Response to Muddle/Abortion

To have the ability to put ones feelings on the written page is a gift. Muddle has that gift. After reading his contribution regarding his feelings about the practice of abortion in this country – I certainly understand his political stance on the subject. There was one sentence that stood out – the sentence where he stated that he and his wife made the choice to have their child. I applaud that decision. I feel that decision was based on the values and principles that they learned from their home training – as well as the community support. I just don’t feel they made that decision based on a ‘law’ imposed by government.
We have a law in most major religions and governments that ‘frowns’ on ‘killing’. Yet – we kill. If abortion is made ‘illegal’ – abortions will continue.
I was appalled at the Planned Parenthood website – where the first alternative listed to parenthood was abortion!! In my day, (my child bearing days) the emphasis of this organization was prevention/control over the size of one’s family. Believe me, I am doing some questioning about the purpose of Planned Parenthood.
I wonder have we become so jaded by sex for recreation only – that we have forgotten that ‘sex’ is also for creation? How is sex education taught? Do we still pretend that ‘good’ people don’t engage in sex? Lack of sex education – and a promise to abstain is just not working among our youth today. (There is more to sex education than ‘intercourse’.)
I was once asked what we did for ‘birth control’ back in the day. For me – it was the look in my father’s eye. I didn’t want to disappoint him in any way. I knew the difference between recreation and creation.
Thank God I never had to tackle with the decision of to abort and not to abort. And thank God for my children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. There is nothing more valuable in this world to me than my family.
The home and the church need to honestly teach ‘sex’ education according to their respective principles– so that our youth can make informed decisions about their actions, their health – and their future. Informed decisions/choice based on knowledge and principle taught in the home and the church means ‘choice’ to me.
For this reason – I ‘m pro-choice. This is one decision-making area I feel government needs to leave to the woman and her partner.
Thanks Muddle for so eloquently sharing your thoughts.

Davids mom's blog | login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
David's Mom:: Abortion
muddle's picture
Submitted by muddle on Thu, 02/12/2009 - 6:43pm.

Your reply to and assessment of my piece is a model of civility in the midst of disagreement. This is how it is supposed to be done. It's also no surprise to me, as your posts in general always have that character.

I'm finding that for an unemployed--or underemployed--person I'm awfully busy, so I don't have the time I would like to develop an adequate response. But here are a few thoughts.

I'll begin by reminding you of a quote from philosopher Francis Beckwith that I included in my piece:

"The view that human beings are made in the image of God and ought to be protected by our laws and the wider community is not "one issue." It is the principle that is the point of justice itself: to love our neighbors as ourselves; to exercise charity; to help the vulnerable and the weak."

It's the "protected by our laws" part that I particularly wish to emphasize. I am a reluctant follower, but a follower nonetheless, of J.S. Mill regarding the ideas that he developed in On Liberty ("Reluctant" because I reject darn near everything else he is up to in his moral theory, etc.) There, Mill argues for the "Harm Principle": A society ought to curtail the freedoms of its citizens if and only if it is necessary to prevent their harming others or harming societal institutions." (Something like that.) It's a book about the conditions in which laws should be written. Mill rejected both "Paternalism" (laws should be written to save me from my own stupidity) and "Legal Moralism" (laws should be written whose sole purpose is to enforce morality). So do I.

And so, given that philosophical commitment, the question of whether abortion should be illegal turns on a further question: Does abortion involve the sort of harm to others that we should seek to prevent by law? And this will depends upon whether it is true that abortion kills humans beings.

My argument is that if abortion kills human beings then fetal life should be protected by law. It's that simple.

A lot of people gravitate toward a certain position on abortion. They'll say, "I hate abortion. I would like to see the number of abortions decreased--perhaps to zero--in this country. But I also believe that it should remain legal." I suggest that there is potential incoherence in this position. The main reason for anyone to "hate abortion" would be that it kills human beings. But if it kills human beings, then, barring further argument (I have some philosophical essays in mind), we seem to have a prima facie reason for making it illegal.

____________________

"Puddleglum" by Weatherwax (one of the Muddlings).

Jeeves to the Rescue


login to post comments
M uddle: lady with 16 kids under 10
Submitted by Nitpickers on Thu, 02/12/2009 - 9:02pm.

A comment on this one if you care, please.

Should some of those "fetuses" (eight of them) have been "aborted?"

Is life created in the woman without the sex act with the woman by a man, "life?"

Maybe we will ultimately produce perfect kids without a woman or a man being involved after the "donations?" Altered genes of course for blue eyes, blonde hair, and piano playing potential.

login to post comments
16 Kids (and Whaddya Get?)
muddle's picture
Submitted by muddle on Fri, 02/13/2009 - 7:02am.

