Abortion is Wrong!…I Mean Abortion is Free-choice!
WASHINGTON (Talon News) — On the verge of this weekend’s pro-abortion march in Washington, yet another “flip-flop” on a major issue from likely Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry has surfaced.
The Drudge Report found that although Kerry will be attending the abortion rally today asking supporters of abortion to help him in his presidential campaign since he supports their cause, Kerry has not always been a vocal supporter of the procedure that has ended the life of millions of unborn children since the controversial U.S. Supreme Court ruling Roe v. Wade in 1973.
In an interview with the Lowell Sun in October 1972, Kerry said abortion should be limited and not used to control unwanted pregnancies.
“It’s a tragic day in the lives of everybody when abortion is looked on as an alternative to birth control or as an alternative to having a child. I think that’s wrong,” Kerry declared in the interview.
In fact, Kerry went so far as to say he is “opposed to abortion” because it makes “common sense” to do so.
He said at the time that abortion “should be the very last thing if it has to be” an option to resolve an unwanted pregnancy.
Interestingly, Kerry added that the federal government did not have any business deciding the issue of abortion since the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution left that decision to the states.
“I think the question of abortion is one that should be left for the states to decide,” he commented.
A few years later in 1975, Kerry told John Mullins from The Sun that abortion was a minor issue on the political landscape.
Kerry believed it was more important to determine “how to put people back to work, how to reduce crime and how to keep institutions from breaking down.”
In a prophetic statement that sounds like it could have been uttered by a modern-day conservative, Kerry lambasted “liberals” who bring up topics that most people are not concerned with.
“‘I think liberals spend too much time pushing issues which just aren’t relevant to the mass of people, including among such issues abortion, the death penalty and amnesty,” Kerry said at the time.
On the official Kerry for president web site, his position on abortion is in direct contrast to the pro-life position he took nearly 30 years ago.
“John Kerry believes that women have the right to control their own bodies, their own lives, and their own destinies,” the Kerry web site reads. “He believes that the Constitution protects their right to choose and to make their own decisions in consultation with their doctor, their conscience, and their God.”
The ideological turnaround by Kerry suggests the influence these factions in the Democratic Party have had over his presidential campaign, as shown by his promise to only nominate judges who support abortion.
“He recently announced he will support only pro-choice judges to the Supreme Court,” the web site continues. “Kerry also believes that we should promote family planning and health plans should assure women contraceptive coverage.”
Kelly Says: April 30th, 2004 at 2:27 am
Allow me to explain to some of your more simple-minded readers why Kerry’s comments make complete sense. Abortion isn’t the black and white issue that most extreme rightists (and leftists, for that matter) want it to be. Kerry is simply stating that abortion isn’t necessarily a “good” thing that should be encouraged as some sick form of birth control, but that it also isn’t something that can be solved simply by making it against the law. I understand him because I agree with him. Abortion is a terrible thing, and it shouldn’t be an easy thing to do. But just because you make something unlawful doesn’t mean it will stop happening. If all of the pro-lifers and pro-choicers out there would just get off of their self-righteous highhorses and consider the other side’s point of view, we might severely reduce the number of abortions out there. Abortion will only be defeated with alternatives: Condoms, abstinence, family planning, and education on all of these things (not just one, sorry Bush). But seriously, who are we kidding? The simple-minded extremists on both sides would rather scream at each other and insult each other until the end of time, while lives continue to be snuffed out.
As far as Kerry goes, anyone who calls it “flip-flopping” is just admitting their own lack of thoughtfulness. Kerry’s view is one of a reasonable man who’s intelligent enough to acknowledge the complexity of a sensitive issue. There’s no easy fix for this one.
