I don't get Liberals sometimes

[windyman]

Liberals would rather see a innocent baby be put to death via abortion than some murderer who killed someone.

Could Liberals please explain this one to me? It seems like backward thinking to me.

[Guest Warwick Green]

Liberals would rather see a innocent baby be put to death via abortion than some murderer who killed someone.

Could Liberals please explain this one to me? It seems like backward thinking to me.

A woman's right to an abortion is the position of all four parties in the House of Commons. And, judging from polls, the views of the public as well.

[Liam]

Liberals would rather see a innocent baby be put to death via abortion than some murderer who killed someone.

Could Liberals please explain this one to me? It seems like backward thinking to me.

Not true. We'd rather see an abortion than an execution? Personally, no one has ever asked me and I've never seen polling data surrounding this kind of scenario, so I think you're blowing hot air.

I am on the moderate-to-liberal end of the spectrum and am not pro-abortion (or pro-choice or pro-life or whatever the latest labels each camp throws around these days). I think abortion should be legal, but my conscience tells me it should only be used where the baby would suffer a painful, life-ending illness if taken to full term. In that way, I kind of see it as an act of mercy. I suppose I also understand the "life of the mother" arguments for abortion access. But I don't see it as a means of birth control -- nor do millions of pro-choicers, but you can't convince lots of conservatives who think that liberals get their jollies by killing the unborn.

Likewise, I can see the merit of having the death penalty on the books for certain crimes, particularly for premeditated murders, terror plots, etc.

[August1991]

A woman's right to an abortion is the position of all four parties in the House of Commons. And, judging from polls, the views of the public as well.

You avoid Windyman's question.

Liberals would rather see a innocent baby be put to death via abortion than some murderer who killed someone.

Could Liberals please explain this one to me? It seems like backward thinking to me.

I don't know if I want to open a debate on abortion but here goes.

While the idea gives me qualms, I have no problem with killing people as such. We kill animals for food. We order soldiers to kill other soldiers, knowing also that innocent civilians will be killed as a consequence. We arrest people and put them in prison for life, depriving them of, well, life. Heck, we drive cars at 100 km/h by pedestrians standing on a shoulder knowing that a slight error means instant death, for them.

These are questions of degree, as is much of life, and it is foolish to pretend that there are always easy delineations. Sometimes, the line is clear. A woman is pregnant or she's not. Other times, the line is not clear. What shade of hair will the child have.

I happen to think that forbidding abortion would cause more mayhem, unhappiness and destruction - more waste of human effort - than if we simply accept to make abortion legal. Governments should pass laws that they can enforce and avoid laws that they cannot enforce. Because something is legal, that does not make it moral. (If Canada and the US made abortion illegal tomorrow, under pain of death for those found guilty, what would happen? Canadian and American women would fly abroad to obtain abortions, or go to great subterfuge to obtain them illegally here. An abortionist would have the status of a pusher, with all that entails.) The cost of making abortion illegal is not all the lost children, it is all the mayhem caused by women seeking an illegal abortion.

If someone can show me convincing evidence that the death penalty leads to less mayhem, unhappiness and destruction, then I'd be in favour. Except, I haven't seen any. On balance, the cost of abolishing the death penalty is keeping many people in prison for years. I'll accept that cost if it means being able to correct a mistake - that could be my life.

IOW, I approach such moral issues with pragmatism. It is "costly" to forbid abortion but it is "cheap" to abolish the death penalty.

Windyman, your own morality probably has a similar pragmatism - if you think about it shorn of any self-justification. Andrew Coyne had a great line recently: "When people say: 'It's not the money, it's the principle.' Then you know it's the money."

[Riverwind]

Liberals would rather see a innocent baby be put to death via abortion than some murderer who killed someone.

A fetus is not human. A convicted murderer is human and could be wrongly convicted.

[newbie]

Liberals would rather see a innocent baby be put to death via abortion than some murderer who killed someone.

A fetus is not human. A convicted murderer is human and could be wrongly convicted.

