More Pro-Choice “Logic.”

J.J. Jackson* | March 10, 2006

I received a reply to my last post about Planned Parenthood by someone who just can’t seem to let facts get in the way of how he wants to think.

Here goes:

ummmm it’s not a child yet so your argument is moot.

That is where you are wrong. I would highly recommend you do a little bit of what we in the real world call research. In fact, you can even do a google search on embryology. Your argument is less than moot, it is idiotic.

Regardless of what you want to call “it,” what “it” happens to be is a human being in its most earliest stage of development, hence an actual living being.

“But thanks to your words of wisdom, I now see that this is all done
for the health and safety of the woman, who could have exercised more
self-control prior to being in your office having her child mutilated.”

Self-control? What about gun-toting people who shoot other
individuals, thinking they are game? Do you know how many people are killed by
guns, accidental and not? Why not legislate it since it does kill
people?

Well, maybe we can legislate driving too, since people die in vehicle accidents. I fail to see how this logic makes much sense. Those who kill people maliciously, with whatever means, are doing the same thing those who practice abortion do: they are murdering people.

In the case of guns, however, while there are those who use them as a means of hurting someone, they are also used in defending one’s self against someone like the person you mentioned. By outlawing the actual tool, you in effect do nothing because where there is the will of a lunatic, there is a way to pull off the scheme.

Plus, those who kill people outside the womb maliciously actually face consequences as opposed to those who take the lives of developing human beings who you state are not children, yet. If it isn’t a baby, the woman isn’t pregnant.

Isn’t that what you’re trying to protect, human life? What about
banning smoking altogether across the land? That would save many lives.
But wait.. conservatives are defending those issues… Hyprocrisy,
don’t you think?

Yes, I am trying to defend innocent human life. Those who take up smoking, while I do not condone the activity, are doing so volunatrily knowing full well the consequences. I knew that I could possibly get cancer for the fourteen years that I smoked. Later in life, I chose to discontinue smoking because I no longer wanted to take that risk. However if I had died from smoking, it would be my fault.

No baby volunteers to be aborted. No one volunteers to be murdered. You see, that is the difference here. In the case of someone smoking and dying as a consequence, that person suffered at that hands of that which he or she chose to undertake. An abortion, on the other hand, makes one person dead who definitely had no say in the decision.

See, I’m trying to blur the lines of your “argument” the same way you
posted your blog. Your rant was boring and didn’t bring up any fact
that could convince anyone to your point of view.. except for prayers?
Give me a break.

No, what you’re doing is trying to justify your belief that it is okay to abort children by showing how other things lead to death. In doing so, you proved my point. An abortion itself leads to death. In your first case, the case of guns, you mentioned that people use guns in furtherance of the crime of murder. While some people get away with murder (can anyone say Vicent Foster?), murder is still considered a crime that is punishable by law. Abortion is a practice that takes away a person’s life because people like you fail to realize that “it” is a developing human being. This act of taking one’s life has been legalized and goes unpunished, at least on this earth.

The second scenario, using the same topic of guns, happens accidentally and is still very unfortunate. Yet, the one thing you mentioned but failed to make a connection was the fact that these deaths happen accidentally. How many aboritons are on accident?

Lastly, you mentioned smoking, a voluntary act made by people who know the consequences, whether they begin smoking as an adult or as a teen. These people may die as a direct result of their actions. Again, you failed to make the connection or chose not to because doing so would negate whatever point you tried to make. When you choose to do something knowing there may be consequences, either good or bad, you can only take what is coming to you.

What act did the developing human being, whom you so eloquently refered to as an “it,” do to suffer such a consequence as dying? Was this person conceived to the wrong parents? Well, it seems pretty obvious what the answer to that question is.

I brought up points that might not change your point of view, but by using your logic, I’d wonder if a mathmetician could convince you that 2+2=4. The point of my post, sir, was to show the faulty logic of Planned Parenthood in regards to why they want to defend the malicious act of taking a human being’s life. The fact that you think the “it” isn’t deserving of life means less than nothing to me, but shows me that perhaps I need to pray for you, too.

My call for prayer for those like Planned Parenthood and yourself was because I know that God’s intercession can do a lot more for this issue than anything I can do as a mere man. Perhaps you don’t believe in a higher power, which wouldn’t surprise me based on the fact you don’t consider “its” to be children.

I do hope you have an excellent day and please join us again. I may not change your mind with anything I write here at American Conservative Daily. The fact that I struck enough of a nerve for you to waste your time telling me that an “it” isn’t a child let’s me know that I did something.

Have a great day and may Jesus Christ richly bless your soul.

The Hand of God : A Journey from Death to Life by the Abortion Doctor Who Changed His Mind

(Book)

Authors:BernardN. Nathanson
Manufacturer:Regnery Publishing, Inc.
Released:25 October, 2001

Contributor's website: http://www.libertyreborn.com

*Content posted by a user may not be completely written by that user. Content from another source is cited in either block quotes, with quotes or with a link to the original material. Content from other sites is posted for commentary and news purposes under fair use. Each user is responsible for their own postings and a particular posting should not be construed as being endorsed by this site or it's owner.