Putting the abortion issue to rest by SovereignJim
(libertarian)
Monday, February 22, 2010
Abortion is one of the issues tearing the cohesion of our nation apart. It has become a political football that must be grounded. The pro and con arguments are well known. Both sides have positions reasonable to themselves. I sense our culture is moving to some sort of compromise such as, abortion is not permitted during the third trimester or abortion is permitted during the first trimester. There is an easy answer if the question to be resolved is an agreement about which point in time is the permitted abortion cutoff time.
That time issue can be settled by examining the scientific and cultural agreement about the definition of what defines the death of a human being. That definition considers the condition of the heart where it has stopped beating and can not or will not be restarted. The beating heart thus defines the human status of being alive. A healthy beating heart can thus be the signal of the transition from being an unprotected fetus into the protected status of a child. Aborting a fetus is OK. Aborting a child is murder. Neither side of the issue will be fully satisfied but a compromise like this must be achieved.
What then is the status of a female who is pregnant with a child and does not want to become a mother? She must be coerced, aborting is murder, into giving full term birth and to give up the child for adoption. The adopting parents should pay her for expenses and a reward, all under contract. The pregnant female may always choose to become a mother unless under contract for adoption. Children are a precious gift to humanity and there are many couples wanting a child who can not achieve one.
Â
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 15
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of SovereignJim only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
SovereignJim is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Jim, I have to politely disagree with you on the abortion issue. In the interest of full disclosure, I am an Independent Conservative who practices Christianity; however, I also look at this argument from a scientific and behavioral point of view as well. I don't approach this subject from a Republican or Democrat thought process because Republicans have a way of sanctioning one form of death, while Democrats sanction another.
Too many times in our society, people seek the easy way out of situations they created for themselves, such as the issue of abortion. Our culture today no longer thinks before they act. Instead, they instantly act upon a spontaneous emotion. Emotions of anger, fear, or even lust are not repressed in good conscience, but rather acted upon as a release and a way to convey immaturity throught the excuse of "I just couldn't help myself". Modern American inclinations no longer exemplify the necessity of self-control and healthy physical and emotional behavior. This includes the subject of sexuality and "animal attraction".
Once conception takes place, a woman has a living, breathing fetus growing inside of her. Yes, the fetus may not be fully developed as it would be noted in a scientific journal, but in order for something to grow, it must be alive. A non-living entity will not grow. A dead seed or a dead tree limb will not produce a beautiful, vibrant flower.Â
The American culture has lost respect for human life in any form, whether prenatal or geriatric. Our culture has encouraged a self-centered existence that legalizes the destruction of "inconvenience".  Unwanted pregnancies and disabled "old folks" have become a reason to sanction a "death culture" in our nation. People turn the other way while laws are passed that encourage irresponsibility, selfishness and insanity.Â
If we look at this argument from a practical and responsible point of view, we would not encourage abortion, but rather encourage mature and logical behavior. The practice of abortion only encourages more erratic and irresponsible behavior and drives apart a nation of people who could actually have a good influence on the world as a whole.Â
Abortion, euthenasia, homosexuality and many forms of hedonism have never been proven to improve someone's quality of life in any culture. People believe that hedonism is freedom; however, the opposite is true. A hedonistic culture leads to chaos, confusion and desperation. Responsibility leads to freedom because responsibility yields productivity, peace and contentment.Â
To encourage abortion is to encourage death, divisiveness and delusion. Abortion is not the answer for our culture's irresponsible behavior. It causes a war within the human spirit that cannot be calmed in the office of a psychologist. We were not created to kill and therefore, death through wars, homicides, substance abuse and even abortion will only serve to further divide an already unbalanced nation full of selfishness and narcissistic behavior.  Â
This infectious and unstable existence has permeated our halls of government and it affects every person in this nation, either directly or indirectly. Even our financial system forces a welfare state and a tax system that encourages people to lie, steal and even marry for the wrong reasons. Minorities in this welfare state are encouraged to become unwed mothers in order to receive a check. So, we have two problems, people having children for the wrong reason and people aborting children due to irresponsibility and imaturity. Either way you study it, we're looking at "Created Insanity".