And yet there have been cases where a pregnant woman has been charged with murdering her unborn child (fetus)? One case:

http://www.talkleft.com/new_archives/007837.html

[August1991]

Liberals would rather see a innocent baby be put to death via abortion than some murderer who killed someone.

A fetus is not human. A convicted murderer is human and could be wrongly convicted.

Gimme a break, Riverwind. You too are avoiding the question by turning it into a debate about: "When does life start?"

You say life starts during pregnancy (when exactly?), others say it starts at conception, the Pope says it starts at ejaculation, I say it starts with the glint in an eye. Who's right?

If you want to, we can have this debate about when life starts but it will be sterile (pardon me) and resolve nothing. It will also say nothing about our soldiers now in Afghanistan with orders to shoot to kill.

[Kindred]

Why bring up a court case in the US in 2004 on a thread about Liberals and their stand on abortion and the death penalty? This is Canada, not the US.

Would the death penalty prevent murder, damn right it would. People who think its to their financial advantage to murder their spouse rather than split the assets in a divorce would think twice about it, and I bet they would choose divorce over being put to death themselves.

There was a case in BC where a guy told his coworkers he was going to kill "that bitch" before he was going to hand over half of everything he had worked for - and he did - and he isnt the only one.

I just happen to know some of his coworkers who heard him say it, and he was out in three years, half a million dollars richer than he would have been had he gone the divorce route instead. AND he got his old job back too. Half a million for three years in jail? Not bad .........

I think the term "pro abortion" is inaccurate because its really "pro choice" and its whether a woman has the right to have control of her own body, and the right to choose what happens with her body, or doesnt happen. I think it should be obvious that is a fundemental freedom in a democratic country.

As long as men do not and cannot become pregnant, and will never face the possibility of being FORCED to carry the pregnancy to term against their wishes then they shouldnt have a vote or any legal say in the matter. Especially not when women still suffer the stigma and financial hardship a child born to a single mother can bring with it, not to mention the physical repurcussions of pregnancy - A guy gets some woman pregnant and he can walk away with NO financial or physical repurcussions - therefore IMO its something women should decide - not men.

[Riverwind]

You say life starts during pregnancy (when exactly?), others say it starts at conception, the Pope says it starts at ejaculation, I say it starts with the glint in an eye. Who's right?

That is the entire point. Each person's opinion on whether abortion is murder is based entirely on their concept of when life starts. This is a religious decision that each person should be free to make for themselves and no person has a right to impose their religious views on others. That is why there is no contradiction between between opposing capital punishment and but supporting abortion.

[Riverwind]

And yet there have been cases where a pregnant woman has been charged with murdering her unborn child (fetus)?

Only in the US where abortion opponents push for laws that recognize a fetus as human as part of their quest to force their religious views down every one's throat. Such cases do not exist in Canada.

[margrace]

It makes me very angry to read what hypocrites propose. No I do not believe in abortion as birth control but I sure would like to see all the people charged who make money promoting sex. Our children are awash in it. Did you ever watch TV. Disgusting.

It also angers me that it usually is men who debate this. If they would practise what they preach and control their unholy urges then we would not need this discussion.

It takes two to make a baby and when items such as the sale of date rape drugs for instance is allowed then maybe we should consider who is creating the babies and who is responsible. Give me a break what a lot of hypocrites.

[Black Dog]

Liberals would rather see a innocent baby be put to death via abortion than some murderer who killed someone.

Could Liberals please explain this one to me? It seems like backward thinking to me.

A fetus is not a "baby."

[jdobbin]

Why are liberals the hypocrites? Reverse the question somewhat. Why do conservatives want to protect life in one stroke and want to take it away with another? Can't they be consistent?

[Jerry J. Fortin]

First of all there is a large difference between captial punishment and abortion. One is the choice of the individual the other is a choice of society as a whole. Lets take this one step at a time in a logical debate about these two contentious issues.

Do we want individual rights, or do we want the state to tell us how to live?

If you promote individual rights then you must accept the current abortion practices. If you do not support individual rights then you can take those rights away from the citizen and prevent them from acting in what they believe is their best interests.

