Column: Abortion takes away the right of millions to speak
We existed as a prosperous nation for quite some time under the banner of slavery, slavery of the African-American people.

The slavery that was once considered necessary is now undoubtedly declared evil. We wonder whether we're not experiencing something similar today. People said the economy would collapse without slavery; perhaps it did, but were human rights not more important than the economy? People ignored science and common sense. They consistently argued against all evidence that an African-American was not a human being because if it was affirmed that an African-American was human, all arguments for slavery would collapse. Foolishness was legislated through the Three-Fifths Compromise. Was this not similar to the Holocaust, when the Nazis used pseudo-science to convince so many that Jews were not human? We know that African-Americans and Jews are human beings, deserving of every right granted to any human.

Today, here in this nation and across the globe, we continue to defy science and common sense. Science has shown us the marvelous occurrences during the conception of a human life. Science has made it clear that conception marks the commencement of a new and unique life. This is not a matter of faith; it's a matter of science. And where there is human life there must exist human rights. Yet we continue to act ignorantly, not thinking through the implications of such logic. We are truly experiencing the slavery of our time, the mass denial of human rights to a group of people: the pre-born. More than 40 million pre-born humans, with legitimate human rights, have been killed by abortion in the U.S. since 1973.

We beseech you in urgency but not in hate. Just as the majority of slaveholders did not have malicious intent, nor do we believe abortion doctors, women who obtain abortions, or men who encourage abortions have malicious intent. But that fact does not make abortion legitimate or permissible. Just as slaveholders had to be stopped, so do those carrying out abortions. Just as economics clouded the truths of slavery, so it clouds the truths of abortion. Slavery was not an issue for only men to decide. Abortion is more than just a women's issue. For since we have allowed abortion to be a common occurrence, we've come to accept it. We realize this is sensitive, but truth must win out over sensitivity and political correctness.

Consider this: By our founder's standards, we have an illegitimate government. The purpose of the government is to protect its citizens. We live in a society today that kills unborn humans, entitled to natural rights. A society endorsed by its government. This is so much more than conventional politics; it's the largest human rights violation of our time. We must reconsider abortion in a new light, with a new seriousness.

It's easy to look at other nations and denounce them for their low value for human life. While there is truth here, we need to look at ourselves. If a human fetus is a human life, as science clearly proves, then that fetus has every entitlement to human rights, no matter what stage of development. It is a life, whole and unique. If this is true, what have we done?

1 | 2 | Next »

You might be interested in... Related Topics: rights, abortion, column
Posted by: Jesse at 10/28/08 To-Libs comin round the mountain Just a quick comment... 1) Our current president, though flawed in countless ways, did do something for our movement, he appointed 2 strongly pro-life justices to the supreme court. Overturning the laughable (if it wasn't so insane) decision of roe v. wade is the first step. 2) Even if you're correct on a few points that I know you're wrong on, this argument is still factually wrong. First off, you act as if any person lost in Iraq or Afghanistan died for nothing and totally unjustly; seemingly forgetting the genocide in one nation and extreme oppression of women (WOW, HOW RELEVANT) in the other nation. And so even if you are right in that assumption, it's hilarious that you'd compare the numbers. Because you couldn't be farther from 'correct'. Well over 40 million human fetuses aborted (to any logical and scientific person, that's 40 million human lives) in America alone ONLY since 1973. Hmm, check the math, I don't think you're numbers are correct on the numbers of deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. But I would like to thank you for admitting that Planned Parenthood has taken innocent lives, I appreciate the honesty. *I just had to correct this comment, please don’t turn this discussion into a commentary on Bush or the wars…thanks. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Desmond at 10/28/08 Taylor- Early on in your argument you note that "slavery was an atrocity meant with malicious intent." You further mentioned that they were a means of systematically killing off a race or group of people. This is a ludicrous argument. Slave holders owned slaves because they clearly benefitted from them, making their homes or farms more efficient; not out of malice or to kill off any particular race. It was the backwards public opinion and cultural moral norms that allowed slaveholders to convince themselves that slaves didn't deserve the same rights as all other humans. Precisely the same way that our society's public opinion has shifted to allow people to convince themselves that fetuses don't deserve the same rights as all other humans. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Pro Vida at 10/28/08 I would like to thank the authors of this article for an excellently presented opinion. Even if I were pro-abortion, I would have to think twice about the arguments they make. Science will never be able to "prove" whether a fetus is a person or not- it will always be an issue of semantics. But, since we are dealing with human life, we should give the situation the benefit of the doubt. There is no reason why, especially in this country, a woman should have to abort her child because she does not have the means to care for him or her. If we all put a little bit of effort into caring for human life, this could easily not be a problem. I encourage everybody at Tech to give the issue some thought and become active. The opportunities start here, right on campus. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Libs Comin Round The Mountain at 10/28/08 Thank god our president was pro-life...and did absolutely nothing for your movement. He took more innocent lives in two wars than all the Planned Parenthood clinics combined... Flag Abuse
Posted by: Disgusted Hokie at 10/28/08 Yes, I see that I forgot the "s" so save the inevitable, "who are you to judge when you can't even spell" arguments. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Digusted Hokie at 10/28/08 Oh my non-existent God. If these comments are any indication of the quality of students being admitted and the quality of education being provided at my alma mater then the entire admissions department and all of the faculty should be fired, and the university re-named Liberty University Southwest. Wow. So much for the so-called liberal indoctrination theory. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Reese at 10/28/08 Fertility doctors are high priests...for $5,000 a pop Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at 10/28/08 If conception is so sacred how come many couples need fertility drugs and doctors for it to even occur. Sometimes there are too many "conceptions" (multiples) that a couple must "quietly" reduce the number for the health of the mother. Let's not kid ourselves about who's playing God with both fertility drugs and contraceptives Flag Abuse