Therefore, in regards to my original argument, I know that abortion in any form is not the answer and neither are the majority of laws we have on the books today. Legalized insanity will only lead to the destruction of a once-great idea called America.
Norma, I agree. Speaking from a libertarian point of view, I arrive at a pro-life position. Saying, as Roe v Wade does, that an unborn baby is not a "legal person" and is not entitled to constitutional protection is the most unlibertarian statement imaginable. Libertarianism proclaims the primacy of the individual and does not strip anyone of 'person-hood.' Libertarianism protects constitutional rights for all. It does not strip anyone of them. Abortion is an assault on our common humanity. Medical science does not warrant it; reason does not suggest it; human decency does not condone it. As a libertarian, I am against government intrusion into the private lives of people; however, some government actions are legitimate. One of the legitimate roles of government is to protect life. SovereignJim, if someone harms you or kills you, the government will step in to protect you--or at least bring your killer to justice. It must do the same for the unborn person.
Personally I believe in education over legislation. A few years ago I was solidly in the pro-choice camp. I believed a woman should be allowed to have an abortion at any time on demand and I didn't have any moral issue with that.  But in recent years I have come to despise abortion. Several things moved me in that direction. First I saw pictures of aborted fetuses on the internet. These happened to be from late term abortions. I was shocked by it. I asked myself over and over if I supported what was depicted in those pictures and every time the answer came back; "No! I can't support that. It's hideous!" I'll spare you the details of what those pictures revealed, but if you want to see them you can google it.
Secondly my youngest daughter gave birth to twins a little over a year ago. Now don't misunderstand me there was never any danger of them being aborted. My daughter and her husband wanted and loved those babies long before they were born. But in the case of twins there are some complications that can occur that cannot happen with a single birth. Because of that possibility, the doctors ran many more ultrasound tests than they typically would. My wife and I were able to be present at some of them and my daughter gave us pictures from the rest. At first the fetuses look like beans, but at each successive test you can see more and more detail and their appearance becomes more and more human.  When you see those tiny lives developing in the womb that way the prospect of ending them becomes unthinkable. Today they're 15 months old and I think of them as precious little gifts from God. Now I wonder how anyone could consider snuffing out the life of any child before it could even draw it's first breath.
My point in all of that is that maybe we could reduce the number of abortions if more women had the same learning experiences that changed me. That might be more effective than arguing endlessly about whether abortion should be banned or not.
Posted By: Jahfre Fire Eater
Date: 2010-02-24 18:16:55
Hi SovereignJim,
 As a sovereign individual you can implement any abortion law you feel good about governing yourself with. :-)
I disagree and ask you for some kind of basis for your assertion that the abortion issue is " tearing the cohesion of our nation apart." It sounds more to me like it is tearing your cohesion apart. Now that you've put the issue to rest I guess we can all get on with our lives now. Good job.
Abortion is an example of an issue which causes people on both sides to abandon principles and adopt an "ends justifies the means" rationale that tends to escalate the tension as both sides struggle to gain cointrol of the bigger stick with which to club their opponents. Abortion isn't a magic issue, many issues cause people cast aside their principles in favor or their feelings.Â
What tears our country apart is the belief, by both sides, that law can be used to impose their morals on others who are outside your local community. If we follow the constitution and leave the people or the states to choose instead of pursuing a constitutional path to imposing one choice over another then everybody would win. People who want abortions to be legal can allow them in their state. People who want them illegal can outlaw them in their state. Doctors can move to states that match their views if they so desire. No one is forced and the tension is eliminated when people mind their own business and create a community they desire without trying to impose their choices on people outside their community. The reason issues like this tear at the cohesion of our nation is that they require that our constitution be turned from a protection of the people from the power of the government into a force against the people. Abortion, gay marriage, socialist welfare state programs and on and on are not magic issues, they simply all demand the destruction of our constitution to satisfy either side.Â
The rejections to my recommendations about abortion are of two types. First is that the condition we call life begins at conception and that all life must be protected. Nothing new here. Their old, old, single, simple logic debate point carried in their wagon to a discussion is all they have to argue with. I would not protest if their choice was established even though it will be under constant attack. Their argument seems to be stalled and going nowhere.