zack Says: April 30th, 2004 at 7:13 pm
OH! Thanks! We simpletons need all of the help that we can get. Look Kelly, I see, understand and agree with your point….and Kerry’s. You made it very well. However….neither you nor I are faced with the responsibility of having to pass more than just coffeehouse judgment on the issue. The President of the United States “MUST” deal with “complex issues”. That’s was my point in the beginning. If you have a man who “would be President”, yet doesn’t stand for anything, for very long, then “Houston, we have a problem”! If asked outright, I would say that I am against abortion. However, if my sister, cousin, wife or the daughter of a close friend were to be raped, and got pregnant, or young teen couple were about to have their lives ruined by an unplanned pregnancy……I would honestly have to say that don’t know where I would come down. But, I’m not applying for the job to have to make those kinds of decisions either! If you want the job, TELL US WHERE YOU STAND, and we’ll decide. Don’t change your mind with the wind just to get elected. Stand for something! At least we’ll know who we’re getting. I, by-the-way, do understand the complexity of the issue.
Kelly Says: May 1st, 2004 at 4:58 am
I just think this is a pretty pathetic attempt to reveal one of Kerry’s “flip-flop’s.” Even if, 30 years ago, he said he didn’t approve of abortions, it doesn’t necessarily mean that he was bent on forcing the rest of the nation to submit to his beliefs, like so many pro-lifers would. I think Kerry has been perfectly clear on where he stands on the abortion issue. He’s personally against abortion, but he’s pro-choice. It is possible. He isn’t caving to the extremists in his church who would rather see the Pope rule the U.S. by extension. He’s humble enough to understand that his personal or religious beliefs shouldn’t be the only guiding force in the choices he makes, especially in matters of legislation. Reasonable people consider the thoughts and feelings of others. It sounds like you’d be more content with a President such as our current one: A rigid, arrogant, one-sided demagogue who has cotton stuffed in his ears for anyone else’s views save those of his exclusive club of advisers. In other words, a dictatorship.
Besides, the whole “flip-flop” angle is getting weak, and it was pretty weak to begin with, not to mention unoriginal. Bush Sr. spent most of the ‘92 campaign calling Clinton a “waffler,” and Willie still trounced him. If you guys really want to beat Kerry, dig up some more dirt on his wife. That stuff’s hilarious.
zack Says: May 1st, 2004 at 8:34 pm
Kelly, Kelly, Kelly. As a conservative, I believe that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. I stated facts and patiently listened to your opinion. Jumping to Kerry’s defense although I said nothing about him that wasn’t true. You did, bless your heart, give it a try. And it was a somewhat cute little defense. But now you’ve gotten into calling ME names and attacking ME personally for simply questioning whether or not Kerry takes a consistent stand on ANYTHING! You say he isn’t “bent on forcing the rest of the nation to submit to his beliefs, like so many pro-lifers would”. Hmmm…so you’re saying that President Kerry would say that there should be no FEDERAL law regarding abortion? That it should be up to each state to decide? Is that what you’re telling me? Kerry stands for state’s rights? For the record….Kerry DID say that it should be left up to the states. Did you even read my comment? I thought we conservatives were suppose to be mean-spirited! I think you would be more comfortable finding a liberal “Laugh At Conservatives” site. And I know it would be easier for you to understand. But hey, thanks for playing!
Anonymous Says: June 17th, 2004 at 6:01 am
Raped and got pregnant? Can anyone actually give a number on the percentage of this type of thing? My bet would be that it is another form of what I call the Diaper Theory. There was a big deal made about not using disposable diapers because they were filling up the land fills. The reality was that disposable diapers were a mere pittance compared to what really fills up land fills, paper. Another example of the Diaper Theory is the people up in arms over cell phone use in the car causing accidents. While it’s true that they can cause accidents, Triple A puts them at number SEVEN on the list. Number ONE is fiddling around with your radio. Have your heard any politicians trying to outlaw your radio? And you won’t either because liberals don’t necessarily look at the whole picture. They like to waste money and resources going after diapers and cell phones. Why not go after the number one cause and put a big dent in the problem?
I am Pro-Choice. A woman has a right to choose whether to have sex or not. If you have sex, then own up to the consequences of that choice. There is no 100% guaranteed contraceptive except abstinence, so be ready for that chance. Also, the consequences might be the risk to your health. Maybe you should consult with your doctor on the effects of pregnancy on your body BEFORE you start having sex.
