|
|
(more...)
, (less...)
Add to My Group(s)
Permalink
View Article Stats (3 comments)
Add to My Group(s)
View Article Stats (3 comments)
Why Funding for Abortions is Essential to the Nation's Health
By Jim Fetzer (about the author)
Page 4 of 9 page(s)
Timothy, experience tells us that we may as well tolerate dissenting views, because if they are superior to those currently held, they will win out in the end, regardless. History may be unkind to those who would hurry her, but she is just as unforgiving to those who would hold her back.
The focus should instead be placed in developing the best views possible and then energetically defending them against all comers, ensuring that any would-be usurper must be of the utmost quality. History cannot be stopped nor hurried, but she can be led.
That said, history is not on the pro-choicer's side. The practice of abortion has been illegal throughout most of many societies' histories, and cannot be rationally reconciled with respect for life, nor presumption of innocence. All of the justifications for it are murderously self-serving. The advent of technology like 3D ultrasound make the pro-choicer's position increasingly untenable, and fewer abortions are performed every year.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-07-28 12:32:59 PM
Shane,
The downfall of every single great society occurs precisely because it is the bad ideas that eventually won out. Subsequent generations basically took for granted what made their society great in the first place. This is what we're doing right now and only a small minority realize what is happening.
Posted by: Charles | 2009-07-28 4:45:22 PM
Women who cannot afford abortions are being penalized relative to those who can. If we believe in the Constitution, as does Ron Paul but not some of his followers, then we understand that the right to privacy and the right to choose how to use our bodies are among the most basic to which women as well as men are entitled. It has been said that, if men could become pregnant, then abortion would be one of our most sacred rights! Well, the same applies to women, who can become pregnant.
I am both surprised and disappointed at the response to the arguments I have presented above, which are advanced to clarify the moral standing of abortion. Certainly, the common standard for the existence of a person is not conception, since an ovum and sperm has no such standing, but the occurrence of a live birth. That someone on this forum would make such a baseless argument suggests that reason is not prevalent here, even if libertarians like to pride themselves on their possession of that ability.
Indeed, I find it fantastic that a political group that is ostensibly committed to keeping the government out of our lives and maximizing freedom would use the government to impose limitations on our ability to exercise it. The crucial concept is not freedom per se but effective freedom, which entails the resources to exercise it. Some of those who have posted on this issue need to give the matter more thought, because Ron Paul is off-base on this question, where his stand contradicts his most basic avowed principles.
If the right to privacy is rooted in the Constitution, as the Supreme Court has maintained, then it applies across the nation and should not be left to the states do decide--any more than freedom of speech or freedom of religion should vary from state to state. I therefore conclude that libertarians are no more consistent in their politics than conventional politicians and deserve no more respect. Ron Paul is a good man but, on this issue, he is wrong--and his followers ought to admit it.
Posted by: James Fetzer | 2009-07-28 10:18:34 PM
"The downfall of every single great society occurs precisely because it is the bad ideas that eventually won out. Subsequent generations basically took for granted what made their society great in the first place."
No, great societies usually fall when a younger, more energetic one springs up nearby. The ennui and lassitude of an older, more mature culture is easy fodder for an upstart horde whose zest for survival and adventure has not yet been dulled by endless contemplation. Gandalf put it more eloquently than I could ever hope to.
"This is what we're doing right now and only a small minority realize what is happening."
Only a small minority ever realizes what is happening, Charles. Nothing you, I, or anyone else does will ever change that. You can lead the horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
Page 4 of 9 page(s)
The focus should instead be placed in developing the best views possible and then energetically defending them against all comers, ensuring that any would-be usurper must be of the utmost quality. History cannot be stopped nor hurried, but she can be led.
That said, history is not on the pro-choicer's side. The practice of abortion has been illegal throughout most of many societies' histories, and cannot be rationally reconciled with respect for life, nor presumption of innocence. All of the justifications for it are murderously self-serving. The advent of technology like 3D ultrasound make the pro-choicer's position increasingly untenable, and fewer abortions are performed every year.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-07-28 12:32:59 PM
Shane,
The downfall of every single great society occurs precisely because it is the bad ideas that eventually won out. Subsequent generations basically took for granted what made their society great in the first place. This is what we're doing right now and only a small minority realize what is happening.
Posted by: Charles | 2009-07-28 4:45:22 PM
Women who cannot afford abortions are being penalized relative to those who can. If we believe in the Constitution, as does Ron Paul but not some of his followers, then we understand that the right to privacy and the right to choose how to use our bodies are among the most basic to which women as well as men are entitled. It has been said that, if men could become pregnant, then abortion would be one of our most sacred rights! Well, the same applies to women, who can become pregnant.
I am both surprised and disappointed at the response to the arguments I have presented above, which are advanced to clarify the moral standing of abortion. Certainly, the common standard for the existence of a person is not conception, since an ovum and sperm has no such standing, but the occurrence of a live birth. That someone on this forum would make such a baseless argument suggests that reason is not prevalent here, even if libertarians like to pride themselves on their possession of that ability.
Indeed, I find it fantastic that a political group that is ostensibly committed to keeping the government out of our lives and maximizing freedom would use the government to impose limitations on our ability to exercise it. The crucial concept is not freedom per se but effective freedom, which entails the resources to exercise it. Some of those who have posted on this issue need to give the matter more thought, because Ron Paul is off-base on this question, where his stand contradicts his most basic avowed principles.
If the right to privacy is rooted in the Constitution, as the Supreme Court has maintained, then it applies across the nation and should not be left to the states do decide--any more than freedom of speech or freedom of religion should vary from state to state. I therefore conclude that libertarians are no more consistent in their politics than conventional politicians and deserve no more respect. Ron Paul is a good man but, on this issue, he is wrong--and his followers ought to admit it.
Posted by: James Fetzer | 2009-07-28 10:18:34 PM
"The downfall of every single great society occurs precisely because it is the bad ideas that eventually won out. Subsequent generations basically took for granted what made their society great in the first place."
No, great societies usually fall when a younger, more energetic one springs up nearby. The ennui and lassitude of an older, more mature culture is easy fodder for an upstart horde whose zest for survival and adventure has not yet been dulled by endless contemplation. Gandalf put it more eloquently than I could ever hope to.
"This is what we're doing right now and only a small minority realize what is happening."
Only a small minority ever realizes what is happening, Charles. Nothing you, I, or anyone else does will ever change that. You can lead the horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Why Funding for Abortions is Essential to the Nation's Health
Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers
www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/
McKnight Professor Emeritus,
University of Minnesota, Duluth;
Founder, Scholars for 9/11 Truth;
Editor, Assassination Research.
University of Minnesota, Duluth;
Founder, Scholars for 9/11 Truth;
Editor, Assassination Research.
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Editor |
Comments
The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.
This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.
| 3 comments |
To view all comments:
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)
This is what they are really afraid of!
by weslen1 on Monday, Aug 17, 2009 at 10:43:51 AM
Excellent post, but difficult to read. Try this . . .
by Jim Fetzer on Monday, Aug 17, 2009 at 12:32:19 PM
OBs vs. public health
by Jill Herendeen on Monday, Aug 17, 2009 at 1:04:25 PM