So what I have read the last like 2 weeks for Etymology has been extremely boring. It really has nothing deep to talk about and analyze, which is why, I would rather use the words (three weeks worth) to describe what I have read in the book I began reading for week 4. Quotes for it will be up probably tomorrow, but I still have math homework to finish tonight, not to mention spanish homework and debate things I need to do to prepare for tomorrows meeting. Which, by the way, if anyone who reads this wants to join the team it is not too late and if you are unable to come tomorrow, let me know and I can get you the paperwork.
I would also like to point out that if homework was not hard enough to complete on its own with after school activities, it is even harder with a 10 month old chocolate lab puppy who is constantly chewing on things that she is not supposed to like napkins and trash and the counter and the chairs, etc. To make matters worse, she is constantly jumping up on the table and counters to get things off of there. My advice, do not get a puppy unless you can hire a full time puppy sitter that will live with you to watch her while you do important things like homework and such.
Disclaimer: what you are about to read is very heavily pro-life and comes from Scott Klusendorf's The Case for Life. If you are not pro-life and do not wish to know this information, then stop reading now. If you are pro-life, I hope that this information will help you properly defend our stance
I had the opportunity to meet Scott Klusendorf over the summer. A little bit about him: He graduated from UCLA. He studied bio-ethics and Christian Apologetics at Biola University. He began his prolife work because he was an associate pastor who went to a prolife conference and there were 4 pastors versus the 100+ that would normally attend any other conference. He decided right then and there that he needed to do more to educate people about what abortion is and what it is doing to our nation. Although most of what I have read so far, I have read before in his book Pro-life 101 and learned at the summer camp that I went to over the summer. I also got the chance to meet Lila Rose, President of Live Action. She has gone to Planned Parenthoods across the nation to do undercover stings to expose the corruption within. I also had the chance to meet Paula Hughes because she came to declare her support for the camp that I went to
Anyway, Scott (I'm on a first name basis with him, so I will refer to him as such. I mean I spent an entire weekend with him.) claims that the unborn is human and provides arguments for any argument that a pro-life person might face. He claims that according to science, at the point of conception, the pre-born is no longer a gamete but instead a zygote that is a unique, whole, living human being. He also states that if we cannot prove yet that it is human that we should remain on the side of caution. He compares it to what we think could be a coat in the middle of the road or may be a homeless person. He says that people would swerve to not hit it just in case and that we should do the same for an unborn child. He also says that philosophically there is only 4 differences from the embryo that you were and the person you are today. These can be known from the acronym S.L.E.D. which stands for Size, Level of development, Environment, and Degree of dependency. He says that if size were what defines a person, then a short person is less of a person than a tall person. He points to the fact that a toddler is nowhere near as developed as a teenager, but we don't go around killing toddlers because they are not as developed as other persons. When you walk from one room to another, you do not turn into a dog. You are still human and you are still the same person that you were when you were in the other room. What is the difference from that to the 6-8 inches of the birth canal? Lastly, since when does dependency on another person make you less of a person? I still need my parents to pay for things, so does that mean I should die opposed to some college kid that can be completely independent?
One thing that I loved that he said was that you need to find common ground. Now I'm not sure if I would advise this, but it was funny and true. When someone says "I'm pro-choice" say "Really? Me too! I chose to wear this shirt. I chose to put my hair into a ponytail. However, I do not choose to kill unborn children."
I will now go through some of the common claims from pro-life.
The most common is that you will get people who will say "Why are you forcing your morality on me?" This is called relativism. There are 3 main problems with relativism. First and foremost, it is self refuting and commits intellectual suicide. Someone cannot say that you should not force your view upon others while they in that very act, are pressing their view that you should not force your view on others upon you.
Why would you feel the need to post a disclaimer because of your subject matter? Is this because you really believe that those of us who are pro-choice are really so uneducated? My comprehension of the facts is what helped me to form my pro-choice viewpoint. Also, you do not CHOOSE to have an abortion, which is what the pro-choice movement is all about. We want you to be able to make that choice, just as we want somebody to be able to make the opposite choice. The pro-choice movement's main goal is to allow everybody to weigh the options and choose what is best for their situation. If you want to raise a baby, that's great. If you want to give your child up for adoption, good for you. If you want to have an abortion, go right ahead. You can choose. You also mentioned that there were three main problems with relativism, but you only described one. I would like to know the other two before I attempt to discuss that aspect further.
