Posted by politicalpartypooper on September 10, 2008

Call me an idiot if you must, but I don’t get it.   Some science has claimed (or claims they have proven) that life begins at the moment of conception.  Okay, so where is the big issue here?

Abortion proponents claim something else, although what they claim isn’t clear.  No one really knows how a pro-choice person defines a human being.  There is no set-in-stone formula for when a fetus finally becomes human.  This has been argued for ages.

So the question remains, what’s the big deal?  Why do Democrats defend abortion rights so vociferously?  What do they have to gain in such a controversial issue?  Look, when it comes to human life, shouldn’t we be erring hugely on the side of safety?  After all, if we’re wrong, it’s murder.  No one takes murder lightly.  No one defends murder in a political campaign.

I am not a doctor or scientist.  I have no way of proving that life begins at conception.  But for me, the issue isn’t when life begins.  Rather, it’s about human life at all, and knowing with one hundred percent certainty that what is in the womb is always human as an end result.  I would think this would be enough for everyone, but I am willing to allow for differing opinions.  Where we go grey is when we base our opinion on something other than fact.

It’s a woman’s right to choose, pro choice people say.  That’s the basis of their opinion.  There is no other basis to their cause.  Democrats defend this, to the point of sounding almost ridiculous.  Take the case of partial birth abortion.  In this procedure, there is absolutely no doubt that the aborted fetus is human.  The shape is completely consistent with human structure, and the procedure used is to destroy the brain by stabbing it and vacuuming it out of the skull.  That’s pretty graphic, I know, but that’s the procedure.

Someone please tell me on what basis this can be defended?  A woman’s right to choose?

There is no defense based on facts for pro choice.  If science claims that life begins at conception, then pro choice is based on opinion.  If human life does not begin at conception, and many say this is true, I still don’t understand what is defensible about that.  It’s still based on a guess.  Isn’t human life worth more than a guess?

At the very least, isn’t human life worth more than defending a guess?

That’s where I am confused.  People refuse to take risks based on facts all of the time.  We won’t cross a street with our eyes closed because we know there’s a chance we could get struck by a car.  We rarely do anything when we think there is a chance we could end our lives as a result, so highly do we value our own human life.  Therein lies my problem with defending abortion.

I wonder, would people who defend abortion rights still defend them if their own life was at stake?  Maybe that’s it.  Maybe the life inside of the womb just isn’t real enough, or just isn’t “me” enough.  Because no one would disagree that when “me” is in danger, “me” has a right to life.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: