If you are pro birth (and I know that's your only real concern... that the baby actually pops out. After that, it's on its own), it's clear you are pro-quantity of life, not pro-quality of life. You are emotionally attached to the ideal of a baby without regard for the reality of babies.
In other words, you haven't really thought it through.
To put it in terms you can understand, it's like the fetus is a home invader, and you're trying to take away my right to self-defense.
To put it in terms we understand, you are likening a fetus to an invader and you a likening a mother to a defenseless victim of an invasion.
Make no mistake here, we understand your analogy exactly as you say it and as you mean it. We accept that this is your analogy and that you believe it. Nobody is arguing with you or against you.
Feel free to act shocked when the consequences of a national level campaign, riots and other reactions that align with you and your analogy are not what you want.
Interesting. There’s an Underground Railroad for women and girls seeking an abortion. It should be noted Republicans are gearing up to introduce a nationwide six-week ban on abortions.
- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
What if you find out bringing the baby to term is going to kill you, you're in the third trimester, and you can no longer fly?
You can fly in the third trimester. I do think it would be ill advised under certain conditions such as pre-eclampsia. That said, a desperate person will likely stop at nothing.
We only get stronger when we are lifting something that is heavier than what we are used to. ~ KF
If you are pro birth (and I know that's your only real concern... that the baby actually pops out. After that, it's on its own), it's clear you are pro-quantity of life, not pro-quality of life. You are emotionally attached to the ideal of a baby without regard for the reality of babies.
In other words, you haven't really thought it through.
To put it in terms you can understand, it's like the fetus is a home invader, and you're trying to take away my right to self-defense.
I agree. Prochoice does is not really the polar opposite of prolife. Any compassionate and realistic person who is also both scientifically and medically literate will be both prochoice and prolife. There is not really any inherent contradiction there as I view it. As I have said before, anyone who is not both prochoice and prolife is not really pro either one when all realistic conditions and situations are considered.
Last edited by Gunnar on Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
No precept or claim is more suspect or more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
Hopefully, that was the choice your natural mother made, and it wasn't forced on her.
I can imagine several scenarios where what you described had more impact than just "nine months of inconvenience."
I'm sure it's pretty inconvenient for the screaming infant being dismembered and sucked up through a vacuum cleaner and flushed down the toilet. But who cares about the babies, they can't even vote. The bleeding heart of the liberal has no concern for such beings.
What reproductive rights have been given to you by the the Supreme Court?
What reproductive rights have been taken away from you by the the Supreme Court?
We only get stronger when we are lifting something that is heavier than what we are used to. ~ KF
If you are pro birth (and I know that's your only real concern... that the baby actually pops out. After that, it's on its own), it's clear you are pro-quantity of life, not pro-quality of life. You are emotionally attached to the ideal of a baby without regard for the reality of babies.
In other words, you haven't really thought it through.
To put it in terms you can understand, it's like the fetus is a home invader, and you're trying to take away my right to self-defense.
To put it in terms we understand, you are likening a fetus to an invader and you a likening a mother to a defenseless victim of an invasion.
Make no mistake here, we understand your analogy exactly as you say it and as you mean it. We accept that this is your analogy and that you believe it. Nobody is arguing with you or against you.
Feel free to act shocked when the consequences of a national level campaign, riots and other reactions that align with you and your analogy are not what you want.
Yes, the extended analogy is like letting a home invader stay to take what they need from you for at least 9 months, and up to 18 years and beyond, while you take care of them, possibly quitting your job in order to do so. And there’s always the possibility of being killed by this.
I’m sure that the folks who favor the use of firearms for home defense would prefer that, over their option of self-defense. But, feel free to act shocked when the consequences of a national level campaign, riots and other reactions that align with you and your analogy are not what you want.
I was an unwanted pregnancy and could have very easily been aborted. At the same time, there was somebody in the world that prayed for an infant and adopted me at six weeks old. What is nine months of inconvenience?
it is incredibly naïve and thoughtless to imagine that bearing a child, with all its ramifications, is simply "nine months of inconvenience".
That example is a great argument why the decision should between the woman and her doctor, and not dictated by medically incompetent and scientifically illiterate legislators.
No precept or claim is more suspect or more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.