Should some of those "fetuses" (eight of them) have been "aborted?"

Probably not. It's a lot easier just to wait until they are born alive and then strangle whichever ones you don't want.

Is life created in the woman without the sex act with the woman by a man, "life?"

Yes. It's just not nearly as fun creating it.

Actually, the best way to tell is to wait, say, 10 or 15 years and then ask the opinion of the individual who was created.

____________________

"Puddleglum" by Weatherwax (one of the Muddlings).

Jeeves to the Rescue


login to post comments
muddle: thou dost jest, methinks!
Submitted by dollaradayandno... on Fri, 02/13/2009 - 7:50am.

The idea of strangling the unwanted ones reminds me of how cats were disposed of in the old days. Put them in a sack with a lot of rocks, tie up the end of the sack, and throw it into the creek--never to be heard from again.

I can't get any of the "no abortions" crowd to comment on such cases as this 16 kids lady! Including you.

I am beginning to think that aforementioned crowd above wants the same policy about "exceptions," as does the military about homosexuals. Don't ask, don't tell!
Anyway intelligent people and rich ones know how to do it discretely and without turmoil.
The coat-hanger group are just simply baffled as to what to do about an unwanted pregnancy.

All I can figure is that it must be a religious thing!
What did Solomon do with all of those offspring from the scores of wives and concubines?

login to post comments
dollaraday...cats in sacks
Main Stream's picture
Submitted by Main Stream on Fri, 02/13/2009 - 8:07am.

Regarding abortions..

"The coat-hanger group"

Catchy. Mind if I borrow that term someday?

Regarding Nadya Suleman...just because a woman CAN have eight babies growing in her belly, doesn't mean she SHOULD...did you see this: Shocked

BABY MAKER


login to post comments
Octuplets
hutch866's picture
Submitted by hutch866 on Fri, 02/13/2009 - 10:22am.

I think the fertility Doctor should have to pay child support.

I yam what I yam....Popeye


login to post comments
Hutch....octomom
Main Stream's picture
Submitted by Main Stream on Fri, 02/13/2009 - 2:18pm.

I agree wholeheartedly! The fertility doctor must have failed his/her bio ethics class. If some families want mega amounts of kids, and can afford them, then go ahead and breed. However, I'm sick and tired of some women popping out babies they can't afford to support, causing the rest of us to foot the bill. And I'm a dang liberal!


login to post comments
HEY THE HUMMER SEATS EIGHT
Submitted by mysteryman on Sat, 02/14/2009 - 12:00am.

And now that she just got done pumping out all of those kids, she can afford to make the payment on it, courtesy of me and you, aint it cool. Generation $5.00 alive and well. You can almost feel the economic stimulations being provided to us from the octuplets of tommrow, its what makes America so great. Just think while your at work she will be sitting pretty at her mommas house waitin on the 1st and 15th. NYCE.....GOD BLESS..the population bomb.....PEACE...

login to post comments
Poppin-out babies!
Submitted by baroombrawl on Fri, 02/13/2009 - 5:14pm.

Oh, and I thought some said that all babies are miracles of God!

login to post comments
baroom
hutch866's picture
Submitted by hutch866 on Fri, 02/13/2009 - 5:29pm.

I'm sure your Mom thought different.

I yam what I yam....Popeye


login to post comments
Muddle
Submitted by Davids mom on Thu, 02/12/2009 - 6:58pm.

I'm finding that for an unemployed--or underemployed--person I'm awfully busy, so I don't have the time I would like to develop an adequate response. But here are a few thoughts.

That you would even take the time to respond tells me that you have the quality that our classrooms need today! When you are in your right place, sharing ideas and concerns with students - and motivating them to stretch their minds - we'll talk. Your right place is waiting for you. Did you send a resume to the Chief of Staff at Spelman?

login to post comments
DM and Muddle
rock78's picture
Submitted by rock78 on Thu, 02/12/2009 - 9:21pm.

All I can say is wow.

The two of you are amazing. It's quite refreshing to see a spirited, yet civil discussion on this topic....

Quite frankly, I tend to avoid any discussion of the "A" word on this site. That avoidance is mainly due to both sides not willing to discuss the issue in a non-confrontational manner.

Anywho, again thanks to the both of you....I miss the days of spirited discussion, not accompanied by name calling and the like.

ps - I'm one of those "pro-choice" dependent on the circumstances folks. A good buddy of mine is strictly pro-life, but once I mention the unthinkable (Rape), his opinion changes. I really wish all could view the world in the shades of gray that I see it as being, instead of the typical black and white view....


login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.