tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post4733616001966857587..comments2024-03-28T16:58:17.705-04:00Comments on Grim's Hall: "Carelessly Labeled"Grimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-5826886822488135682015-12-03T03:02:04.656-05:002015-12-03T03:02:04.656-05:00Grim, it just seems sometimes as if reason has ver...Grim, it just seems sometimes as if reason has very little to do with any 'conversation' on abortion. Thanks Tom, that lays out our pretty well. It's not that I hadn't responded myself to that same end, it's that I just was uncertain of my premises, but I feel more comfortable with them now.douglashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03241790925053112959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-86553492224875182582015-11-30T22:13:49.829-05:002015-11-30T22:13:49.829-05:00I randomly came across Mark Shea's post on why...I randomly came across <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2015/11/on-shooting-abortionists.html?ref_widget=trending&ref_blog=theanchoress&ref_post=kyrie-eleison-the-year-of-mercy-cant-come-too-soon" rel="nofollow">Mark Shea's post on why pro-life people shouldn't shoot abortionists</a> and thought some folks here would be interested.Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-17722125006771539962015-11-30T15:03:29.733-05:002015-11-30T15:03:29.733-05:00...it is the job of interrogators to get suspects ...<i>...it is the job of interrogators to get suspects to make damning statements. It looks like it would be a cake walk to do so, with this guy.</i><br /><br />That seems like a good point. <br /><br /><i>...is it just the Abrahamic religions that proscribe these practices?</i><br /><br />Well, Aristotle's opposition was not based on an Abrahamic religion, nor indeed on religion. Of course, he was only opposed to abortion once the capacity for sensation had been realized. Also, I don't think his opposition was the standard in ancient Greece. <br /><br />Now, ancient Egypt is not one of my areas of concentration. I'll have to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_abortion#Premodern_era" rel="nofollow">throw this one to Wikipedia</a>.Grimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-57406826011946672202015-11-30T14:46:43.960-05:002015-11-30T14:46:43.960-05:00From the beginning of human history, hasn't li...From the beginning of human history, hasn't life always been cheap? I suspect that neonaticide has been more common than not, through human history, except for a few brief golden ages of common decency. I'm just asking, since I am unschooled in this, but is it just the Abrahamic religions that proscribe these practices? I believe it was also prohibitted in ancient Egypt, at one point, though I don't know if it was for religious reasons. I have no interest in defending abortion or neonaticide, just pointing out that the revulsion towards them, is not universal. That said, I don't see how they can be compatible with a Christian world view, except for dire circumstances. <br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02288007567973279023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-89888461937763502812015-11-30T10:43:20.627-05:002015-11-30T10:43:20.627-05:00Douglas,
If we can get clear on the fact that it ...Douglas,<br /><br />If we can get clear on the fact that it is a killing of a human being, we can start a conversation about what punitive standards ought to apply to it. We would not be the first to decide that it's a kind of killing, even a kind of murder, that deserves less punishment than other kinds. There's a <a href="http://grimbeorn.blogspot.com/2012/02/on-ethicists.html" rel="nofollow">substantial history</a> to this debate. We think of this as a contemporary question and a modern practice, but it isn't: though Jesus doesn't discuss abortion, Aristotle does, and the early Medieval church as well as the secular laws of Charlemagne had standards for it. Charlemagne appears to have done something that makes sense to me, which is to treat the provision of abortion as worse than the seeking of one: is probably reasonable to consider it worse to engage in it clinically and for profit (as the abortionist does) than in a mindset of fear (as, for example, a scared teenaged mother might). As I mentioned in the original post, it may be that there are some cases where it is not morally wrong, and may even in very rare cases be morally indicated (although the Church would disagree with me on that, I think).<br /><br />At the moment, it's hard to say that anyone seeking an abortion deserves punishment, because the law as well as powerful forces in the culture teach that it's not wrong at all -- indeed, that it is to be celebrated as a kind of courageous and principled act. It is said to be entailed by a commitment to equality, for example.