Deal with the number one cause of abortion, personal responsibility for one’s actions. If a teen can theoretically make the adult decision of abortion without having to inform their parents, which some people endorse, then they can certainly deal with the adult consequences of having an unplanned pregnancy. Deal with the responsibility and then we can have the discussion about rape and incest and such.
Now is that self-righteous?
Foodsnob Says: September 15th, 2004 at 7:09 am
why are so many of these “flip flop” ramblings based on such dated information?
Kerry said “X” in 1972, but turned around a mere 32 years later and said “Y”! egad!
guess what? 32 years ago i said that hated girls, and now im married to one. flip-flopper.
my god, people, the man has been a United States Senator for two decades. wouldn’t you expect — no — wouldn’t you HOPE that in 20 years of service to the Senate, to his country and to his constituents that he might change his mind a LITTLE BIT? wouldn’t you PRAY that since 1972 this man has LEARNED MORE about his philosophy, about his personal beliefs, about what direction his country was headed in??
if we only relied on people whose beliefs NEVER change, then this country would never have been founded in the first place.
the founders were all at one point loyal British subjects, who — good heavens — flip-flopped and became dastardly revolutionaries!
how dare they. how dare they indeed.
natska Says: September 20th, 2004 at 5:50 pm
Dear Foodsnob,
I really do hope John Kerry gets elected so our country becomes more stable. John Kerry knows what he stands for. Even though I don’t know what he stands for, I am still going to vote for him, as long as he is not that gross digusting pig - BUSH! I want a country who doesn’t face reality but instead, lives in a shell of self-righteousness and self-indulgence. I want John Kerry to be my leader. I don’t know where he’s leading me, but I am sure as hell going to follow!
natska
zoot potatoe Says: September 20th, 2004 at 11:10 pm
sometimes, i wonder what I’d do in dan’s situation.
his left wing bias has always been evident to me. pretty much every reporter votes one person or another, each having a bias a little towards their candidate, but since Dan is such a high position, he can take his bias further.
To admit a mistake is against human nature, while Dan finally did today admit that he can not stand by the authenticity of the memos any more, I, like him, still think there are some holes for Bush to cover, especially in Alabama. Bush’s “uncertanty”, his unability to remember if he took a medical intregues me, I want to know more about that time.
Also, whoever penned these documents is stupid. if i were trying to replicate 1972 memos, and if I were in and familiar with the guard, i’d try to get my hands on some of these type-writers myself…
And, of course, I too am voting for Kerry. Not because he was in vietnam, not because of the mystery shrouding Bush’s guard, but because I don’t like Bush’s pro-rich, anti-environment, traditional conservative path the economy (he things,like all conservatives, less income + same amount of pay somehow means a better economy, while our tax money now merely goes to pay debt), and I would like to see kerry in office November 2nd.
elispot Says: October 17th, 2004 at 8:03 pm
“I am Pro-Choice. A woman has a right to choose whether to have sex or not. If you have sex, then own up to the consequences of that choice. ”
How so very true!
Cogit Says: October 30th, 2004 at 3:28 am
Someone asked about the percentage of abortions which are due to pregnancies by rape. These account for less than 1% of all pregnancies–and that’s by Planned Parenthood’s own statistics.
Suzanne Katz Says: November 5th, 2004 at 3:02 am
This is to all the comments about abortion,
It did not matter to me that during the election one candidate stated he was for the Right of a Woman to Choose, and the other was not. I do believe this is a personal decision, and the government should not be involved, End of Abortion comments from me.
But, not end of comment.
That issue, was not even within my decision to vote for President Bush. Even though I do not agree some of the beliefs of our President, this is my right as an American to disagree. It is the major issues that are important. The major issues; today’s issues, I agree with our President.
