This study shouldn't really matter in the argument for whether abortion is right or wrong. Why? Well, it implies that it is okay to destroy a human life because it cannot feel pain. In other words, that if a human life can feel pain, we shouldn't kill it. By this logic it is morally permissible to kill anyone, just as long as they don't feel pain.
"we believe life begins at conception" -Dr. Janice Crouse
That isn't a belief, it is a fact—Monica Potts actually debates that life doesn't begin at conception—that is a complete lie, that is the start of a life, we already know this scientifically (duh?). Pro-choicers are very illogical—pro-life is the only logical choice to make for those that value human life.
"having an abortion can be the most responsible decision they can make for that child" -Monica Potts
The mental gymnastics she goes through to justify killing human life. First she dehumanizes human life to justify it, then she is concerned about that life's interests. You can't have it both ways Monica. To destroy a perfectly healthy life, full of potential, is NOT looking out for its interests, but the bank account of the mother. I don't understand why woman that don't want children just don't go on birth control methods (mixing them is an obvious thing to do) or get themselves fixed—I prefer the latter.
"I think abortion is as old as time" -Monica Potts
Yeah, I bet Tyrannosauruses got abortions all the time. And of course, according to "Ms." Potts, even a billion years ago bacteria were getting abortions as well. I'm sure "Ms." Potts knows everything that happened throughout time—she would have to. Sarcasm aside, what a complete tool-bag. Again, it is so easy to see through the bullshit that pours out of her mouth to justify the destruction of human life. I bet this "woman" got an abortion herself, and of course she needs to make it justifiable in her little mind. I believe woman that get abortions should be unable to be mothers in the future—they obviously couldn't care less about the safety of their own offspring (if they are willing to destroy it for the sake of financial convenience).
Pro-life is the logical stance to take for those that value human life, it is the stance atheists should take. Many atheists sheepishly follow what they believe is the "atheist position" on issues—for those atheists—I would look to point out that many prominent atheists are pro-life, one of the best examples is Christopher Hitchens...and of course there are many others. Either way, at least think about the issue of abortion, don't just accept the talking points of the liberals for the mere fact that they are liberals, it is important.
As soon as a person recognizes the dehumanization of human life, they should automatically resist it (peacefully of course)—it is reasons like this that should motivate atheists (and all compassionate individuals) to resist the selfishly driven pro-choice agenda by arguing against it utilizing reason. Atheists are in a great position to debate abortion because we can't be dismissed as easily—many pro-lifers are dismissed as being "religion nuts", "illogical", "old-fashioned", etc.
No comments:
Post a Comment