re: I've flipped. I'm Pro-Abortion af nowadays

This position is all fun and games until there are no births in liberal areas and they decide to import the 3rd world to make up for the population cliff.


Oh wait that’s happening already.

I am a pro-choice conservative.

Not for the same reasons as most people who are pro-choice though.

I just prefer to err on the side of not allowing the govt to tell me what I can't do. Not to mention, in order to write a law on abortion, there really is no middle ground that couldn't be considered completely arbitrary. You either have to ban the practice outright, regardless of situation, or you have to allow the practice up to the moment of birth.

quote:

---

I don't think anyone is arguing it's morally good

---

I disagree. It sounds to me like several people on this forum share what I would assume is a broader opinion that it's a morally good thing for our political and ideological enemies to murder their children for the greater good of society.

quote:

---

I can't stop all the evil in the world. But I can vote for policies that affect my family more than abortion.

---

I understand why many choose the pragmatic path. If you don't see the impact, it doesn't actually matter, or at least not nearly as much as the impact of things you can see. As a Christian, I would say that true impact goes beyond what I can see, as God is not pleased with sin, and He judges wicked nations. I believe the moral degradation of society as we see it today in all areas--not just abortion--is due to God's judgement on our wicked nation, where He is removing His restraining hand and letting people do what is right in their own eyes, leading to more wickedness which does or will affect us more and more directly. That's why we should seek to restrain sin in our nation by pushing for just laws, regardless of whether or not they impact us, personally, in an obvious way. Just as it was right for people without slaves to fight to pursue the abolition of slavery, we, too, can and should fight for justice against wickedness in our nation, even if we are not materially impacted by it.

quote:

---

I also think incrementalism is more effective, but most anti-abortion advocates want to immediately push for an all-out ban.

---

My concern isn't pragmatic, but moral. Yes, it might be more effective to reduce the number of abortions by codifying exceptions, but in doing so, we are not just saying we are reducing abortions, but formally agreeing with the murder of some children. We are pushing to put into law that some children can be murdered if their circumstances are fitting. I can't support that. I can't actively push for injustice even if in doing so may provide some better outcomes than going a different route.

The main point I'm getting at is this: there is a big moral difference between tolerating an evil you cannot prevent, and actively pushing for and supporting a solution that permits and codifies evil, which is what exception-based incrementalism does by purposefully legalizing murder of children in certain circumstances.

A poor analogy might be this: a kidnapper has taken 10 children hostage to torture and eventually kill as he pleases. You witness this and seek to stop it, but you have the choice of either trying to rescue all 10 children and possibly fail in the attempt (perhaps all 10 die in the end), or you can negotiate the release of 7 of those children with the kidnapper being able to keep three of them to torture and kill. If you negotiate, you might wind up saving more lives than if you didn't, but you've also just given your approval for the torture and murder of 3 of those children in the process.

It's a silly question for obvious reasons. But the idea that someone should be in favor of abortion because of eugenics is pretty twisted.

Here's a gay couple that wants their surrogate to abort because of a heart defect that is treatable.

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

quote:

---

The surrogate mother refused and fled to Texas for protection. “Baby Gabriel deserves a chance at life, and I will not allow anyone to unlawfully deny him medically necessary care.”

“Gabriel was diagnosed at approximately 20 weeks. After learning of his diagnosis, his intended parents allegedly demanded that the surrogate mother undergo an abortion. The surrogate mother reportedly refused and traveled to Texas for protection. She also sought to ensure that Gabriel could be near doctors experienced in treating his condition. The intended parents have refused to agree that they will consent to the life-saving surgery upon birth and may attempt to transport the child out of Texas to prevent treatment from being administered.”

“Attorney General Paxton has filed an intervention in the case and asked the district court to enter orders directing the child's care upon birth, prohibiting his removal from the state, and setting an expedited hearing on any refusal of treatment.

---

Imagine our crime rates if abortion in this country was never legal.

quote:

---

I’m pretty sure the Nazi party used similar reasoning to justify the murder of millions of the dregs of their society.

---

Yeah kind of like the Israelites when they genocided all those Canaanite infants.

While you are at it, maybe you should consider self induced and initiated post birth termination. Show your devotion to it.

I have always believed that once a person asks for government assistance (welfare in other words) they should be required to use birth control until the are no longer in need of help, and if they manage to have another child and ask for help again, then they should be permanently kept from having another child. The "have a baby just to get another check" scam has to end.

quote:

---

Yeah kind of like the Israelites when they genocided all those Canaanite infants.

---

Shouldn't be a problem for you and your arbitrary morality. Choosing morality is really no different than choosing a favorite flavor of ice cream anyway, right? At least according to your irrational worldview.

Or, do you want to quit a third thread on the topic?