That Ethic is one of the founding principles of my college Pro Life club
Allow me to play devils advocate here.
Abortion, euthanasia and the death penalty are easier to be against, because you’re talking about a discrete event—one person took another person’s life.
But access to medical care quickly becomes a minefield because now you’re getting bogged down in definitions—are blood pressure pills a right? Is hormone treatment for sexual reassignment? Are monthly massages?
Also, who is paying for this?
There is the issue of some medical specialties simply having fewer practitioners than others.
Do we now force a certain percentage of doctors to become cardiologists? What if they don’t want to? What if they don’t have a talent for it?
Right now our local hospital’s census is full because of flu and pneumonia and are only admitting the most critical cases and crowding them in.
Are the people being given meds to take at home to recover being mistreated.
This is why issues like health care can’t be easily solved.
Not because of a mean and hypocritical republican pro lifer.
I saw Shapiro’s thought experiment on killing baby Hitler and it was actually really compelling. You have to have some serious issues to say that there is a justification in murdering a newborn child on the off chance you may prevent a genocide. It would be morally inconsistent to say you value the lives lost to genocide but that infanticide is acceptable if it prevents genocide
The obvious problem is that it has no real-life application.
We can’t predict the future, so we have no way of knowing who among us will become the mass murderer.
You can’t trade one life for another life which is what he’s getting at. So I didn’t get why he was okay just killing the rapists
Not to mention it wouldn’t stop genocide. Genocide unfortunately is inevitable because we are flawed human beings and those flaws manifest when people say that all of society’s problems will be solved if we just kill off one group of people.
Yeah that’s inconsistent obviously. You can’t really make exceptions for the sanctity of life itself. Otherwise life couldn’t be sanctified. Setting conditions on sanctity is also a really dangerous road to go down
I’m not a Republican and I’m not a White Nationalist, so I don’t have anything to disavow. Also, none of that is really germane to the topic at hand. The issue here isn’t white nationalism or Republican versus Democrat, the issue here is a matter of whether we value the sanctity of life.
You’re also assuming that Catholics are just naturally voting Republican and that’s not accurate. “Disavowing white nationalism” has nothing to do with the pro-life movement. That’s virtue signaling. And I’m very much disinterested in pointless acts of expressing how virtuous we are.
Trump isn’t going to be relevant after he leaves office. Put the politics aside, because that’s never going to get us anywhere
Pro life= defending life from conception to natural death.
Pro lifers generally support caring for the poor but it doesn’t fall under pro life category.
That’s like me saying why pro choicers are not fighting for other causes that has something to do with ‘not being forced to do xyz’. They support choice in general but the pro choice movement focus on the choice to abort.
Usually this means that people support an innocent person’s right to live. Hence why some support the death penalty in some cases or the morality of killing someone in self defense.
But guilty people also have value and dignity and worth. Look at David Berkowitz, the serial killer called “Son of Sam”, I’m sure we all know him, one of the most notorious serial killers ever, killed 8 people in one summer in the 70s.
He taunted the police while he was on the lose, calling them and saying where he would be. He claimed a dog made him do it (his neighbor’s dog Sam, thus ‘Son of Sam’). He also said he was part of satanism. Most people wanted death for him, he got 25-Life and has been denied parole I want to say 15 times now.
Well if you don’t know his story, look him up. He had a huge conversion, and now he is a minister type in prison, he runs bible studies and evangelizes to the other prisoners and the guards all say he is a model prisoner and never gets in trouble at all. He is truly doing God’s work in prison. ABC did an interview two summers ago on him and he was saying how terribly sorry he is and he knows he will probably never get out but he said if he does he has minister and priest friends. But he said he is fine where he is, he is spreading the love and mercy of Jesus to others. He now calls himself the ‘Son of Hope’ and wrote a book titled that, I own it.
Mr. Berkowitz is one of my biggest interests, I have studied him extensively from academic and personal interests. Truly a fantastic and merciful conversion story. If he got the death penalty who knows how many lives would never be touched with the love and Gospel of Jesus he is bringing them?
This is only one case I know but he is one of the most famous serial killers ever, him and the Zodiac Killer. And look at his conversion! If he can convert anyone can so I don’t think we should assume these people have no value and no worth in living
I think some wonderful pro-life measures are gaining traction. There’s been a greater effort to meet people where they are. Growing up, I remember the pro-life movement being churchy, clique-ish, and insular. There was a lot of in-fighting and finger-pointing between Catholics and different streaks of Protestants and their yer-doin’-it-wrong approach to theology. Now, pro-lifers are increasingly welcoming a broader audience by making a case that is secular, scientific, and taking struggling women into account.
I also love that pregnancy resource centers are increasingly offering a medical staff and extra support services.
It won’t be easy or happen overnight. But in my years, I’ve seen a lot of positive changes.
I think you need a multi-pronged approach and think tanks to help develop it.
Yes, there are many young women who might keep a baby if there were more resources. But many women who abort are married with many resources. They don’t want their child’s sibling to be adopted out because they don’t want to go through with the pregnancy.
I would lock up the abortionists but not criminalize getting an abortion.
Ask companies to show more ads with large families.
Get people from other religions to support our pro-life work.
Make an ultrasound mandatory for all people considering an abortion.
We need far more people to go into schools and say it’s okay to go through with a teen pregnancy. These talks should have parents present. In other words, all kids should have discussed this concept with their parents before they’re ever called upon by circumstances to do so. Question: Mom, what would you do if I told you I was pregnant? Answer: I would expect you to go through with the pregnancy and then choose adoption or keeping the baby. We would support you and continue to love and respect you throughout the pregnancy and beyond. Parents would pledge this in front of students in the school auditorium.
I don’t disagree with you.
Personally in theory I would be against the death penalty. But I admit sometimes when I see pedophiles or serial killers…I would want them dead. But obviously that isn’t a good enough reason for me to support it.
I’m pretty undecided at the moment.
Again, not relevant to the discussion. We’re not talking about Republican versus Democrats or white supremacists.
Would you point me to the statistics/data about this? I am constantly researching and this is a new report to me! Specifically “married WITH MANY RESOURCES”. I’ve a ton of free time over the next few days to read these reports.
It would be better for any govt monies to come from the Cities, Counties & States.
Federal govt grant programs often require full time staffs / departments within the charities to handle. Additionally, federal level programs often don’t take unique, local issues into consideration. It’s harder for charities to be flexible to local needs when they have to meet federal requirements.
That’s not to say that there can’t be any federal grants (eps for national charities), but in general, I think it is far better when social programs are funded by cities, counties and states vs. the federal govt.
Yes, more can be done to reduce the incidence of abortion.
One way would be to eliminate child-support laws that require an unwed father to support his child for 18 years. Because of these laws some unwed fathers choose to facilitate an abortion for their pregnant girlfriend rather than be forced to make monthly child-support payments for 18 years. Of course our taxes would have to be raised to make up for the missing payments.
I am always amazed at the resistance to this plan among the pro-life crowd. It seems that these are not willing to have their taxes raised by even a single dollar in order to reduce the incidence of abortion.
There is something very wrong here.