These are notes. I am not for or against, just thinking through it.
2.) In doing so you are giving government permission to women to kill a living organism. FACT.
3.) By trying to define whether the organism is intelligent or not takes away from the issue. We can't define that, so why should that be a valid point with weight in the argument? That point is moot and null because it is unidentifiable. Let's work on what is identifiable to determine whether it is ethical to allow a woman to kill an organism within her.
M=W: What applies to a man must apply to a woman.
4.) If a man hit a pregnant woman crossing the street with his car and the woman miscarried could we call that murder...? Then we say it depends on the intention. A woman who is having an abortion intentionally kills the living organism within her. Okay, taking everything else out of the picture, if a man intentionally kills a fetus is it illegal...? We can say yes. Based on law M=W, if a woman does the same then it is also illegal.
5.) But see, we're not dealing with what's illegal or not, we're dealing with whether it is ethical and basing the law off of that. So is it ethical for a woman to kill a living organism within her...? Is it ethical to chop down trees...? Those are living organisms as well, are they not? But the argument is, trees are not human beings, trees are not people.
6.) This is why everyone is trying to set the point of intelligence for an organism inside the mother. It is arguably unethical to kill another human being. So if they find out when the organism becomes a human being, i.e. has intelligence, they can decide whether it should be law.
7.) Look, people have beliefs. These are BELIEFS. The question is, is it the RIGHT thing to do, if I had a wife, would it be the RIGHT thing to do to get an abortion...?
8.) There was a story a while back about a woman who needed an abortion and died because she couldn't get one. Hmmm...
9.) Should parental law be sovereign enough to allow mothers to kill the living organism within them...? If we say this, would we slippery-slope and eventually say that parents can kill their sons and daughters because parental law is sovereign...?
10.) "Are you for or against abortion...?" is equivalent to "Do you think it is right...?"... Do I think it is right...?
11.) What makes abortion wrong...? Is killing another human being wrong...? Yes or no...? If so, who defines what wrong is...? If we give permission to kill living organisms or prefactors to becoming human beings within us then how is it not permissible to kill human beings in general...?
12.) Concluding Thoughts: People should be able to do what they want. However, when does freedom turn into unethicalism...? If you give the people the choice, some of the people will take it, some of them won't. As president of a free country, if this is indeed 'free', one could allow the populace to think for themselves. However, as a leader, one would know that a population this massive is virulent under passive leadership, meaning, the masses think for themselves but that doesn't mean they think logically, all the time. In which case ample leadership is needed to set the record straight. No, America is NOT truly free. If it were so, anything could happen... use your imagination. Abortion could be legal, but we could make a law that basically says, if you have an abortion then it counts as a sort of label that is not punishable by law, but it holds on your record. However, that might be too governmentally invasive. Who says it's the government's duty in the first place to get into these matters...?
So am I for or against abortion...? Do I think it is right...? My answer is thus: I am not pregnant. I will never be pregnant. It is not my right or any of my business as a person to decide what pregnant women should be allowed to do with their lives. Seeing as it doesn't affect me or hasn't affected me, in all my intelligence, I have come to the conclusion that I cannot be "for" or "against" abortion. Whether it is legal or not, that decision belongs to the mothers out there or the would-be mothers who have or have not gone through it. They are the ones who know the pros and cons of doing it. They are the ones who know whether its consequences should determine the legal status of it. That decision does not belong to religious sects, cults, whatever you want to call them. And it certainly doesn't belong to the government. Don't ask a neighbor what you should have for breakfast in your own house. That is their house. Not mine. I am too limited in scope.
-XJ
No comments:
Post a Comment