Posted by: Pro-Life @ VT Without Exception at 10/28/08 @ Heather. Did you ever think and realize that is the same people that support abortion and shirking responsibilities that have created a generation of "men" that feel no obligation to provide for their offspring and the women they impregnate. If a woman can kill her unborn child to avoid caring for it, who is to say he CAN'T avoid his obligations to his child also. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Pro-Life @ VT Without Exception at 10/28/08 @ Heather. Did you ever think and realize that is the same people that support abortion and shirking responsibilities that have created a generation of "men" that feel no obligation to provide for their offspring and the women they impregnate. If a woman can kill her unborn child to avoid caring for it, who is to say he can avoid his obligations to his child also. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at 10/28/08 I have an easy way to settle this. If a woman wants to be selfish and take the life of another, then she should have to suffer also. I suggest all abortions be carried out with steel-toed boots, baseball bats, and coat hangars. Then maybe women wouldn't go around sitting on every piece of meat after happy hour at tots. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Taylor at 10/28/08 Also on a side note, look at the rising cost of birth control. Once again the republicans are making it so that women can't afford to protect themselves against unwanted pregnancies. These are the same people who are trying to put harsher stipulations on abortion. This in essense is making it so that women are deemed as nothing more than baby producers. Have we not learned anything from history. If women have harder times getting access to birth control and/or abortions, once again unsafe measures will happen again. Did anyone stop and think about that for a minute? The back alley abortions and the use of coat hangers? Or is everyone too busy thinking about an embryo or fetus that has not even so much as taken a breath of air. Did anyone think about post-pardum depression? How mothers have killed their children because it. Or did you happen to think about during the late 80s and 90s when so many babies were thrown into dumpsters by teenage mothers who didn't want them. Clearly not. Take a minute and think about all that, before making your arguments. I applaude every woman who had made strides to help keep women safe with their reproductive choices. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Taylor at 10/28/08 Hmmmm I find that highly unlikely unless they have that much money to blow every month on one. To be pro-choice is to be able to allow a woman, such a right to choose. It's in no way saying that someone has to have one if they get pregnant but the options are there. Unlike being pro-life which states you get knocked up you have to take it term. S----e---x--- does have consequences, but not just pregnancy, also STD's. Maybe if our dear president would stop pushing so much for abstinence only in schools and actually teach about contraception this could be avoided. However that's not the case, and the fetus is in no way viable within the first trimester, therefore making the argument for humans rights null and void. As the old saying goes, don't judge me until you've walked a mile in my shoes. Until a man can have to suffer the repercutions of a broken condom, missed pill, rape, or other such events there's really no need for them to be telling me what rights I have over my own body. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Taylor at 10/28/08 Dear Jesse, Way to be completely patronizing. Figures. But the facts still remain that this is a women's rights issue. Something that cannot affect men's bodies because of the fact that they don't have to carry the fetus for nine months. To compare abortion to slavery is probably the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Oh and guess what, I'm black. Slavery and the Holocaust were both attrocities meant with mallicious intent. They were a systematic attempt to control others of a lesser race, to kill them off because they wanted to and knew ahead of time that it was wrong and still did it. Abortion cannot be compared to that. Clearly the authors have not read a single thing about the remorse that women have had over making such a decision, but it was one that was needed to be done. Also it's not one that is typically done without thought. A woman has to think about how this is going to effect her health, ability to procreate later on, and how it's going to affect her financial situation. Abortions are not cheap, my dear Jesse. Feel free to go and do research on the costs. This goes along with saying that women will use it as a form of birth control. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Fetal Holocaust at 10/27/08 I agree with anonymous below...let the liberals keep killing their reinforcements! Flag Abuse
Posted by: for logic, truth, and love at 10/27/08 This is a plea. Abortion has become ingrained as a woman’s rights issue and to speak of ending abortions sounds regressive of the entire women’s rights movement. This is obviously a sensitive and important issue and I try to treat it as such. It is difficult to looks past abortions a woman’s right and see it as human rights. There is a point where the rights and freedoms of others collide with the safety and rights of another. Abortion is such an issue. Women fought and pressed so hard for their rights that it infringed on the rights of others, the unborn. We cannot use our bodies to the extent that its hurts, or in this case kills another. Freedom means nothing if it is used in destruction of another. As a woman, I hail these four men for their beliefs, devotion, and love to the born and unborn. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Interesting at 10/26/08 Dear Jesse - I am sorry my comment was upsetting to you, but you misunderstood it (or, more likely, I was not clear enough). My comment did not endorse (or condemn) abortion. Nor did it aim to justify abortion on the basis that it could not be prevented. I only argued that it is beneficial to separate an academic issue of abortion morality from a pragmatic question of abortion prevention. Countries that have (or had) abortion bans teach us that overturning Roe vs. Wade is not a solution. To prevent abortions other paths are needed. Your message suggests that you do not seem to care if the solution works as long as we act somehow. Well, to use your imperfect analogy, we should wonder whether the slavery could have been abolished in a peaceful manner (this is a pragmatic question independent of morality). And what I meant by the “pro-life crowd” (I should have been explicit rather than implicit there) are people who mix morality and practicality: pontificating editorial writers who offer no pragmatic solutions, those who think that overturning Roe vs. Wade will stop abortions, or those who picket abortion clinics with “baby killers” signs to earn afterlife brownie points. Those have not, to my knowledge, prevented any abortions. My comments were meant to be constructive. Clearly, I failed. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/26/08 And also, you portray Planned Parenthood is somehow the savior of children. I’m sure they have saved many by helping young expecting mothers. But they have also been the largest provider of teen abortions for a long time…so we can safely assume their hands have killed several millions. And not to mention the extremely racist history of Planned Parenthood. But I’m not surprised that’s not widely known. “I am holding my breath to see one abortion prevented by the pro-life crowd.” Wow! For one, I’m amazed at such ignorance. The rest of you should be equally amazed. For one, how dare this writer ignore the wonderful and vast work of pro-life pregnancy centers throughout this nation that help young women choose life for their children every day! They provide counseling, baby supplies, financial aid, etc. How DARE this person ignore the work they’ve done and the abortions prevented and lives they have saved, not to mention how much they’ve helped young women actually work through their problems. And legislatively, there have been restrictions put on abortions throughout the states since roe v. wade such as parental notification, parental consent, term limits, etc. And to assume these laws pushed by the pro-life movement have not prevented one abortion is utterly preposterous. This person, writing under ‘interesting’ made some of the most false and outrageous comments I’ve heard since this debate started and should be ashamed of them. Thank you Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/26/08 This is outrageous in principle. Sure, the north should’ve done all it could to lessen the needs for southern slaves, and helped to better educate the south. BUT THAT IS NOT GOING FAR ENOUGH! SOMETHING LIKE SLAVERY OR ABORTION MUST BE OUTLAWED IN ADDITION TO ALL THE ACTIONS THAT WILL LESSEN PEOPLE’S WANT/NEED FOR IT! (continue reading above) Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/26/08 To interesting – Even if it is true that an abortion ban would not be totally effective, or if it would negative effects, does not justify condoning the action of abortion if it is the killing of a human life. This is obvious. To say bad things will result from a just action is no reason not to be just. There is plenty we can/should do to lessen the need/want of women to obtain abortions. The pro-life movement has not been as vocal on this as they should be, not nearly. We can improve education, reduce poverty, make our streets safer, etc. But it cannot stop there. For this is akin to saying…ok nation, we need to reduce the need for southern slaves. We need to subsidize cotton farmers, encourage the freeing of slaves, better southern education, but to outlaw slavery is going to far. We can’t impose our moral views on southern slave owners. If we do, bad things could happen, heck, a war may even result. I know we think it’s obvious that slaves (African-Americans) are people, but the slave-owners aren’t convinced. So let’s get moving and reduce the southerners need for slaves! (continue reading above) Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/26/08 I say this is possibly the most dangerous assumption in the history of the world. Because guess what, even if you call the percentage chance 50/50, there’s a 50% chance we’ve killed almost 50 million unborn humans in this nation ONLY since 1973, and millions more worldwide. And on this path, we’ll do it all over again in the next 35 years. This is a risk I am not willing to take, and you should not be wiling either. But even as that chance is a ridiculous one to take. Please, come to terms with science. It’s becoming clearer and clearer that a fetus is a human life, right from conception. When people cite that it’s a tragedy when the fertilized egg is not implanted or when a miscarriage is had…they are right. But WE did not voluntarily do that, it was a natural death…something to be mourned, but cannot be legislatively fought against, unlike abortion, a direct act carried out by a person against another person. We do have a choice. We can ignore that a fetus is a human, and continue the slaughter, making false arguments so we can sleep at night, or we can accept the truth, how things really are, and change things. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/26/08 Brad – You are very right in saying that all my arguments hinge on the fact that a fetus is a human life. Let’s consider. In most of pregnancy, nearly all agree that the fetus is a human life. In the earlier stages of pregnancy, it is not quite as obvious to a un-enhanced eye, but biologically, it IS a human life. All agree is it alive…so what else is it? A dog life? A cat life? A fungi? A parasite? NO. It was a human egg, and human sperm! If we agree that it’s alive, but not human, what are we even talking about?! Of course it’s human life. But ok, you and others can choose to remain ignorant and say…well, I’m still not totally convinced that it’s human life. Ok. Then again, like the authors of this piece have already said…Everyone is willing to say it MIGHT be human life. So it might be human life…and we are seriously willing to ASSUME it is not and allow full abortion rights. Just because we’re not sure, we will assume it’s not? This is ridiculous. (READ ABOVE TO CONTINUE) Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/26/08 Taylor – Sure, you’re right. We shouldn’t discuss social issues. Memo to everyone: Taylor thinks we should not be discussing this or anything else. Apparently it’s just too much trouble, and it may inconvenience Taylor, so we should stop. No matter that millions may be affected; it’d be better to keep quiet. Thanks Kyle Flag Abuse
Posted by: Kyle Minor at 10/26/08 Right, because the intellectaully superior position to take is that men aren't entitled to opinions. Thats as bogus as claiming that whites aren't entitled to opinions on the rights of blacks, that the rich aren't entitled to opinions on the rights of the poor, and that the strong aren't entitled to opinions on the rights of the weak. There are a lot of arguments in favor of abortion which make sense. . . I wish Taylor and her like-minded brethren would stick to those, instead of attempting to place some sort of cap on thought. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Taylor at 10/25/08 Of course this article would be written by three men and only one woman, because clearly men know oh so much about what it's like to be a pregnant woman. There's no reason why we should have a bunch of men in office making decisions on WOMEN'S reproductive organs. Until we can do the same for you, it's better to keep articles like this out of the newspaper and just kept in your close minded households. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Interesting at 10/24/08 An interesting thread, but it appears to mix two unrelated issues: morality of abortion and abortion ban. Many postings seem to equate the two. However, if one feels that abortions should be prevented, a feasible proposal should be put forward. Data from countries that had, or currently have, abortion-restricting laws suggest that abortion bans do not work (if anything, they make things worse). There were posts below that noted that, but (sadly) most anti-abortion comments are akin to the pontificating editorial that started it all: a self-righteous call to action that is bound to do more damage than help. Are those folks naive or do they act so to feel good about themselves? The much maligned Planned Parenthood have already saved many babies by providing education, support, etc. I am holding my breath to see one abortion prevented by the pro-life crowd. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at 10/24/08 I tried to write the word s-e-x in a comment but i was told "your comment contains an innapropriate word: s-e-x. Seriously????? All I wanted to say was I like the quote from the article "we cannot compromise human lives for our s-e-xual desires" Flag Abuse