My state of Utah is a happy hunting ground for a possible terrorists attack. I need not specify what, why, and or where. But had President Bush not won, I would have moved elsewhere. Not out of the country (well, did think of that) but this is my home, and like one person wrote, American, love it or leave it. Well, I love it so would have had to move to all places, East Texas, a fate worse than death. Because who would want to blow up East Texas. (I hope that statement got through to the right person)
Now, I will stay for the present in Utah, living downwind from the storage of chemical weapons, by the Proving Grounds of the Air Force, just a few blocks from the Interstate where Nuclear disposal waste is being transported from one area to another;
I am staying in my home because I have seen what our President has done in Utah to protect these areas that had been left unprotected.
To me, this is more important that either opinion on abortion, gay marriage, and other topics always thrown in to try to get votes. I am not stating that these issues are not important; they are, just not in this election.
When we vote for a President, it is the major issues that present immediate danger and need prompt attention and which of the two will do the right job. This is how I make my voting decisions.
I really do not wish to wake up one morning and find the West Desert of Utah, is under attack by terrorist, releasing chemical weapons, from the storage area and these deadly partials are blowing in the wind direct to my home. Should this event ever take place, escape would be impossible.
This was, four years ago, a real possibility, but not now, President Bush solved the problem; (and not once did he grand stand on this fact).
I think you would have to live in the area of Utah that I live in to understand the true meaning of what I wrote above.
Look on the Utah Map, find the Pony Express Trail, this is my area to retreat from the world, and this area has sirens that would go off should the storage areas start leaking or were attacked. Now sirens are wonderful, but when on a road that one can not exceed 15 mph, and you are at least 100 miles from no where. Should the sirens go off and you are in places that are almost inaccessible. I guess the only thing you could be glad of is that you will die and lay on sacred Indian burial grounds. Now, I once again feel safe going to my isolated West Desert and listen to the silence of the voices on the wind (another of those things that you would have to be there to understand).
This is just one story of the changes most are not aware of that our President has accomplished during the last four years. So, all of you who are looking at issues that although important, do not outweigh the issues that affect ALL AMERICANS
America, Love it or Leave it,
Hey, abortions are legal in other countries, so if you don’t like President Bush, move!
Your neighbor may even be a terrorist, or your neighbor may be the one who does the abortion.
Suzanne Katz
Maverick Says: November 5th, 2004 at 4:20 am
Hey Suzanne, yuo know I got love rof ya girl but we disagree on one of your points. Actually saying disagree is putting it lightly. Ill get straight to the point (and this is for everybody not just Suzanne) I am not a big fan of people that kill children. Yes, thats right KILL childeren. I am not going to discuss abortion here and right now but if you disagrre with me email me at standingaloneplus1@yahoo.com and I can very easily prove to you that abortion is murder. Just think of the word abortion. Think of the meaning…..to terminate. Hmmmm….lets open our eyes here people. Nevermind i said i wasnt going to get started but this is a bad topic to say it wasnt “A Big Issue”.
Suzanne this was not meant to anger you or anybody that’s for abortion, it was just my opinion. I am here to educate on this subject, not indocturnate.
I liked the rest of your message Suzanne, you had some great points, email me with your comments.
Peace everybody, and God Bless America.
I too voted for George Bush and I am very proud of that. Please forgive all the typos. =)
Maverick Says: November 5th, 2004 at 4:30 am
On comment #5 by anonymous…
Great article especially the diaper theory. Reasons for abortion involving rape and incest is under 1% and thats from Planned Parent Hood so you know its probably less if thats possible.
Suzanne Katz Says: November 5th, 2004 at 5:21 am
Hi Maverick
Nice to read your words,
Maverick, I am assuming you are a man,
Men do not get in the need of needing an abortion.
I do not think abortion is always the right options, but because if you are a man, if you have never become with child, and if the situtation was in one of several areas that I do agree with abortion, it is not you to make the decision if it is right or wrong, this can only be the choice of the woman, no one else,
But, on the other hand, abortion should never be used as a means of birth control.
Actually two complete opposites.
