RE: Atheists, the death penalty and abortion...
March 14, 2013 at 4:56 am
(This post was last modified: March 14, 2013 at 4:59 am by EGross.)
Person comes from "persona", meaning a mask, from which a personality is expressed that identifies yourself as an individual.
Catholics also use "person" to express each part of the holy trinity - individual personalities, but the same substance.
But does a fertilized egg have a personality? A couple of years ago, in Mississippi, the extreme Right tried to pass a "personhood" law, stating just that - that a person is definied as a fertilized egg. It did fail to pass months later, since it's repercussions were well thought out. And the country mocked them, and by and large, the USA declared that a fertilized egg is not a person.
The way the "egg is a person" argument goes is like this: if a baby comes out of the womb, most will hold that it is a living person. So if so, then waht about one hour before, was it not a person? And the hour before that? And you go all the way back to a fertilized egg, which is the beginning. From that non-scientific argument, you have that very broad interpretation of "person".
But on the flip side, you have those who say that a fertilized egg is not a person, so it is ok to abort. What about an hour later? A day later? What about while the woman is in labor? What about after the baby is outside the womb?
And so you end up with both sides having a scale, with each individual having his or her own comfort level defined. And so you have the anti-abortion who says "No, in all cases!!! Well, except this one, that one...ok and that one". And then you have the pro-choice who goes "Yes!!! In all cases!!! Well, except that one, maybeee..." It used to be that abortion was always illegal, even at the cost of the mother's life. We have evolved from that perspective. Very few people would return to that day. Rape has been added to the discussion, which demonstrates the compassion of people.
But rather than extreme positions, there is a third path, a middle way, that nobody has yet to implement or even discuss. And you cannot have a discussion about abortion in some places, like you cannot have a reasonable discussion about guns in the USA. If you have the extremes making the decisions, they will never agree. Get the assholes out of the way, and reasonable people can succeed.
And as we see in this thread, a middle way would be very hard to acheive, never mind even talking about it.
Catholics also use "person" to express each part of the holy trinity - individual personalities, but the same substance.
But does a fertilized egg have a personality? A couple of years ago, in Mississippi, the extreme Right tried to pass a "personhood" law, stating just that - that a person is definied as a fertilized egg. It did fail to pass months later, since it's repercussions were well thought out. And the country mocked them, and by and large, the USA declared that a fertilized egg is not a person.
The way the "egg is a person" argument goes is like this: if a baby comes out of the womb, most will hold that it is a living person. So if so, then waht about one hour before, was it not a person? And the hour before that? And you go all the way back to a fertilized egg, which is the beginning. From that non-scientific argument, you have that very broad interpretation of "person".
But on the flip side, you have those who say that a fertilized egg is not a person, so it is ok to abort. What about an hour later? A day later? What about while the woman is in labor? What about after the baby is outside the womb?
And so you end up with both sides having a scale, with each individual having his or her own comfort level defined. And so you have the anti-abortion who says "No, in all cases!!! Well, except this one, that one...ok and that one". And then you have the pro-choice who goes "Yes!!! In all cases!!! Well, except that one, maybeee..." It used to be that abortion was always illegal, even at the cost of the mother's life. We have evolved from that perspective. Very few people would return to that day. Rape has been added to the discussion, which demonstrates the compassion of people.
But rather than extreme positions, there is a third path, a middle way, that nobody has yet to implement or even discuss. And you cannot have a discussion about abortion in some places, like you cannot have a reasonable discussion about guns in the USA. If you have the extremes making the decisions, they will never agree. Get the assholes out of the way, and reasonable people can succeed.
And as we see in this thread, a middle way would be very hard to acheive, never mind even talking about it.
“I've done everything the Bible says — even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff!"— Ned Flanders
