Mrebo said:
To illustrate my view that what is important is where one's views are anchored on this topic.
Ugh. I hate this topic, though I feel more strongly about it than most any other. I just know how these "friendly" discussions tend to go. But here I go, jumping back in when I'm trying to actually spend less time at this site.
From your article:
“Both a fetus and a newborn certainly are human beings and potential persons, but neither is a ‘person’ in the sense of ‘subject of a moral right to life’. We take ‘person’ to mean an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value such that being deprived of this existence represents a loss to her.
[...]
Merely being human is not in itself a reason for ascribing someone a right to life. Indeed, many humans are not considered subjects of a right to life: spare embryos where research on embryo stem cells is permitted, fetuses where abortion is permitted, criminals where capital punishment is legal.”
Truly, their position is justified, if we accept the premise of justifiable abortion at all. What gives a born child any more right to life than a fetus? And that's the thing--it's not a slippery slope fallacy; it's a slippery slope! Really, when we start questioning whether a human has attained personhood or not and use that as a means of justifying abortion, where do we really draw that line? It's only a matter of convenience in the end. It's far too arbitrary. Perhaps we will one day be capable of saving the majority of developing children no more than 10 weeks gestational age. Would we move the age of personhood to that point? Perhaps we will identify the precise age when a child can be considered sentient and fully self-aware (not truly complete until 4-5 years of age, based on our understanding); should we move the legal age for "abortions" up to 4 years of age?
It's not just a matter of my faith in God; it's a matter of my faith in humanity and the sacredness of human life. My values have changed greatly over my life, where I am more accepting of many things than my parents and the majority of my church are. Heck, I oppose homosexuality just as I oppose adultery, but I have a hard time justifying illegalizing gay marriage for the same reasons that I couldn't justify illegalizing adultery. But I simply cannot ever see myself changing my mind on abortion.
I teach my sons to respect the ants around our yard and not to kill them. Many liberals are completely in favor of the rights of animals, creatures who don't even have a chance at gaining personhood. Why, oh why do we find the life of an embryo or fetus (terms that in many ways dehumanize what is really a developing child) so relatively meaningless?
I know I can be long-winded in this topic, so I'll stop with one last thought: I do sympathize with mothers who did not intend to get pregnant. It is a scary thing, it causes changes to one's body and alters her life forever. But I see no reason for her ability to choose to be so much more important than the child's. I am pro-choice: choose not to have sex unless you're willing to have a child with that person.