Â
The second type of protest is that the best solution is to make abortion a state by state debate with decision. Their debate wagon also has only one plank in it’s load. I have considerable sympathy with their position but consider the possibility of it happening close to nil.
Â
The arguments are being made against my proposal because it has no place in their opinion wagon. Both groups have closed minds exhibited by never arguing against a point made by an opposing view and only parroting their well worn existing positions. The essence of my recommendation is that we use a demonstrable existence of a beating heart as a sign of life as we use it’s absence as a sign of death---and that we then use that signal of life as a time point for changing the name for the consequence of pregnancy from fetus to child---and that we then provide the same protections we provide today to all children. Not a single reference about a beating heart or the logic that follows is made by the rejecters.
Â
The growing numbers against abortion comes from more people becoming aware of the pain being suffered by children not yet fully birthed. The reality of body parts being torn from a living thing and the resulting pain suffering is becoming well known. It is only a matter of time and public awareness that will someday cause a big change in the abortion issue.
Â
For the all or nothing first type of disagreement, agree with me and help to save more worthy lives than your current position will. For the better states decision supporters why not start to save lives now when you hopes are unlikely to ever to be fulfilled.
No time to write a lengthy article, but I was very disappointed that Sovereign Jim's was the article to lead opinion. Respectfully,,,he knows nothing.Â
Killing the unborn is NOT ours to compromise. Whether you kill the baby in the first trimester or the third trimester, you are still killing the same baby. Listening to him bat it back and forth on "which point in time is the permitted abortion cutoff time", is nothing less than DISTURBING.
The CHOICE is in the bedroom, not in the abortion clinic. SNAP OUT OF IT AMERICA !! Stop killing our children---Please.
The Spanish Community in America---reproducing at 5.1 children per couple.
The Muslim Community in America---reproducing at 8.3 children per couple.
American Couples---reproducing at 1.6Â children per couple (Does anybody have better numbers out there?)
But do the math--it will take a few short years to completely change the face of our ethnicity in America---especially if we continue to KILL millions of our children every year.
Jahfre Fire Eater--I loved what you said about returning the abortion question (along with gay marriage, et al) to the states. You are right on target with the best "libertarian" response! Although I'm prolife in sentiment, I don't believe in imposing my values on others. Roe v Wade should be stricken down and the question returned to the states. Let's roll!
Posted By: No Name Supplied
Date: 2010-03-02 13:25:32
I think the original point being made here is that the abortion question shouldn't be a question at all. The debate has been "when does life begin?" because once it has been established that someone is alive, their life is protected and cannot be terminated (as Americans we have that "pesky" Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness thing). I think the beating of a heart to mark the start of life is a brilliant observation - when someone's heart stops beating they are considered dead, so when a heart starts beating a baby should be considered alive. As a mom of two who had an early ultrasound with each pregnancy, I was able to see my babies hearts beating when they were only a couple weeks along. It is amazing! A baby's heart starts to beat 18 days after conception... that is only 4 days after the mother's missed period. That means most abortions take place well after the heart has started beating. I am not okay with giving the states the option to kill innocent little LIVING babies with beating hearts. These fetuses  should be afforded the same constitutional rights as a full term baby!
Want to comment on
this article? Leave your comment
here. Your email address is required to track your
comment. However, we will neither publish your email
address nor distribute it to other organizations or
persons. The only reason we might use it would be if
we needed to contact you regarding your comment. All
comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
