Life begins at birth (duh!)

Comments

7 comments posted
That's just a helluva concept

Spread it around, and maybe it will catch on!

moiv's picture
Posted by moiv on 13 September 2005 - 6:40pm
You may think it's a simple

You may think it's a simple idea, but it's a far from settled assumption to make. I think it gets back to a fundamental difference between "human" vs "humanity". You and I ( and many others ) belief about life has more to do with "humanity" birth begins a life and when there is no more humanity left they are effectivly dead no matter how strong a heartbeat. Pro-Lifers seem to define life as "human". In that sense life does start at conception and ends when there is no more heatbeat and brainwaves. These worldviews are diametricly opposed to each other, but only at the begining and end of the "life".

When you start to see the difference you can start to act and argue in a way that can appeal to them. The compasionate conservative should be more concerend with humanity not just scientifically human.

Eric's picture
Posted by Eric (not verified) on 14 September 2005 - 9:23am
Actually

I am just challenging the idea that "life begins at conception," which has pretty much gone unchallenged, and led to all sorts of ridiculous politics, such as so-called "pro-choice" governors vetoing legislation making plan B contraception available to women.

I don't think it's possible to appeal to "pro-life" folks, because when it comes to them, abortion is the feint, the red herring. If they really wanted to reduce abortions, they would support making birth control readily available and back sex education in schools. But they vehemently oppose those things. Why? The only explanation that adds up is that they are really focused on subjugating women. Some have been fairly open about it. Pregnancy is punishment for women who have sex. Birth control and abortion are ways for women to escape this punishment.

You also don't see much "pro-life" support for early childhood programs, daycare, natal healthcare, or even mandatory health insurance coverage of pre-natal care.

I'm not trying to make any scientific distinction, but simply speaking to how we as a culture have been dealing with pregnancy for ages. No, it's not an easy or simple subject, but that only points to the importance of leaving these decisions to the woman who is pregnant, and not to politicians striking poses in capitols.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 14 September 2005 - 10:43am
All my comment pointed out

All my comment pointed out was that your definition of "life(tm)" will greatly affect your judgement of when "life(tm)" begins.

Personally the life at conception argument will not even withstand SIMPLE scrutiny by anyone with reason. Let mt lay out one senario that has confounded conservative Pro-Lifers time and time again. By using the foundations of their own belief system you can show how it's a mistake ( but don't expect them to actually listen, they will probably just revert to the old "I can't hear you" tactic ).

1) All life is precious and deserve an equal chance

2) Life begins at conception

First off most Pro-Lifers support abortion in the case of rape or incest. How is that belief compatible with the pricipals of Pro-Life? It's not since a rape or incest fetus is just as much "life" as any other fetus.

Second and more devistating is the following senario. You have the option of saving 1 infant or X fertilised embryos ( that you can transport and know will survive ). When it is morally correct to save the fertilized embryos over the 1 infant? What if there were hundreds? Thousands? When is it acceptable to let a infant die to save embryos?

That second one will bring out all the stops... how choosing the infant does not mean they don't care for all life, how it's impossible to answer such a horrible question, ... anything but confront the delima that cuts to the core of the belief structure. In order to answer the question they must give up one or BOTH core beliefs and begin again with nw beliefs.

Eric's picture
Posted by Eric (not verified) on 14 September 2005 - 12:30pm
Sophie's choice
Second and more devistating is the following senario. You have the option of saving 1 infant or X fertilised embryos ( that you can transport and know will survive ). When it is morally correct to save the fertilized embryos over the 1 infant? What if there were hundreds? Thousands? When is it acceptable to let a infant die to save embryos?

A fine question to reveal where people really stand. Well said. After all, who's going to say, "Butcher the baby to save the embryos"? (I'm sure some blowhard men in the religion business will find it easy rhetoric to go along with assassinating foreign leaders, judges and (ahem) liberals, but then do those folks count as "human"?)

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 14 September 2005 - 1:27pm
what exactly is the point

what exactly is the point you are trying to make here? i don't quite understand.... and as a woman who had to labour and deliver an 8 pound DEAD baby you should be careful. have you yourself had a full-term, chubby and otherwise perfectly healthy baby die? have you? so a premature baby born at 20 something weeks and kept alive in an incubator for three months is consider alive... is considered a human.... but a full term baby who dies shortly before birth is not??? draw your line carefully. and again... i'm having trouble understanding the point you are trying to make here... so if you will- explain to me.

snoopy's picture
Posted by snoopy (not verified) on 14 September 2005 - 10:33am
I'm sorry

I'm sorry you suffered such a painful ordeal. Words do not suffice, I know.

I'm not trying to make any point, except to say that there is another view, supported and embedded in our culture, that challenges the superstition that "life begins at conception."

Until there is a baby, separate from the woman's body, there is only one person to deal with, a person with rights recognized by the Constitution. Some people may want to believe life begins when microscopic something happens. The Catholic Church believes every sperm is sacred, and treats men's masturbation as sin. Does life begin with the erection, perhaps?

And if you disagree with me, you know what? That does not oppress me in the least. What oppresses me is when others want to impose their views on everyone else. Anyone is free to believe life begins at conception, and they can live their lives accordingly. Just leave the rest of us out of it, please.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 14 September 2005 - 10:50am