Should a woman be raped, and thus a child was created, then I am assuming you would expect her to give birth to this child. How do you think the woman would feel about this child, and yes I know of how a woman feels for her baby, but go a bit deeper, try putting yourself in the body of a woman, I have a very hard time with men who under any events, try to dominate a woman from getting an abortion, I do respect your value of all human life. As so do I. This is such a delicate and complicated topic. Because as you, in reality, abortion is wrong, but at times it is necessary. This is why it must be the choice of the woman. Then it is on her hands, I would never abort a child, but I have never been raped, or put into a situtation where I had to make a decision. I do know, that an unwanted child, will suffer. So in truth, it is clear I am back and forth on this subject, so back to my original statement
IT MUST BE LEFT TO THE CHOICE OF EACH INDIVIDUAL WOMAN, AS NO ONE ELSE HAS THE RIGHT TO TELL ANY WOMAN WHAT SHE MUST DO OR NOT DO WITH HER BODY
THE END
and no you did not anger me,
Now, the big issue thing, I did not mean it was not a big issue, what I meant was, that this issue was throw in as a means to get votes, not with true feeling to the issue, that is what I was trying to explain, and am writing a main comment on this subject. Abortion is a major issue though it was used for the wrong reason
I will copy and send you and email
Suzanne
Brooks Kinch Says: May 10th, 2005 at 3:01 am
I love the abortion debate…
I guess I’m not on either side…
I just don’t think it’s that hard to use some sort of birth control device, such as that new patch they have.
ConservativeKelli Says: May 15th, 2005 at 2:50 pm
I can’t believe u people, especially the liberals! i am 13 and i debate w/ liberals in my enrichment class all the time!! They come up w/ way better arguments on abortion than u do…but how can u really argue a point that common sense proves wrong?
Suzanne Says: May 15th, 2005 at 9:18 pm
ConservtiveKelli
I think a few more years on your life might just change your thinking
especially when you get married and your wife is going to have a baby and decides to have an abortion instead, now what do you think about that?
It is ok to think the way you do, but keep learning there are many many side to this issue.
But do not forget the real side of this issue
The unborn child. That is the issue!!
Suzanne
Grooks Kinch,
Yes I agree with you, but see some people are not smart enough to do such things, or could be in the heat of passion they forget (dumb) or gosh do not know what the OR is.
but you are so right.
I had one child, she is all I wanted, now I did not just have sex once in my life, so how come I never found the need to have an abortion?
Guess I used birth control, guess this high IQ does come in handy sometimes.
Suzanne
Mr. Jack Says: May 15th, 2005 at 10:01 pm
ConservativeKelli, you being 13 explains alot. first of all your political education is obviously incomplete seeing as I’ve meet doorknobs with a deeper political philosiphy than you. You seem to be geting your education from Fox News, somthing i don’t recomend because the channel is extreamy bias and one sided, I recomend The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, it’s a nice balance of conservitivism and liberalism.
third, there is more to the political spectrum than just Liberal and conservitive, the world isn’t as black and white as you think. Here, allow me to educate you on the political specturum ass seen by the united states.
On the Left begining with the farthest left to the center:
True Democrats
Communists
Socialists
Aristocrats
Liberals
Now the Center,
Moderates
Progressives
Now for the right wing starting from the center and moving left:
Conservitives
Monarchs
Theoticians
Facists
Totalitarians
That is the political spectrum, there fore if one does not agree with your conservitive thoughts, it does not neccessarily mean that they are a liberal, If I were you, I’d wait untill atleast Highschool to begin criticizing others political philosiphies, especialy when yours is vastly incomplete
Mr. Jack Says: May 16th, 2005 at 8:19 pm
How does common sence prove abortion wrong? are you saying people have no right to choose what happens to thier bodies?
sure abortion is immoral, but it is a choice.
all of life comes down to choices.
I belive in a book called the rise and fall of the 3rd reich, you’ll find a paragraph in the begining about how Adolf Hitlers mother thought about abortion when she was empregnated with the embodyment of evil.
Ash Says: June 6th, 2005 at 5:22 pm
Common sense proves abortion wrong in soooo many ways. Its common sense not to have sex if u dont want the baby. Its common sense (and even proved scientifically) that abortion is in fact murder. It’s common sense that abortion does hurt the baby and that the “fetus” is truly a baby. Who gave you the right to decide what babies live and what babies die???
