Death Penalty Week
Supposedly it's some kind of Death Penalty Week. I read about it in my Cornell Catholic Bulletin. That's why there were all the liberal hippies passing out fliers in Ho Plaza this week. The liberal activists up here are starting to get on my nerves. First, I was in the grocery store and this family behind me in line was talking about when they
( Read more... )
"...that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."
So yeah, we are given life by our Creator, but the government is charged with the responsibilty to protect such a right. The government does have a say in such an issue. Just thought I'd point that out. I quoted the Declaration of Independence which may not be law, but it contains a great deal of the philosophy on which our government was founded.
So on to agree with you on the moral part. When a woman is pregnant, she has a life inside of her. I won't get all touchy-feely with the concept, but she has no right to end the life of another person, whether it is her child or not, born or unborn. I'm tired of hearing about the emotional damage it can do to the woman. We're talking about a child here guys. You are taking the right of life away from the child.
Other people (actually the same people as those who talk about the emotional damage) will talk about the statistics of babies who weren't wanted and how they end up having troubled childhoods and such. This doesn't mean that the child is better off being killed.
Others will talk about how women will perform abortions out of professional medical care should Roe v Wade be overturned and how more women will die from botched abortions. The fact is, fewer women will die per year than fetuses killed currently per year. You have to look at the greater good which is how laws are made. The greater good concept states that you make laws that benefit the largest group of people. (Don't get on my case about this being bad for minorities, this is actually how laws are made. Minority laws that get passed aren't a detriment to the majority so they fall under this concept too.)
I would address the issue of when life starts, whether at conception when the cell starts developing, or when the umbilical cord is cut, or some sort of intermediate point, however I don't feel that is constructive because I don't see any way of changing others or my own opinion on such an issue and debating it would simply be a waste of energy.
I'm not some pro-life Nazi though. When a pregnancy threatens the health of the mother, then an abortion should be among the options considered. Incest and rape are also special cases.
Governor Rounds from South Dakota made a big mistake when he banned all forms of abortion except for when a physician's efforts to save a pregnant woman's life results in the accidental death of the child. That probably could have been thought out a little more. It's good though that a governor signed the law. It is not the federal government's position to make rulings on such an issue. It is each states right. The supreme court can determine the constitutionality of such a law, but neither it nor any other federal body should be involved in making a federal law regulating abortion.
I'll look forward to the responses I get. But I'll warn you, I don't cite statistics. As has already been mentioned on this page, statistics don't offer much insight and can often be misleading. I'm an engineer here at Cornell but I don't put much faith in percentages and rates and what significance they may have.
"There are three types of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Unknown
-Brian
Reply
Reply
-Brian
Reply
Leave a comment