Thank you for posting your question Fletch. I will answer your question on abortion right now and gun control later seeing as it is past my bed time. Let me get this out there so that everyone understands clearly and simply. The Earl-Silva Democratic Platform is not Pro-Abortion. Let me repeat, we are not Pro-Abortion. Rather we are Pro-Choice. We believe that it is the woman’s right to have control over her body, which includes the ability to have an abortion. It is not the government’s place to legislate a woman’s body for multiple reasons. It is discrimination against the woman and violating the 14th amendment of equal protection of the law. For obvious reasons, males do not have to experience pregnancy, and if a woman so chooses, she may choose not to experience pregnancy either. To force her to do that would violate the 14th amendment’s equal protection under the law. Also we believe that it is a right guaranteed by the 9th amendment which reads: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”. We feel that abortion is one of these rights that may be “retained by the people”. The question of when the fetus becomes a human being cannot be definitely answered and is severely subject to personal beliefs not held in common by all citizens of the United States and we do not try to answer this question. We do not condone abortion, yet we believe too much in this country to take away the rights of another citizen. Therefore the Earl-Silva Democratic stance on the issue of Abortion is Pro-Choice.
Another note on this issue; there are those who claim to be Pro-Life with the exception of rape and incest. They will argue all day long about the importance of a life and how an abortion is murder, and yet their beliefs suddenly change in the light of rape or incest. If an anti-abortion advocate believes that the life is important then they should also believe the life is important no matter how the fetus was conceived. I am simply asking all those who claim to be Pro-Life to turn away from the hypocrisy and truly take a stance on the issue. -dallin earl
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use violence to get what they want. This is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion."(Mother Teresa at the National Prayer Breakfast in D.C., 1994)
ReplyDeleteOkay, I wont argue with Mother Teresa, but why do we want babies born into homes where they are not wanted? In some cases they are put up for adoption, but some mothers won't do that. So they have the baby and neglect it, how is that teaching people to love? Abortion is not pleasant to think about, but ultimately we are talking about the fundamental right that a women has over her own body.
ReplyDeleteI don't necessarily believe abortion is he best option either, but at the same time, birth control is never 100% foolproof. It's not fair to force someone into parenthood or to even sacrifice 9 months of their life (and receive public ridicule) when the only preventative measures they could have taken were abiding by morals they may not have been taught. It's also not fair to ask women to make life-altering sacrifices when men can walk away without consequences for the same action. It teaches men it's okay to be promiscuous and women will have no other choice but to take all the blame.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it's even mildly an issue of a woman's moral or in this case the lack of. women know the risks and it's their own fault when they get pregnant. allowing them to shirk their responsibilities by getting an abortion is wrong. if a women "accidentally" becomes pregnant she has the option of putting the child up for adoption if she doesn't want to keep it, but denying a child it's entire life so that she doesn't have to live with the child for 9 months (not that you can even tell the difference for the first few)is just wrong.
ReplyDeleteIn some cases, I agree, it is the mostly woman's fault for getting pregnant. But a woman can't impregnate herself, and she isn't solely responsible. Why should she have to take full responsibility when in many cases, teen pregnancy for example, the father almost always walks away without having to sacrifice anything. Isn't that also morally wrong?
ReplyDeleteAnd going back to teen pregnancy, 9 months is demanding a lot, and in some cases, ruins lives. Some schools allow pregnant teens to attend for part of the pregnancies while other schools don't allow it at all. Should one mistake get in the way of simply getting a high school diploma? The unemployment rate is already high, but trying to get a steady job without a high school diploma is rare.
Also, it's hard to argue the fetus can actually be considered a child. Sure, it's a potential child, but it is still just an extension of an already living human. If a fetus can be considered a human, taking any sort of birth control or "preventative" measures to avoid pregancy should also be considered murder. And even a menstruation cycle could be argued as murder. Menstruation is literally eggs dying which would otherwise have been potential humans if fertilized. Is that considered morally wrong?
the only instances in which it's not the woman's fault is in cases of rape or incest. so I assume that's what you're talking about when you say that "a woman can't impregnate herself and she isn't fully responsible" it is wrong when a man gets a woman pregnant and then walks out. but I don't think that that should make any difference in what the woman's options are. no matter what the man does, it doesn't change that fact that abortions are wrong.
ReplyDeleteif a fetus has the right to life, then the mothers education should come second don't you think? you wouldn't suspend a murderer's sentence just so they could finish high school would you?
going to your argument that if abortion is murder why isn't the menstruation? the difference is that with an abortion, your killing a fetus. not an egg. a fetus can become a person but without a sperm, an egg can't. that's the difference. also, the menstrual cycle is NATURAL an abortion is not. nowhere in nature do you see any other animals terminating their pregnancy. what gives us the right to do something so unnatural?
Serendipity:
ReplyDeleteI think it was a mistake of you to bring up the option of other animals in the case of abortion. While animals don't have 'natural' abortions, there are many animals that eat their young once it is born. To compare a human to an animal in this instance is a mistake because human's are more complex, and it is irrelevant to this debate. It is true that I don't agree with abortion, but I also don't agree in your argument. Humans are unnatural. We don't have wings, yet we fly, we aren't fast, but we drive cars. There is a differenct between an animal and a person, therefore most of your argument is irrelevant.
Many politicians fail to look at potential changes in society when they think about decisions that they will be making for the future. They say that there will be a specific result, but how do they know? Society isn't predictable. What will society's reaction be at the conclusion of this issue? Is anyone even thinking of that when they make their decision??
that's a good question. if we were to ban abortions wouldn't mothers just do it illegally and in dangerous conditions that could lead to their death? how many women would change their minds about what they want to do? would it be for the benefit of the people? or would we end up risking more lives than we would be saving? who knows? how will we ever know until we try? wouldn't it be worth it to at least try? most women would obey the law and avoid abortion. it'd be worth it for them. yes a few women will continue to do it illegally but wouldn't it be worth it for all those lives we saved? but like i said, we'll never know until we try.
ReplyDeleteI'm sick of arguing this. Serendipity, I still think some of your arguments are valid (I also think many are ridiculous), but I'm sure you think mine are as well. Humans, also UNLIKE animals, are stubborn in their beliefs and opinions. We could make this page 100 posts long, and it wouldn't change a thing. I will still believe women should have options whereas you will always believe a full pregnancy is mandatory. I've said what I feel, and you can take it for what you will.
ReplyDelete