Do we want capital punishment ? If you want capital punishment you are giving the state the right to kill and denying that right to the citizen. Aside from that it implies that you trust the government with your own life and have faith they will not make a mistake and take your life in error. I do not trust the government with my life.

[August1991]

Each person's opinion on whether abortion is murder is based entirely on their concept of when life starts.

On the contrary, arguing about when life starts as if that that determines "murder" and hence when an abortion should be illegal is entirely avoiding the question. As you point out, different people view this issue differently which means that some will consider it murder and others not. The debate will turn around in circles endlessly. Worse however, the definition is completely arbitrary anyway. One is free to pick whatever justification one wants to support one's opinion. "It's not murder because I say it's not murder."

Finally, such an approach still does not explain how we (as taxpayers and citizens) can send our soldiers abroad to kill people, sometimes in cold blood.

When Blackdog argues that a "fetus is not a baby" and hence an abortion is not murder, Blackdog is inventing a premise out of thin air and in effect avoiding the moral dilemma.

I suggest rather that we face head on the obvious fact that our society tolerates "murder" and then look at the circumstances surrounding this fact. Here's an example: There are numerous unsafe highways across Canada and many fatal car accidents that could be avoided if we made the roads safer. So, why don't we?

Do we want individual rights, or do we want the state to tell us how to live? If you promote individual rights then you must accept the current abortion practices. If you do not support individual rights then you can take those rights away from the citizen and prevent them from acting in what they believe is their best interests.

Your argument is inane. I want to murder you and if the State forbids me, then the State is encroaching on my individual rights and telling me how to live.

[margrace]

Another way of looking at this it the holier than thou person who is against abortion but never looks at the fact of what happens to an unwanted child. When some of those children grow up and become criminals then it is all right to kill them. You can't have it both ways

[Charles Anthony]

Forgive me but...

Another way of looking at this it the holier than thou person who is against abortion but never looks at the fact of what happens to an unwanted child. When some of those children grow up and become criminals then it is all right to kill them. You can't have it both ways

...your message may be concealed behind your grammar.

I would suggest writing shorter sentences. Otherwise, you may be misunderstood.

[Liam]

Why are liberals the hypocrites? Reverse the question somewhat. Why do conservatives want to protect life in one stroke and want to take it away with another? Can't they be consistent?

Valid point. Conservatives often claim to be "pro-life", yet what they mean is pro-life till birth then all bets are off.

[Charles Anthony]

Let us create labels for people who ARE consistent.

What would you call a person who supports both abortion AND capital punishment?

Would you call him a person who supports killing?

What would you call a person who opposes both abortion AND capital punishment?

Would you call him a person who opposes killing?

[geoffrey]

Each person's opinion on whether abortion is murder is based entirely on their concept of when life starts.

Wrong, we justify imposing death on others all the time, I don't think we ask if adult Iraqi lives have started.

My opinion on whether abortion is unethical/immoral (I'm claim that it is in fact, completely unethical at least) has little to do with the fact I believe life starts at conception. I think the current laws are both immoral and unethical for the reason that:

a) father's rights are completely ignored, if the dad would be the best dad in the world and wanted the kid like nothing else, the mom can still have it terminated.

there is a long line of people looking for adoptions in Canada, why not spread happiness.

c) it removes responsibility from sex, not saying you've got to be married or what not, but the why bother with the condom tonight attitude only exists because of abortion, I know such people personally.

d) if we look at it from a utilitarian perspective, more good is done by having the child, even if immediately adopted.

e) if for medical reasons, then that's just BS unless its 100%. The doctors recommended my parents abort me because I was ultra-high risk for mental retardation type problems and major physical impairment. Good thing my parents didn't see the morality in it, they thought I was to be disabled up until my birth. Funny now that I'm competitively active, graduated high school near the top of my class, and am near the top in my university class. Tests have a margin of error, would you be ok pulling the plug on three year olds if it was 99% provable that they were going to get fatal cancer 2 years later?

