I’m Anti-Gun Shot Wounds, Much More Grazing Shots
October 25, 2007
I’m a social conservative through and through; I’m pro-life – much more so after the first trimester…
This was in a post supporting Rudy Giuliani. Can someone tell me how it really matters if somone is much more pro-life after the first trimester? Over 75% of all abortions are done in the first trimester. I really don’t want to be too hard on the guy, but I’m not the one advertising my pro-life bonafides as being after the first trimester. Republicans, meet the problem.
10 Comments
Comments are closed.
I’m much more struck by the composition… “I’m pro-life much more so after the first trimester.” (emphasis mine)
This suggests that he does in fact consider himself pro-life in the first trimester. However, being pro-life has always struck me as something you’re either all in or all out. Does he mean that he’s OK with killing rape and incest babies in the first trimester but not after that? Where’s the logic in that? If it’s a life worth protecting in one trimester its a life worth protecting in another, when the only independent variable is time. If he’s using time as a proxy for some distinct moment of human development (heartbeat, brainwave) then he ought to just say the moment of human development he thinks a life is worth protecting.
Schmuck.
To be honest it seemed an odd point of emphasis. The implied answer to your question is that there are some abortions he would support in the first trimester. What bothered me is that he could see himself as a social conservative and make the statement. I didn’t force the guy to make himself a soc-con through and through. He apparently doesn’t see the gross contradiction in his views and the philosophy he professes.
I really probably shouldn’t be hard on him though. I imagine there are people who say “I’m Catholic through and through; I’m against abortion, particularly after the 1st semester” and think they have established something. I guess we in the pro-life movement have more work to do.
And some people think Red State is superior to Daily Kos!
So, what you’re doing here is commenting on a commentator on another website? What are you implying? That because someone like this individual supports Giuliani, then….what?
I was quite explicit. I’m claiming his pro-life bonafides are lacking.
Who’s pro-life bonafides, M.Z.? The commentator or Giuliani’s?
It’s hard to speculate as to what Mr. Knight may have meant (actually, it’s easy to speculate; what’s hard is speculating accurately). But a person might think that, while abortion is always wrong, it is more gravely wrong in the latter stages of pregnancy than it is in the earlier stages. Why? Well, for one thing, the ability of the unborn child to experience pain undoubtedly grows during the course of pregnancy. For that reason, I suspect that many pro-lifers would be uncomfortable with a law banning abortion only in the first trimester, even as a stop-gap, while they would not similarly mind a ban on third trimester abortions.
The freakin’ blogger’s. It isn’t like I excerpted War & Peace. I don’t think I’m being particularly cryptic here.
Yeah, I think MZ’s intent was pretty clear.
It’s an odd comment, and l’m inclined to think, based on the content of the post, that the commenter is pro-life through and through. Blackadder’s interpretation makes sense, but it’s an attitude that bothers me.
Think of it this way. There are those that oppose abortion except in cases of rape and incest. But an unborn child is no less worthy of life because of how it was conceived. From a certain standpoint we might not see the abortion as being as bad as in other cases, but it’s still wrong. Same thing here. Yes, our discomfort with abortion might grow as the child develops, but it’s no less of an evil act whether it be in the first month or seventh month. Sure, on some psychological level it might seem worse later on in its development, but in reality, it shouldn’t make a difference to us.
I can’t totally blame the kid for thinking as he does. I can blame him for supporting Rudy, and for really poor reasons to boot.
We might differentiate on the questions of evil act and mortal sin. Someone who chooses an abortion for reasons both selfish and unmitigating (I think there are those who do) is engaging in an intrinsically evil act and has likely incurred mortal sin (if the other requirements are met). Someone who chooses an abortion as they feel that there is no other option has still committed an evil act, but the gravity of the sin might be mitigated due to potential lessening of full consent.
-j.