S.

2001 E430, Bourdeaux Red, Oyster interior.
79,200 miles.

1973 280SE 4.5, 170,000 miles. 568 Signal Red, Black MB Tex. "The Red Baron".

Paul, note how I encapsulated my argument, "... if one were to pursue consistency at the expense of common sense, ...".

What I mean by that is that many times people become very entrenched with respect to this argument. Of all the arguments that I have seen made, I believe that the Roman Catholic's is the most logically consistent because it removes any qualitative argument from the hand of man. Catholic teaching is adamant that all human beings are equally endowed with life by their Creator. That all life is therefore a gift of God and equally valid. This is far and away more consistent than the rabbi whom you quoted (accepting that you recall his argument accurately, for the sake of argument).

The rabbi argues that there is a qualitative difference between a baby in utero and a baby ex utero. Okay, lets follow that to the very last moment before dilation of the uterus is sufficient for life birth. In one moment the baby is less worthy than the next. Is a baby at 24 hrs post partum less valuable or less human then a baby at 25 hrs? How about a 5 year-old vs a 15 year-old? What I am arguing is that any distinction is based on the value system of the individual who is deciding for or against the life of the child. value is placed by an external, subjective evaluation, not by the subject (the baby).

If you could ask the zygote or microcephalic newborn or a 99 year-old with senile dementia, each would argue that his life is valuable and worth preserving. But since these people are mute or unable or unwilling to speak, we diminish their value and kill them at will. I'm okay with that probably to a greater degree than the rabbi. I would argue that my position is logically consistent with the rabbi's.

The RC Church's position has been far from consistent on this matter. The inconsistency is related to the fundamental question that has to be addressed in the matter. When does a 'something' which exists in someone else's body become the moral equal of the adult moral community. Could be the egg, could be the sperm, could be at fertilization, could be at quickening, could be with brain waves, could be at birth, could be at 21yrs old. The list goes on. The RC church used to base it's view on quickening in earlier times. The fertilization view only has become possible with microscopes I think.
It looks like the modern RC view on this question were developed at the end of the 19th and early 20th centuries when the RC church was responding to 'modernity'.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13