Antilla The Hun Says: June 7th, 2005 at 5:44 am
Ash, who gave YOU the right to decide what to do with these womens bodies?
ben Says: July 22nd, 2005 at 12:33 am
abortions make me very happy
ben Says: July 22nd, 2005 at 12:35 am
abortion is good for the soul
Scott Says: July 23rd, 2005 at 12:54 am
Abortion is very possibly the most difficult of the political issues that are under debate right now to be proven one way or the other. Abortion is indeed wrong- why should one be denied his right to live because of the mistake of another? He shouldn’t be. However, I do think that abortion should be permissible when it entails rape, in which case it most certainly isn’t the victim’s fault. Unfortunately, if this is instituted, rape would be difficult to prove, therefore a difficult law to enforce. But honestly, abortion is the easy way out of a mistake. It’s not a light issue, it’s a life that is being denied its first and most basic right- to live. This has nothing to do with a woman’s right to choose or her body…I’m sure if the baby could choose whether to live or die, we all know what it would be.
Scott Says: July 23rd, 2005 at 1:17 am
Abortion is perhaps the most difficult of the current political issues to prove or disprove, regardless of which position is taken. I don’t believe by any means that abortion is about women’s rights or their ability to choose or has anything to do with their bodies. No individual should ever be denied the right to live becuase of the mistake of another. A mother who gets “knocked up” should not be able to take the easy road, destroying her offspring’s life before it has even begun. However, when the scenario entails rape, abortion should be permissible, as it is nobody’s fault but that of the assailant. Unfortunately, if a law were to be implemented that has the same basic premises as aforementioned, rape would (naturally), be the common excuse for an abortion. It would be difficult to prove that such an event had transpired, and would take up a considerable amount of government revenue. Hopefully the nation will come to its senses regarding abortion, not because of religion, but as mentioned by another poster, common sense. It bears a semblance to murder, whether or not it actually is is debatable. Most people can differentiate between right and wrong. Abortion is wrong. Why don’t people see it?
K. Marx Says: July 23rd, 2005 at 8:45 pm
Scott; re: 25.
The issue you’re discussing is whether abortion is morally permissible or not. That is an entirely different issue than the one facing the U.S.
This distinction must be made: Abortion may be morally wrong, but that doesn’t make it illegal. The issue at hand is whether the state has a right to limit the moral decision of abortion; not whether abortion is morally right or wrong. Morality and legality exist apart from one another, although they may coincidentlly agree on some issues. Simply because something is moral does not make it legal. Nor does something having the quality of immoral make it illegal. Simply because abortion is morally wrong (or right) does not make it illegal (or legal). A person cannot say, “Well it’s morally right, therefore it should be legal.” Likewise, a person cannot say, “Well it’s morally wrong, therefore it should be illegal.”
Moreover, it seems to be your thinking is thus: Abortion is morally wrong because it is taking the life of an innocent person. This reasoning would be difficult to be consistent in, for we can think of many instances when killing an innocent person is deemed justifiable legally and morally. For example, during times of war many innocent lives are taken. It is, at least by many authors on this web site and the U.S. government, a necessary evil. Therefore, we can’t say abortion is morally wrong because it is the taking of an innocent life. Furthermore, it is unclear how abortion is the taking of a life. How is the union of an egg and sperm a life? Because it has a genetic code? No, I think a more compelling argument is the classic restrictive view on abortion: An egg and sperm union has the opportunity to a life, regardless of whether it carries full term. Therefore, abortion deprives a future-person their life, liberty, and persuit of happiness.
However, think of such situations as ectopic pregnancy and cancer of the uterus where a mother has to abort the future-child; otherwise she and the infant as well will die. Either both will die, or one can live. This is an example much like when two innocent people are stranded during an unforseen disaster and only one can survive because of lack of water. Surely, we would not think someone immoral for preserving their own life. As a result, it seems abortion can be justified on the grounds of self-preservation, as with the case of ectopic pregnancy and cancer of the uterus.
