|
-
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 36,685
|
|
|
-
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 36,685
|
I think my opinion can be summed up fairly succinctly thus:
It's undeniably inconvenient that pregnancy is a potential consequence of sexual intercourse. People want to have sex. They don't necessarily want to have children. The (last resort) solution is to kill their unborn child in the womb.
That's the basics of it, morality completely removed. The semantics used to make it more palatable exist for that reason alone: to make the process clinical and provide emotional distance. "Abort" instead of "kill", "fetus" instead of "unborn child" etc. All in all, I find that people are just keen to justify sit as 100% clinical and remove the moral question.
People don't want to call it what it should be, even for those who support it: a necessary and unfortunate evil. The rhetoric that surrounds it is purely to protect the emotional well-being of the person having it done, because the reality is hard to deal with. When you have an abortion, you end a human life. There is no logical argument to the contrary. It is human, it is alive. Some people might be able to justify that - fine - but I can't accept them justifying it by attempting to change the facts.
|