Troll King
Kingfisher
turkishcandy said:
Yeah. I was, and am to a degree, the same way from about 14 until my mid to later 20s. I just turned 30, if that helps.
I have always known that the whole pro-life v. pro-choice argument is flawed. If you look at bio-ethics the argument boils down to when we, as a group that can be defined as consisting of a minimum of two human lives (mother +baby) to the entire social group and every strata within, define a human life to be morally valuable.
That is what the bio/medical ethics of it all says. But isn't that kinda a fucked up way to look at it?
Well...maybe or maybe not.
We routinely determine when and how and why a human life shouldn't be considered morally valuable. We do this with our enemies or with capital punishment, for example. But the difference, and I hate the word innocent in these arguments because we really don't know if that fetus will be morally good or bad and it can't be innocent or guilty when it lacks the ability, is that we are dealing with a minimum of two human lives where one is in complete control over every element of the other.
If an abortion is needed to save the mother, then I don't think most pro-life people are going to argue against it in that case. I sure wouldn't. I live in the south and I have never seen any hardcore lifer argue that abortions shouldn't be allowed when the mother will die or in the case of rape or incest. That is all a liberal fantasy as far as I can tell...and I am a liberal.
Where it starts to bother me, and this is really since I have gotten older and thought seriously about what it would mean to have a family other than simply freaking out over a broken condom or a gf missing a period, is how callous women seem when discussing it.
So many western women talk about abortion as if they are getting a haircut because, "I just don't have the time/patience/energy/ of having long hair and OMG...it totes will ruin how beautiful my awesome self is..grrl power."
The fact that western women can be so callous with human life is really fucking disturbing to me on a moral level. Even more, they as individuals and as a group not only have the power to carry (us men create it) a life but they have no problem destroying it over casual reasons.
It seems to me that you can make a naturalist argument for why women should have this moral right. But then I would want to argue that us men, being stronger and being the protectors and providers, should have the same moral rights over women. I am not exactly sure how to make that argument but it has been made before in history based on naturalism and related philosophies.
I am tired cause I haven't slept, so this may not be making as much sense as I hope but I have wondered based on what I wrote above if the future won't see children throwing off the paternalism of their mothers in the same way that women through off the patriarchy of men and if or when this happens maybe children would subjugate women and outlaw abortion in similar ways to how women are now trying to subjugate men through their hypergamist alpha/beta paradigm.
Wow. That got long. Simpler version. I largely agree.