Now, this isn’t to say abortion is morally right or wrong. It’s just to say the typical arguments for and against the morality of abortion are flawed. It can been seen that abortion in it of itself is not morally wrong or right, for if it were, people would be required to essentially take their own lives in the cases of ectopic pregnancy and cancer of the uterus simply to ensure the ungaraunteed possibility of a future life.
I argue the morality of abortion must be measured with two variables: The reasons and timeliness of the abortion. To be sure, moral common sense tells us aborting a child at 8 months would not be morally justified due to rape. However, taking a day-after pill after a rape would be morally justified. Another instance would be self-preservation of the mother. It seems morally better to save the mother’s life at 2 weeks into the pregnancy rather than 8 months.
This query doesn’t answer the question of morality, but it sheds light on to the morality of the state using its authority to limit the moral decisions of its citizens.
Scott Says: July 24th, 2005 at 8:18 pm
I forgot to mention ectopic pregnancies and cancer of the uterus. Self-preservation should indeed be the decision of the mother. However, if I mentioned “taking a life”, I didn’t mean it in that particular fashion, as I believe life begins at conception, though I also disagree with taking away the oppportunity for it. I recapitulate my opening statement in comment #25, abortion is perhaps the most difficult of the current issues to have legitimate and bonifiable evidence to; this issue is transcendent being in that there are so many facets (as you stated, ectopic pregnancies, rape, etc.), that it cannot be viewed in terms of black and white. And you’re correct, Mr. Marx, in claiming that morality and legality do not necessarily go hand in hand. On this issue specifically is where that should be changed.
victoria Says: April 18th, 2006 at 11:38 pm
hello my name is victoria and i am researching a couple of things on abortion for a school essay for things im against and im totally against abortion ive read a couple of comments and things people have said on this topic i may be only thirteen but i strongly believe that every child is a wanted child god made that beautiful baby for one reason so that it could live a wonderful life on earth and if the mother does get pregnant and didnt want the baby then why did they have sex in the first place they could have caught something besides having a baby most mothers dont know what they are doing to themselves i totally disbelieve in abortion what if u was aborted?think about it…..
nutslikebush Says: April 19th, 2006 at 11:37 am
Hi Victoria,
Good essays are crafted to persuade your reader to adopt a particular point of view on an issue. But every essayist knows that the writing process, when carried out thoughtfully and sincerely, forces the author to drill deeper into their own beliefs and understanding. So don’t be surprised if your essay transforms your own beliefs into something new and fresh. Now it seems to me that, like you, most of us start out with a preconceived answer to the question already “in hand” and then begin to look for reasons to justify the answer that they like. Your comment suggests that you are beginning to develop a theory about why abortion is wrong (that is, a way of trying to see if the facts, as you understand them, fit together coherently). As a budding essayist you now must go deeper and hunt down the hidden (covert) assumptions of your theory - what are you assuming is true versus what is not contestable? - and then focus in on disecting and evaluating the assumptions in public. Before you can effectively persuade others to adopt a certain understanding of an issue, you need to be able to carefully lay out the assumptions of your position and show people why those assumptions are valid (turn a microscope on each assumption and examine it in as much detail as possible) and how you infer or deduce (rationally align assumptions and facts) your conclusion. This is the formula for a powerful essay. Essays filled with opinion are not just boring, they do not persuade. You may have noticed that politicians and talk radio characters are rarely persuasive. That is because they don’t understand the power of genuine thinking. The essayist aims higher. Finally, and most importantly, be patient. A fine essay requires the effort and commitment of a marathoner.
nutslikebush Says: April 20th, 2006 at 10:39 pm
V,
Here is a question to ponder. Many women who have abortions are like you, they are anti-abortion. And yet they have them. They are the girls sitting beside you in church. They are white, middle class, and come from politically conservative families. Why does that mean? The least likely people to have abortions are low-income minorities. And liberals who are pro-choice are themselves no more likely to have abortions than pro-life conservatives are. Beliefs don’t influence behavior very strongly in matters that are urgent.