Pragmatically, I tend to side with August to an extent. Banning abortion doesn't stop abortions, they are just done in ways that harm more people. The solution, seems to be tough to find. More investment in adoption agencies and family planning clinics that weren't so abortion trigger happy would be a start. There are alternatives that aren't being discussed enough with most mothers that are seeking an abortion of convinence.

This is a religious decision that each person should be free to make for themselves and no person has a right to impose their religious views on others. That is why there is no contradiction between between opposing capital punishment and but supporting abortion.

I agree there is no contradiction between capital punishment and abortion (I oppose both however), but abortion doesn't have to be a religious issue. I just clearly outlined a logical ethical argument against abortion on 5 different grounds. Didn't mention God in any of them, none are based on religion. My religious values aren't why I believe life starts at conception, I can logically reason this.

There are non-religious arguments against abortion. Don't make it so black and white River just because many pro-lifers are so hardline religious folks. We all aren't.

[margrace]

Interesting arguments so as soon as the men start having the babies then we will have a level playing field and not a bunch of hypocritical nuts.

[Black Dog]

a) father's rights are completely ignored, if the dad would be the best dad in the world and wanted the kid like nothing else, the mom can still have it terminated.

When the father has the power to assume the responsibility for carrying the kid, he can have equal say.

there is a long line of people looking for adoptions in Canada, why not spread happiness.

Because pregnancy is highly stressful and often dangerous time. You're asking people to risk their mental well-being, their jobs or health just to "spread happiness."

c) it removes responsibility from sex, not saying you've got to be married or what not, but the why bother with the condom tonight attitude only exists because of abortion, I know such people personally.

I call b.s. People don't frivolously use medical services just because they're available. Esepcially in the case of an invasive elective prodedure like abortion.

d) if we look at it from a utilitarian perspective, more good is done by having the child, even if immediately adopted.

Who's "good"?

e) if for medical reasons, then that's just BS unless its 100%. The doctors recommended my parents abort me because I was ultra-high risk for mental retardation type problems and major physical impairment. Good thing my parents didn't see the morality in it, they thought I was to be disabled up until my birth. Funny now that I'm competitively active, graduated high school near the top of my class, and am near the top in my university class. Tests have a margin of error, would you be ok pulling the plug on three year olds if it was 99% provable that they were going to get fatal cancer 2 years later?

Why does the fetus recieve more consideration than the mother? I'm not talking about cases where the chld may be physically or mentally impaired but about cases where th elife or healh of th ewoman is potentially at risk. Would you wish your wife to go through with a pregnancy that could kill her, even if the chance was somewhat remote?

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I do not favor either abortion or capital punishment. Then again I am a guy and will never have to make the abortion call, so that one is out of my hands and I would literally abstain if it ever came to a vote. Capital punishment is different as well. I just don't trust the court system not to make a mistake and kill the wrong person. If it isn't okay for me to kill you or you to kill me I hardly think it wise to let the government kill either one of us.

[newbie]

...Would the death penalty prevent murder, damn right it would...

Uh, actually no:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/abolish/deterrence.html

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=168

[ClearWest]

Thou shalt not kill.

Let's start with the government, is it okay for them to kill? My opnion: No. Scratch capital punishment. Scratch conscription. It shouldn't happen. Period.

Now, does abortion count as killing? My opinion: Yes. I would personally never endorse abortion because I feel that it is murder, and I'll explain why. It doesn't matter whether the fetus is 'human', but it might as well be. It has the genetic makeup to become human. It's on its way to become human. It's a living, thriving pre-human. And if allowed to run its course it would eventually become like you or me. A fully formed, fully functional, fully capable, fully reasoning human being.

Politically, should we 'ban' abortion? No. That would only send it underground like drugs and alcohol when they are prohibited. Should we encourage abortion? No. But the option should be allowed to be supplied if it is demanded. It's all about the supply and demand. By trying to stop supply and demand you only push the demanders and suppliers into a black market, which can be more dangerous than the actual act sometimes.

But I will always discourage abortion the way I would discrouage smoking tobacco or drinking caffeine. I won't stop you from doing it, but I highly recommend that you don't.