<br /><br />What we need now is simply to clarify how implausible it is to suggest that this act is anything other than the intentional killing of an innocent human being. Once we can all get clear on that, we can reason together about what to do with those who engage in the practice. Grimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-83480695545109469802015-11-30T08:53:27.122-05:002015-11-30T08:53:27.122-05:00As to the shooting in Colorado, it does appear tha...As to the shooting in Colorado, it does appear that the two civilian victims were accompanying others to Planned Parenthood, at least per reports of statements made by their family members. I can't speak to their accuracy, because I too have seen and heard assertions that the victims were in the bank. For the militant pro-abortion people, this event was a dream come true.<br />That said, I am still going with the assumption that the shooter was too disorganized to have a coherent motive. As for his alleged statements to law enforcement, it is the job of interrogators to get suspects to make damning statements. It looks like it would be a cake walk to do so, with this guy. I have an addled dementia person in my family and I think I could easily get him to say the like, and I am just an ordinary untrained person. Think of the crazy witch hunts of the 80s over diddling children and the questions regarding the use of suggestion by "therapists".Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02288007567973279023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-47272749499768369612015-11-30T08:35:30.392-05:002015-11-30T08:35:30.392-05:00Pro-choicers desperately want to believe that the ...Pro-choicers desperately want to believe that the entire pro-life argument is an irrational, arcane theological stance. That lets them believe that they live scientifically and rationally, and that their opponents are irrational, pre-modern people clinging to old superstitions. Debunking the alleged theological stance of the pro-lifers then becomes an effort to stamp out these old superstitions and enforce science, reason, and progress.<br /><br />There are two problems with that position. First, the pro-choice argument isn't based on science, but rather philosophy. It's entirely an argument about morality. Second, the pro-life argument isn't really religious.<br /><br />Yes, religious arguments can be made, but basically the pro-life argument rests on the scientific fact that at conception you have a new human organism and the common moral injunction against murder. That can be a religious injunction, but even most atheists believe murder is morally wrong, and we could just as well look to Locke's inherent rights to life, liberty, and property instead of the commandment to not murder for the morality of it. The name "Right to Life" is Lockean, after all, not Mosaic.<br /><br />So, to really debunk the theological position of the pro-life movement, you would have to argue against the commandment "Thou shalt not kill." <br /><br />Puncturing the "rational science vs. irrational religion" paradigm forces pro-choicers to deal with the real argument instead of straw men, or to run away from the discussion. Either way, it's a useful incision to make.Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-3891993600067719482015-11-30T01:16:37.574-05:002015-11-30T01:16:37.574-05:00I think it's quite obvious Grim is correct, an...I think it's quite obvious Grim is correct, and has the better argument.<br /><br />What interested me from what she wrote was this, because I've asked this question myself, and am not sure of the 'correct' answer:<br /><br /><i>"...an entire movement that has carelessly labeled abortion as "murder" and "baby-killing." Killing abortion providers flows logically from the moment you call abortion "murder"..."</i><br /><br />So, does it, and if yes, what does that imply? One hesitates at the thought of that, and the concern of acting brashly...<br /><br />Is it correct to say that she's right- or correct to say it may be so, but it's in the long term unproductive and could bring worse repercussions... or is that the cowards answer?<br /><br />In my mind, it's a struggle.douglashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03241790925053112959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5173950.post-40978660563716699882015-11-29T20:20:16.885-05:002015-11-29T20:20:16.885-05:00I grew up UCC.
Their religion is liberalism. The...I grew up UCC.<br /><br />Their religion is liberalism. There is some overlap with Christianity.<br /><br />They do not even rise to the level of being Social Justice Warriors - they are culture warriors. Notice that her credentialism is grounded in secular status, with no indication of any spiritual journey or even considerations. She doesn't make a positive case about life. She's just sure her opponents are wrong, and that's her argument.<br /><br />I am moderately pro-life, in that I am not convinced that conception is the only line than can be drawn. But I draw a hard line at heartbeat and brainwave, about 5-6 weeks. And even then, <i>prefer</i> the line at conception. Also, I can see some arguments in the nature of trade-offs and lesser evils that could be made, though I don't accept them. This pastor doesn't make those arguments, she makes the "my opponents are evil" argument.Assistant Village Idiothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.com