John Mc

This is a collection of my thoughts. Some of the thoughts that I once had, I no longer do. Some thoughts I have now I have never had. Yet none shal be discounted. This blog is soley for the enjoyment of the author and the readers. On occasion the views expressed are overly exagerated in order to prove a point. Also there may be a dirty word or thought in some of the posts. Grow up and take this for what it's worth - a blog that barely anyone will ever see.

3/04/2006

Responce

Recently William Maggos wrote a response to one of my posts. You can read it below. Here is my response to his comments:

You are correct. I am against in vitro fertilization. This is a process where many children are created and one is selected by the doctor(s) to be implanted into the woman. The other embryos are destroyed. I am obviously against this. Essentially, any scenario where man is playing the part of God, I am against. We, being the ignorant beasts we are, (when compared to God) have no role deciding who lives and who dies. In the case of in vitro, abortion and embryonic stem cell research, we take this role, and I'm against all of these situations.
You then bring up rape/incest/health or life of the mother. All of these scenarios account for such a small percentage of all reasons for abortions in America. If that was all that we were permitting, what a great decrease of this evil it would be. Now, in cases of rape/incest - I think that the woman should bring the child full term. Adoption is ALWAYS a better scenario than death. ALWAYS. There is an argument that the psychological effects of doing this would be painful for the mother. "Enduring the pregnancy" and "seeing the face of the child" would be traumatic. I don't doubt that it would be. However, the psychological effects of an abortion, for whatever reason, are far greater. Plus the health risks of the mother who decides abortion are not factored into this.
You say that men and women do not equally share the "responsibility and additional burdens once conception has occurred." In one case, you are right. Men will never be pregnant for 9 months. However, once the child is born, they are just as responsible for this "burden," as you put it, as the mother is. Even physically, the child is a 50/50 make-up of both parents.
You also talk about the financial aspects of allowing a child to live. Many pro-life organizations have created free day-care, job assistance, housing, food and financial assistance for mothers who choose life. They have also created free counseling for mothers who made the mistake of abortion. I have yet to hear of a pro-abortion group (or pro-choice, if you prefer) creating any of these types of free assistance. Funny to think how "Planned Parenthood" does everything in its power to prevent parenthood in the first place.
You talk about the "illegal" or "back-alley" abortions that would occur should the day come when abortions are illegal. This is a popular argument. No matter what laws we have in place, insurance fraud will still happen. People will get mugged. Identity theft will occur. However, there would be a great number of those crimes, if they were legal. So, a law banning abortions would cut down on abortions considerably.
The legal aspects of going out of the country - I don't know. I HOPE that becomes a problem that we have to wrestle with. First, though, we need to make it illegal. And, I will not ever refer to anyone as "pro-choice." That is the biggest PC cop-out of terminology that I've EVER heard! What are you pro-choice about? Life and death. And, in some respects, I agree with Mark's response of there being no grey area. If you support a woman's "right to have an abortion" you are supporting her having the abortion as well. If I were supporting your "right to free speech" I am also supporting you being able to speak freely. That is why I won't delete any of your posts. I do understand that you aren't encouraging abortions. You don't rejoice when an abortion is performed.
And neither do I. I instead pray for the day that everyone is entitled to the other rights this country is founded on "LIFE, Liberty and The Pursuit of Happiness."

P.S. I don't mean any of this to be an angry, fist-clenched, rant. Instead just a statement to be evaluated. I understand that in print it is difficult to hear the tone that the piece is written in. Bill and I go way back and have discussed this several times. Oh, and Bill, I didn't write what I wrote to make you mad in my previous post. And while I have been listening to Rush a bit more recently - he has had little influence over my statement of facts. Hopefully the clarification I've given your comments has shown you that you can again have "faith in the American people to think about complex issues from others' points of view."

1 Comments:

  • At 7:51 PM, Blogger Luke Walker said…

    I can tell your a Columbia grad...

    It may help add validity to your statements if they are spelled correctly.

    "Response" not "Responce"

    That is of course unless you were going for the whole, "Im a gangsta and dis be how I spell it" thing.

    Just f'n with ya!

     

Post a Comment

<< Home