ReplyDeleteLastly, I want to know what makes YOU pro-life. Not what you heard from Scott at "pro-life" camp and were taught to repeat verbatim. Not "Scott claims," or "Scott says," but what YOU think, what YOU say, and why YOU believe it.
I posted a disclaimer because this is for a class and I wanted to warn those who do read my blog because it is my classmates that I have to spend 45 min a day with. My disclaimer had nothing to do with the education of pro-choice people. I have friends who are pro-choice that are very educated people. The disclaimer was for one purpose and one purpose only, so I did not get in trouble for posting something on my blog for an English class.
ReplyDeleteI do, however, have to disagree when you say that you don't choose to have an abortion. Nothing forces you to abort a child. Sure there are obstacles, but I and Scott alike base our rational on the fact that it doesn't matter how a child comes to be, but what they are. People are put into other situations such as poverty and deaths of family members, and especially the latter, there is not an easy scapegoat as abortion has become for unplanned pregnancies. I think to an extent there should be options. I will admit that to an extent, some pro-lifers are hypocritical in the meaning that they want to make abortion illegal, yet they do not want to increase funding to social problems that factor into the decision to abort a child. I, however, believe in both. You are right! I only addressed 1 of the 3, which was unintentional. I had this in a draft and posted the incomplete draft versus the complete post I prepared. I will fix this as soon as I have some free time.
I grew up in a devotes Catholic family and I attended a catholic elementary and middle school. I had always learned to respect all forms of life.
In 8th grade, we watched a film, which I later learned was The Harder Truth. I couldn't believe that some people did that to a tiny baby that even I could see was indeed a baby. I then developed a passion for speaking up for those who cannot do it for themselves. I believe that human life begins at the moment of conception because at that point the sperm and egg are no longer sperm and egg or gametes. They join to form one and become a zygote. At which point, the only difference between the zygote and us would be the acroynym sled. I am not brainwashed into thinking this way. Instead, I went to the camp with the goal of learning how to do something for the pro-life movement. I came out instead with that and the connections within the pro-life community.
Also, I am posting from my iPod so it enjoys changing words that I type.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry; my sentence was not very well worded. By "you do not CHOOSE to have an abortion" I meant that you, personally, would not choose to have an abortion, but that is still entirely your choice. I in no way intended the meaning that people were forced into abortion.
ReplyDeleteAddressing your other points, I do not disagree that life begins at conception. That is a biological fact. I simply believe that a uterus-bearer should never be forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term because their rights are viewed as less important than the nonexistent rights that are being granted to fetuses in the “pro-life” movement. An unborn fetus does not have a “right to life” because rights are only given to those who have been born.
As to your comment that you speak up for those who cannot, of course a fetus cannot speak for itself. At the time of 80% of all abortions, the fetus is roughly the size of a kidney bean and does not have enough tissue in what will develop into their brain to know that they even exist. This is because a fetus is not a baby, it has the potential to become a baby, but in the first trimester, when the vast majority of all abortions take place, it is nothing more than a growing blob of cells in the vague shape of a mammal. This, of course, excludes late term abortions (commonly considered abortions after 21 weeks), which make up only 1.5% of all abortions and are almost always preformed for medical reasons.
I disagree that the only differences between a fetus and an infant can be described by the sled acronym. The differences hinge around societal dependence and physical dependence. An infant has societal dependence, meaning that they require a caregiver. However, a fetus has physical dependence, meaning that without the physical bond with the uterus-bearer it would not be able to continue the process of developing into a baby.
I like to describe it this way. There is a patient in acute kidney failure in a local hospital and they will die in a matter of days without a kidney transplant. Your kidney is the only match in the city and there is no time to locate any other matches. Somebody forces you to donate your kidney to this stranger. What if there are complications with the procedure? You might get fired for missing work due to recovery time. There will be the physical pain of the operation. Fortunately, you cannot be forced to donate your kidney to this person, even if it is the only thing that will save their life. In the case of a pregnancy, however, the uterus-bearer should be forced to house a developing life form in their body for nine months? The only difference between these situations is that in one situation there’s a “baby” and in the other there is somebody who has actually been born.
I also did not imply that you were “brainwashed.” I simply want to hear what you believe from you directly, not in Scott’s words. I think that if you are starting a Teens for Life club at your school and are putting your opinions online, you should be able to defend your beliefs yourself instead of letting somebody else’s words speak for you.