Posted by: Mark at 10/24/08 To Think before you open your mouth - "The government has no place in between a woman’s legs. Nor our sheets for that matter…" Since you claim this, then how did the U.S Supreme Court get involved in abortion in the first place? Isn't the court part of the Judicial Branch of the GOVERNMENT? Flag Abuse
Posted by: Mark at 10/24/08 To Heather - women, both the unborn and born STILL DIE from Legal abortion. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Mark at 10/24/08 To Brad, take a biology course and you get answers to all your questions on the fertilized egg and human life. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at 10/24/08 babies are fun! Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at 10/24/08 Lets have a little faith in humanity people. I'm the product of rape and I thank my mother and God everyday for my chance to live. Yeah, my mother's life was turned upside down but she unselfishly gave me the chance I deserved as a human being. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Kyle Minor at 10/24/08 So to whom, Brad, do we give the benefit of the doubt? And under what circumstances? We can cloud the discussion with disagreements over assumptions all we want (and they are certainly philosophically important points to raise), but at some point we have to come to a conclusion as to why, ethically, it is or is not appropriate to abort a child (or fetus, if you prefer) at a certain point. Do motivations play into account? That is, would it be ethically acceptable for a woman to abort a fetus 'cuz she didn't feel like dealing with it?' Or should there be some other ethical paradigm measuring the decision? I'd argue that the discussion in our society has moved past the stage of outlawing all abortions under any circumstance (at least for a clear majority) and has moved on towards a discussion of 'under what circumstances.' Flag Abuse
Posted by: Brad at 10/24/08 Jesse, every one of your arguments has hinged on the assumption that a fetus is a human life at the instant of conception. That's it. Every other argument after that does not matter. The disagreement most people have is with that one point. It is far from scientific fact that a fertilized egg is a HUMAN life. Sure, it may be alive, and I'm willing to concede that it may be a human life... but I don't know that for sure, and neither do you from science. Maybe you know it for sure through your religion- which should not be legislated. This is why the abortion debate NEVER gets anywhere. There is an axiomatic difference over something that hasn't been proven one way or another. Any argument that goes beyond that point is a straw man argument on either side. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/24/08 to the most recent anonymous post - totally ridiculous, and totally unhelpful in a serious discussion. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at 10/24/08 seeing as how many of the people who get abortions consider themselves to be liberal or free-spirited sorts of people who don;t want to be tied down by a child, the republicans ought to be happy that there aren't 40 million more democrat voters running around there right now, or obama would be winning by a landslide and people like rush limbaugh and sean hannity would never have been given a chance to be who they are. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jane S at 10/24/08 To Really, are you sure you cannot compare abortion to slavery? Not so long ago it was the SLAVEHOLDERS RIGHT TO CHOOSE whether a slave lived or died, was freed or bound for life. Why the hell should the government be able to tell the slaveholder what to do with his property, his livelihood. Would you rather a slave be thrust into an inner city that is unprepared or unwilling to take care of him? So that he never would have the life his owner should have been able to provide? I don't understand how you believe that would be fair. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at 10/24/08 Maybe that potential child raised in an "unprepared household" could become the next president, ceo, or cancer curing doctor. Or maybe the potential mom was too lazy to buy a condom. But hey, we live in a country where we don'thave to account for our actions, so who cares? Flag Abuse
Posted by: really at 10/24/08 I get the feeling it wasn't only myself who was outraged by this article. Yes i realize it's an opinion article, but i find it somewhat humorous that four males are trying to argue about abortion. Is it only me that thinks that it is a WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE. Why the hell should the government be able to tell me what i can do with my body. Your use of comparisons of abortion to slavery and the holocaust were ludicrous. Would you rather a child be raised in a household unprepared or unwilling to take care of it? So that it would never have the life that its parents should have been able to provide? I don't understand how you believe that would be fair. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Kyle Minor at 10/23/08 See, Heather, the problem with your argument (and it is the one often most vociferously advanced by the pro-choice lobby) is that it says absolutely nothing about 'abortion on demand.' Certainly the more sympathetic pro-lifers can at least understand why a woman who has suffered a rape, or who is faced with a life-or-death decision, might want to entertain the option of abortion. The problem is, most abortions in this country are carried out because the mother straight up just doesn't feel like having the kid. That's a different sort of ethical question - and that's why the debate over abortion availability (rights are very specific things - abortion is a service provided by someone else, and you aren't ever entitled to someone else's service 'just cuz') is so contentious. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Hokie at 10/23/08 Brilliant article. This represents my beliefs almost exactly; but I have one question. When you say "Science has made it clear that conception marks the commencement of a new and unique life. This is not a matter of faith; it's a matter of science." Where is the proof that human life is formed at birth? URL? If there is real scientific evidence of human life at conception from a respected organization, I don't see how the Supreme Court could uphold Roe v. Wade. It would be murder, with far more deaths involved in this massacre then all US war casualties combined. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Tom L at 10/23/08 Abortions have consequences for the mother. It often is a surgical procedure, after all. Remember the part where back-alley abortions result in the death of the mother? Is that not a sufficient reason to consider them a problem and work to render them unnecessary? (Rather than the simplistic response of rendering them illegal)? Oh, except for emergency contraception, where the effect is rather like extreme menstruation. In which case you want to cite the existence of a "person" that literally can't be seen without a microscope. You cite science catching up to morality. You would do well to consider the physical reality of early term gestation. There is no actual person there. Only a -potential- person. You are violating the rights of a real live woman in order to give rights to someone who as yet does not exist. Your priorities would go well on the far side of Alice's looking glass. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at 10/23/08 Sounds like you should take a self-defense class Heather. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Heather at 10/23/08 It's easy to forget that before abortion became legal, it resulted in women DYING. That is what is at stake here. Until men stop assaulting my body by putting themselves inside it, and until men step up to do their part to raise the children of this country, I will fail to understand any reasonable argument against the legality of abortion. Should death be the consequence of an unwanted assault on my body? You stop your assaults and I'll stop getting pregnant. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jenna at 10/23/08 Here's the thing, lads. The second you can remove that fetus from my body without any more discomfort or inconvenience than a surgical or medical abortion and let me sign away all rights and responsiblities towards said fetus, you are welcome to ban abortion. Until then, I have a right to say what can and cannot live off of or in my body. None of you have the right to drop by and hook yourself up to a supply of my blood or glucose or any other part of myself without my consent. In fact, I daresay that if I, needing a liver or kidney, forced you to donate one to me to save my life, you'd howl about how you'd been violated. Yet you are perfectly willing to force women to let a fetus use their body and to take away any choice she has in the matter. The right of life for a human cannot come at cost of another's body without that other's consent. If you choose to bear a child, kudos to you! You've made a difficult and dangerous and brave choice. I, however, won't make the same choice, and I'll be damned if the gov't forces me to do so. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Joseph at 10/23/08 But the fact of the matter is, Jesse, the President nominates the Supreme Court justices, who sit for life. They won't die off or retire quickly enough for any conservative president and mostly conservative senate to choose enough new justices who will overturn the decision. It's just not going to happen.So the best thing to do to prevent abortions is to promote contraceptives and non-abstinence-only education. I'm pro-life. But I recognize that it will not be made illegal and so take more realistic steps to stop it from happening. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/23/08 Joseph - I understand your cynicism. I do. But the fact is, the supreme court hangs in the balance, and that is where Roe v Wade will be overturned. If one pro-choice judge is replaced with a pro-life judge, we have it, that's all it takes, we'll have 5 strong anti-abortion judges. We must change the attitudes toward abortion in this country. This happens top-down (through overturning roe v wade and other govt measures) but also bottom-up (by slowly convincing people of the pro-life position, probably what the authors of this article were hoping to do. The battle must be fought on both fronts, which is why individual conversations are key, but also presidential selections are key. Abortion is a 'wedge' issue, unfortunately...but it's not taken as seriously as it should be. It is, without questions, the biggest human rights violation we've ever seen in this world. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Joseph at 10/23/08 What pro-lifers and pro-choicers alike need to understand is this: No presidential hopeful is ever going to touch Roe v. Wade. It's not going to change or become illegal. Abortion has become a butterfly net to catch simple-minded voters in. My mother, for example, thinks Obama has better ideas about all the issues, but she won't vote for him because he "supports the murder of infants." Grow up and look at all the issues, and vote for whatever you feel is the lesser of two evils. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/23/08 Maggie... Well I'm pretty sure there would be quite the outcry if we started killing illegal immigrants by the millions and reasoned it by saying their not covered under the 14th amendment. What do you think? We're the most powerful nation in the world. We have (or should have) an obligation to help obvious human rights violations...darfur being one of these. We should be helping far more than we already are. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Maggie at 10/23/08 From the 14th amendment, section 1: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." Therefore, the US government has no obligation to protect a fetus. It's not born, it's not a citizen, so it's entitled to all the US protection that - oh, say, an illegal immigrant, or someone living in Darfur - is. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/23/08 With all due respect – All this talk about the rights of the woman not having to carry a child…I sympathize. But let’s think about this in a different way. For a moment…assume we know that the fetus is a human life, it is alive (which I believe we already know). So, why is it we consider that in the womb, the baby is such a burden upon the mother, but once it is born, it somehow ceases to be a burden. Listen, we all know that parents (mothers included) are required by law to take care of their children after birth, until age 18. What does this entail? It entails a burden on the body of the mother and father in terms of providing for the child, whether it be food, shelter, clothing, etc. There is a burden on the mother before birth and after birth. So if we know that the child is alive both in the womb and after the womb, why is it we only speak of a woman being burdened only while the child is in the womb? She’s also burdened after the baby is born, just in different ways. Knowing this, when we re-consider the argument that woman has a right not to be burdened, we can assume that a mother should also be able to kill her child after birth. We, and our society, have falsely placed the point of birth as when responsibility starts. We need to re-align our thinking. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/23/08 To Anon e. mouse – While I see the Nazi parallel weakening the argument the authors made, you’re saying that does not inherently discredit their argument. And what the authors were trying to say is, we already know the status of a fetus…IT IS ALIVE. The gender is decided at conception, a heartbeat follows soon after, and brain waves next. It already is known, let’s stop pretending otherwise. And if we’re seriously unsure, are we really willing to RISK THAT WE MAY BE KILLING MILLIONS OF HUMANS??? The authors already made this point, it’s unfortunate that people have basically bypassed it. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/23/08 Also anonymous – The argument of ‘if you don’t like abortions, don’t get one’, is outrageous, and I’m sure you know this deeper down. Because again ride with me for a moment and assume an abortion is the death of a human life. It would be very close to a slavery situation, and during the civil war, the war was fought over this very question. And the argument of ‘if you don’t like slavery, don’t own a slave’ did not fly. We’ve already solved this issue. Don’t fool yourself. People tell people how to live ALL THE TIME! This example is no different. You may want to steal and murder, but the law is telling you how to live by not allowing those things. You may want to rape and pillage, but you’re not allowed by the government. People tell people how to live ALL THE TIME. This argument is patently foolish. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/23/08 To anonymous – I sincerely hope you’re not serious about your argument of ‘feeling pain’. So what you’re telling me is, if a human being cannot feel pain, it’s ok/moral/valid to hurt them or take their life? So a man that falls into a coma after being involved in a car accident…he cannot feel, let’s kill him…what do you think? Let’s take a quadriplegic. They cannot feel most of their body, so is it ok to kill them, or hurt them? Even more extreme…a man is standing with his back towards you, and you hit him in the head with a lead pipe killing him instantly, he felt no pain and has not knowledge of what happened, does that make it fine? And on your second point, about fighting the measles. Great idea, let’s get people involved in that. But ride with me for a second and assume abortion is the taking of a human life. We cannot forsake this arena totally for the arena of measles. These two problems must be fought simultaneously. We cannot ignore one injustice and just focus in another. Also, there’s a distinct difference between fighting illness, which people are not responsible for creating, and something like abortion, where humans are perpetrating the act, and it can be easily stopped. There’s a much more human role in one of these situations than the other. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/23/08 To ‘think before you open your mouth’ – It’d be great if you’d listen to your own advice. The age-old argument of keeping abortion legal because outlawing it would not completely rid ourselves of it is unbelievably stupid. The question is what we allow our law to condone. Of course drugs are still used. Guess what, murder is outlawed, but we still have some murder…maybe we should legalize murder? How does that sound? The effectiveness of a ban on abortion is not really the question here, that question comes later. What must initially be decided is what our government condones. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/23/08 To Jeremy Baker – Of course we need to consider quality of life after birth. This is obvious. This has been a long time pro-choice argument; that pro-lifers don’t care about people after birth. It’s 1) not true and 2) not a valid argument for supporting abortion rights. The fact is, whatever the quality of life after birth, life should not be denied on any grounds, whether before birth or after birth. And as for speaking of it in terms of state’s rights…if the authors are correct that abortion is like slavery, do you think slavery should return to being a state’s rights position? We already fought a war over this, remember? Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/23/08 To one argument that claims we must choose between higher crime and legal abortion: Not to be offensive, but this logic makes me laugh. So basically we all acknowledge that in any person, born or unborn, there’s a possibility of harm to come from them. Crime would be one of those ways. So am I hearing that because there’s bad potential in people, they should be exterminated on that possibility of badness or harm? By this logic, people should be done away with in general, because all have to potential to commit heinous crimes. Or perhaps this arguer is suggesting that we should select the most likely people that may be criminals in the future, and exterminate them. Either way, it’s outrageous to even suggest that because crime may result from unborn children when they grow up, it’s valid/reasonable/permissible to end their life. Once again, because the fetus is human life, this argument collapses. You say we should choose…sure, I’ll choose. No question, I choose the possibility of crime over killing unborn humans, end of story. And I know the article you're referring to, written about 20 years after Roe v. Wade. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jesse at 10/23/08 I'd like to address a few of the arguments I've read here. First off, I think it unfortunate that I’m hearing the same common illogical arguments that I think the authors of the article had hoped to avoid. But nonetheless, let me attempt to shed some light. (A series of notes will follow) Flag Abuse
Posted by: Grr at 10/23/08 I have to admit that this article made me incredibly angry. Intensely angry. Can't quite get over how angry it made me... Still, I’ll try to be civil. I respect the opinion that life begins at conception, but the idea that you could say that that's the only valid opinion supported by science and that everyone else is just deluding themselves to justify murder - it's insanely offensive. Obviously there's still debate going on in both the scientific field and the moral field and it's purely self-serving to just hold your own side up as the premature victor. Since that’s still undecided, I think it’s pretty clear that we should side with the person who no one doubts is alive – the woman. It’s her body and she shouldn’t be forced to share it with another being if she doesn’t want to. Honestly, I believe that’s true whether you consider it alive or not. A woman should not be forced to sacrifice herself for the life of another. It’s noble if she chooses to, but the choice should be hers. Flag Abuse
Posted by: really at 10/23/08 I get the feeling it wasn't only myself who was outraged by this article. Yes i realize it's an opinion article, but i find it somewhat humorous that four males are trying to argue about abortion. Is it only me that thinks that it is a WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE. Why the hell should the government be able to tell me what i can do with my body. Your use of comparisons of abortion to slavery and the holocaust were ludicrous. Would you rather a child be raised in a household unprepared or unwilling to take care of it? So that it would never have the life that its parents should have been able to provide? I don't understand how you believe that would be fair. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Just Another Anon at 10/23/08 Kyle, unfortunately you're missing the point of his argument. His argument does not attempt to address ethics. He is trying to point out how silly it is to assume a zygote is alive. The problem you and all the other pro-lifers have is that you just assume you know when life starts which is plainly false as Anonymous's argument suggests. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Kyle Minor at 10/22/08 There's a fallacy in your argument, anonymous. . . in that you attempt to frame the discussion in a manner other than which it has already been framed. Look, the consternation over abortion has to do with the fact that abortion is an inherently VOLUNTARY act - nobody 'accidentally' aborts a child. Things can happen to cause the child's development to cease, or to cause the woman miscarry - but more often than not, these are unintentional occurrences which occur naturally. One way of looking at failed implementation is as a natural progression of chance - by chance, the egg was fertilized, and also by chance the fertilized egg failed to properly set itself up for further growth. There's nothing malicious going on here. Abortion, to contrast, is a purely voluntary action. That's why the debate is different than the one you seem to want to have. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at 10/22/08 You have claimed that "conception marks the commencement of a new and unique life" and that this is "a matter of science." A zygote is the cell resulting from fertilization. Scientific research suggests that between 50% and 70% of zygotes either fail to implant, or, of those that do implant, are miscarried by the sixth week after the woman’s last menstrual period. If you think about this “logically”, you should see this as a humanitarian disaster of gargantuan proportions, many times worse than abortion. Perhaps you should refocus your efforts. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Kyle Minor at 10/22/08 But that's just the thing - it's an opinion column. The authors have an opinion, and they present it as is their right. The fact that people disagree with it doesn't mean that it's an invalid opinion to hold - and it doesn't (or at least ought not) take away from their right to express it. At the end of the day, the only person who can make decisions regarding yourself is. . . .yourself. This goes for legal and illegal actions alike, of course - plenty of people, for instance, smoke pot despite the fact that it isn't legal to do so. Also, make sure not to confuse discussions of legality (which this is not) with discussions of ethics (which this is). Laws are a construction of societies which facilitate the abilities of people to interact on some sort of common footing. Ethics is different - perhaps socially constructed and perhaps not, ethics discusses what should and should not be assessed as the 'correct' way of making choices. You might disagree with the ethical conclusions the authors make, but that doesn't mean that the debate isn't worth having. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at 10/22/08 Please tell me you're joking Penny. I'm not saying that Jonathon or anyone else can't hold an opinion and live with it, but I am asking for them to refrain from telling others how they should live. While I do not think there is anything inherently wrong with having an abortion, I also respect that other people do feel it is wrong and would object. I would not force them to have an abortion, and likewise they should not have the ability to tell me not to. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Penny at 10/22/08 Anonymous & Wesley: You have both made claims against people voicing their disagreements. Wesley, these authors "have no obligation or authority to jam [their] beliefs down [your] throat." You may be right, but you just did the same thing. You forced your belief on them, the belief that they shouldn't impose their beliefs on you. What authority do you have to do that? It's contradiction and holds no water. I hope you're breathing all right with all these beliefs down your throat. Anonymous, you're doing the same thing. Did you just dictate your way of life via "comment"? How else would we have heard the solutions to having a better world to live in? Authors...Thanks for not sounding like jerks in your article. It seems you were successful in motivating at least some thought on quite a range of topics, which is refreshing. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anon E. Mouse at 10/22/08 The strength of an argument is inversely proportional to the amount of time it takes for a comparison to Nazism. Seeing as how you couldn't even make it past the first paragraph without such a comparison it seems that your argument is extremely weak. In fact the article is almost completely filled with empty rhetoric designed to take a complex issue and turn it into "You don't want to be one of them Nazi's do ya?!". With four writers contributing I would have hoped for some strong objective viewpoints, but you came up with only one: "The definition of life both beginning and end is not exact". Since that is your one interesting point then the rebuttal is simply this: In an uncertainty of the existence of life and therefore the appropriation of rights: between two entities should we give preference to the one we know has rights (the mother) or the one that might have rights if it was alive (the fetus)? To make it even more clinical: Does the government have the right to force a host to allow a parasite feed off of it? Flag Abuse
Posted by: Scott D. at 10/22/08 If abortions are so bad, why hasn't any government invested billions of dollars into preventing the many millions of spontaneous abortions? What of the woman, does she surrender all rights to her body once pregnant? If abortions are illegal, should the sentence for having one be the same as if the woman committed murder? Flag Abuse
Posted by: Chris Emory at 10/22/08 My view is pretty simple. Abortion is not a simple issue with a simple solution. If a simple solution is not the answer, then the government is the last thing we want trying to solve the "problem." Gov't is definitely not going to get a complex issue right. Flag Abuse
Posted by: hokie girl at 10/22/08 Interesting how this article and all of the comments written are from MEN... Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at 10/22/08 Hey Jonathon, if you don't agree with abortions, then don't get one...but don't tell other people that they can't get one just because you disagree with it. Perhaps if everyone on the planet spent half the energy they expend telling others how they ought to live their lives focusing inwardly on themselves and living the kind of life they would want, without dictating it to others, we might actually have a better world to live in. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jonathan Daugherty at 10/22/08 Thank you for this column. I hear every word you’re saying and I fully agree. Since every comment on here has been negative (except perhaps the second one which makes no sense) I’ll be the first to say thank you and amen. Unfortunately you are shouting into the darkness, a darkness that is much darker than you can imagine. I will not respond to the previous comments because that is like throwing pearls before swine. The commentators have already brushed aside logic, reason, and a concept of right and wrong, and have taken the position that the debase mind will naturally take. The best you can do for them is pray for their souls and minds and continue to fight them in the voting booth. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Reproductive Rights at 10/22/08 Reproductive Rights are called that for a reason. Just as the government can no longer sterilize people deemed undesirable (the disabled, mentally ill, etc), they can't force women to carry through with unwanted pregnancies. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Anonymous at 10/22/08 The difference is that slavery involves human beings that can feel pain. Science shows that a fetus can't even feel pain until at least the 24th week. Here's an interesting fact: it costs less than $1 to vaccinate against the measels. Yet the measels remains a leading cause of death in small children. If you want to save lives, donate money to the Measels Initiative, which urgently needs money to reach its 2010 goal. I envision a world where measels could be the next smallpox - effectively eradicated. But I guess some people would rather spend their time and money fighting abortion. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Wesley at 10/22/08 It is time for people in this country to stop shoving their "morals" down the throats of those around them. While no religious argument was offered by the authors, I'm quite certain that their religious beliefs have contributed to the extreme, nonsensical bias in this article. I humbly submit to you that it does not matter whether "human" life begins at conception or not. It is obvious that life begins at this point, but is a single-celled or an eight-celled being really human? If that is the case, then every multi-cellular organism should be treated with the same respect. Is it immoral for me to kill bacteria on my kitchen sink? Of course not. As far as I'm concerned, human life does not begin until feelings, thoughts, and so on can be experienced by the fetus. When does that happen in a pregnancy? I don't know for sure, but I do know it doesn't happen at the moment of conception. All you need to understand (and this will be hard for you simpletons) is that I disagree with you and you have no obligation or authority to jam your beliefs down my throat. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Brad at 10/22/08 "If there is nothing wrong with abortion, why do so many women regret their decisions?" Terrible Terrible Terrible logic. Terrible. People regret all sorts of things. I bought a suit once that cost $500 dollars. I regretted it the moment I swiped my credit card. Does that mean buying a suit was immoral? Not a chance! How many mothers regret having a baby? Does that mean having a baby was immoral? You act like everything is so simple and straightforward. Also, I'd like to see this science that "so clearly shows" that a fetus is a human life at the moment of conception. This argument that you've given provides absolutely no new information to a debate that is dead split among the population. You've contributed nothing to the conversation. I'm sure all pro lifers are sitting at home reading this and nodding their heads in agreement while the pro-choicers are seething at your assertions that everything is so clear and they must just be stupid. I'm undecided on the issue, leaning towards states rights, but asinine arguments like this one are ridiculous and do nothing to help your cause. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Think before you open your mouth at 10/22/08 It continues to amaze me that for some reason pro-lifers always seems to forget that making it illegal won't make it go away. Last time I checked, drugs were illegal, yet many high school students admit that getting them is easier than procuring alcohol. Prostitution is illegal, yet I know where I can pick up a hooker if I am so inclined. Ironic that the answer to everyone’s problems is simply to write laws abolishing those things we find distasteful. The simple fact is that if abortion is outlawed here, there will still be other countries that allow it. Not to mention the back-alley abortions that will be done here. I’m not saying that abortion is the answer, nor is it a means of birth control, but I am saying that it is up to the individuals involved to decide. The government has no place in between a woman’s legs. Nor our sheets for that matter… Flag Abuse
Posted by: John at 10/22/08 I was strongly pro-life until my wife and I had an impossible decision to make. Despite using protection and birth control, she became pregnant. Unfortunately, she suffers from several diseases, including polycystic kidney disease, hypothyroidism, and is at risk for muscular dystrophy due to family history. Our doctor advised her to get an abortion since there was an extreme risk to her health and life if she carried out. At that moment, I began to understand why abortion is sometimes a necessity. However, she miscarried about a week later, shortly before she was scheduled for the abortion. After going through that, I became strongly pro-choice, because I understood better what it was like to have that kind of situation facing you. I would urge the pro-life people to imagine themselves in such a situation. Would you be the person saying that my wife’s life is not worth saving because you are pro-life? Would you want to be told that your life is worth less because you are pregnant and everything must be done to protect the fetus, and even if it risks your life you have to carry it out? Does that really sound compassionate or loving? Could you honestly do that if you faced the same thing? Flag Abuse
Posted by: You have to choose... at 10/22/08 ... between higher crime and legalized abortion. If you think that abortion is all about killing infants, what do you think of the fact that would-have-been-aborted babies grow up to be criminals, and in some cases killers. Bad parents make for horrible people, and most times bad parents know they would be and abort their pregnancy as a result. No, it doesn't make the taking of a life any easier to swallow, but we have to choose - more crime or legal abortion. PS - Jeremy, it's called "Godwin's Law" - Google it. Flag Abuse
Posted by: God Loves Us All at 10/21/08 I have faith in our Lord to protect the weak from the wicked sinners of this world. My faith is strong, and for that, i cannot deny the obvious; The holocaust against my brother's sperm is due to the blasphemy of these unborn fetuses. Had they been good Christians, they would not be rotting in my brothers hand. Flag Abuse
Posted by: Jeremy Baker at 10/21/08 When you compared abortion to slavery I scratched my head. Then you equated it with the holocaust and lost all credibility. Then you call our government illegitimate because of this narrow issue, repeat the lie that pro-choice people want abortions, and finally whine and beg for us to see it your way. Next time try to consider the quality of life after birth especially in some of the more extreme cases, and at least turn a thought to the issue of federal vs. states rights. That it took four of you to produce this nonsense is the saddest part. Flag Abuse






Add your opinion
Copyright 2009 Educational Media Company at Virginia Tech Inc. All rights reserved.
about | advertising | archive | contact | full edition pdfs | headline emails | join us | subscribe
All stories, photos etc. produced by the Collegiate Times are property of the Educational Media Company at Virginia Tech. No information may be republished without the expressed written consent of the editor of the Collegiate Times.
» Virginia Tech
» Custom Promotional Products
 » VT People Search
» Used Cars
 » Campus Blvd.
»