|
From: "rick mace" <rmace@panworld.net>
Subject: don't know where I found this, but it's interesting
Liberalism - Conservatism: Excuse makers - Responsibility takers.
I've taken the liberal - pro abortion - point of view. Let me rephrase that. As a man, It's not liberal to be pro abortion. As a man, it's a selfish choice to be pro abortion. That is, it's selfish when it's personal to you (and once you take a position on it I'd argue that it's, at that point, personal to you). You know, you don't want the responsibility of being a father but maybe you've done your thing and fatherhood is looming right in front of you -- The result of your actions. So what a liberal does in that case is become pro abortion and call it "a woman's right to choose," or say "life doesn't start till birth," or "there are too many children already," bla bla bla. A conservative in the same position of looming fatherhood, may as I've been, also be pro abortion. The difference is that the conservative doesn't lie to himself about why. A conservative will acknowledge that he's being a selfish son of a bitch. The liberal won't admit that -- not in a million years. There will be the endless string of justifications. I can't speak for a women, but I suspect the same fits. It's one thing to want to fool other people but it's a tragedy when we don't even see that we are just fooling ourselves. Life obviously starts at conception ... dauuuu!!!! ...
Dear Rick:
First off, I take exception with two of the broad assertions this person is making, namely that men don't want to be fathers (some do, some don't -- this guy is projecting his own loathing for fatherhood onto others), and that for men there is no principled pro-choice stance. The principled pro-choice stance is the same for men as it is for women: that the government has no right to the bodies of its citizens. Principled pro-choice men oppose outlawing a woman's right to choose for the same reason that I (a woman) oppose reinstating the draft. It's not that I have a draft-age man in my life that I am selfishly trying to keep for myself, but that I don't believe the government has the right to force anyone -- man or woman -- into slavery.
Secondly, you call the attached paragraph 'interesting'. Interesting how? Do you mean interesting as in, "Ha-ha, look how stupid some people are?" If so, I agree, because whoever wrote this piece doesn't bother to frame his argument (and I am using the term very loosely), or even define his terms:
What is human "life?" Why aren't gametes human? They are alive (engaged in metabolism), have 46 human chromosomes and the potential to create life, and life cannot exist in their absence. Why aren't organs or tissues removed surgically or for transplant human? They are alive at removal, and like pre-viability fetuses, are dependent on a host organism to survive.
What is conception? Does it occur at fertilization (most fertilized eggs never go on to form embryos at all), or implantation (occurs about two weeks after fertilization, may or may not result in pregnancy), or the first missed menses (the point at which the body begins to undergo hormonal changes caused by the implanted embryo, and ceases the monthly uterus scrub)?
And since one of every three American pregnancies spontaneously aborts (miscarries), does that make god the biggest serial killer/abortionist in our country? His hand is, after all, on the womb, according to the bible -- purported to be his inspired word -- which doesn't consider abortion murder, but a property crime against the father/owner of the fetus/chattel.
And what about polluters for profit, and the politicians who work for them? When a politician creates or enables an environmental injury that causes unnecessary miscarriages, stillbirths, and live births that cannot be saved by medical intervention, isn't that politician an abortionist on a grand scale? What about conservative politicians who gut social service programs that provide low-cost or free pre-natal care and medical/nutritional support to expectant females? Do the consequences of their acts make them abortionists?
As interesting as all these questions are, they barely scratch the surface of the issue...
The conservative point of view regarding reproductive issues runs a wide range of subjects, not just abortion...
A FEW OF THE MANY REASONS WHY CONSERVATIVES ARE PRO-PREGNANCY, BUT NOT PRO-LIFE
That is, they seek to maximize the number of pregnancies, but do not seek to assure these pregnancies result in healthy live births:
1) Touting virginity until marriage as the only morally acceptable expression of sexuality: This creates an environment in which any sex, other than married sex, is perceived as morally deviant, thereby discouraging responsible pre- and extra-marital sexual behavior; fosters unwanted pregnancies; fosters disease. (Continued on Next Page)
NEXT: CONSERVATIVE POLICY GOALS (cont'd.)
|
|
