I’m done with the abortion posts, though I encourage you readers to continue the debate. I leave the topic with this thought: this robust and civil debate is exactly what the topic deserves — and exactly what Roe v. Wade prevents.
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico...
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | |||||
Powered by WordPress.
Patterico,
Thank you for the opportunity to post at your place. You offer excellent topics and the commenters are top-notch. All in all, your blog parties are the best.
DRJ (3c8cd6) — 2/20/2006 @ 11:11 pmYep, thanks. This subject doesn’t get debated on the level of ideas very often (at least among those I hobnob with, it seems). Appreciate the chance to think and write. And the many thoughtful challenges to ideas I’ve put out.
I’d be interested if anybody has read through Patterico’s series and the comments in them, and found that their position on abortion has changed, one way or another. (My thinking has changed, if not my position, in that I now understand some of the other points of view much better, thanks to the able commenters here).
AMac (b6037f) — 2/20/2006 @ 11:45 pmAMac:
My opinion has changed in two ways as a result of Patterico’s series and your comments.
First, I have a greater understanding of fetal development – although my understanding is probably at a kindergarten level in a scientific sense – that enables me to focus on a fairly specific gestational period (8-10 or perhaps 12 weeks) as important. Second, I am a more optimistic that people can reasonably discuss abortion. Perhaps dialogues like this can ultimately help us reach a compromise on abortion.
Like you, I have not changed my moral or phillosophical position on abortion. However, since I’m pro-life living in a pro-choice world, the reality is I have to view abortion as a political rather than a philosophical issue.
It has been a pleasure to discuss this with you and others. I especially benefitted from your discussion with Amphipolis, and I’m glad you both took the time to contribute. Thank you for hosting the discussion, Patterico, and for providing the format and guidance to make it work.
DRJ (3c8cd6) — 2/21/2006 @ 12:23 amI am sorry I didn’t get in on this earlier but it’s been one of those weeks at work. I cannot say when a foetus becomes human or even partially human. I can however note that whenever it is argued that someone is less than human it is an excuse for slavery or killing. It took human society millenia to accept that psople not members of the tribe were human. The same for race and religion. If we cannot say to a certainty that the unborn are not human, is it not best to assume they are? I can see the reasons others disagree but I cannot say anything has changed my view.
Ken Hahn (5f4076) — 2/21/2006 @ 5:01 amI suppose my opinion is based on a moral view of human rights, but isn’t that the tone of the Declaration of Independence and the Preamble to the Constitution?
Roe created a “right of privacy” that trumps the unalienable right to life. Privacy? Please someone tell the IRS and the city zoning inspector.
I know I’m in a small minority as an absolutist and I’m well aware that even if Roe is overturned the chance that any restrictions would be put on abortion here in California is close to nonexistant. So be it. As late as 1863, a vast majority of Americans opposed abolishing slavery. I will continue to try to persuade others to reconsider.
P,
paul (464e99) — 2/21/2006 @ 5:15 amThis has been one of a very few times I have had this discussion which didn’t disintergrate into name-calling, screaming and vitriol. Would that the national debate could be conducted in the same atomsphere is something to strive for. Thanks again.
Paul Skurnick
It was, in fact, a very good discussion. I appreciated very much the focus on the human beings involved — the mother and the baby — and not on an authoritarian society imposing its moralistic (not necessarily “moral”) view. It is what I like about Reagan’s version of conservatism. Individual freedom, individual responsibility and mutual respect of individual rights.
nk (5e5670) — 2/21/2006 @ 5:43 amThank you Patterico and all participants for a remarkably civil discussion. It helps when we respect each other as fellow citizens even as our ideas clash. The emphasis becomes persuasion, as opposed to manipulation.
I’d like to hear from those lurkers who remained silent. I’ve already said too much.
Amphipolis (fdbc48) — 2/21/2006 @ 6:21 amPatterico, your focus on abortion was timely. The Supreme Court has decided to take up partial birth abortion.
DRJ (3c8cd6) — 2/21/2006 @ 7:34 amI, too, was delighted at this very thoughtful discussion about one of my favorite debates in law school. Thanks to the pro-choice folks who gave me new food for thought. Thanks to the pro-lifers who frequently fleshed out my personal arguments against abortion. 🙂
sharon (be9d4e) — 2/21/2006 @ 7:55 amIt was good to discuss the moral aspects of abortion as a starting point, without regard to the legislative and judicial obstacles for either side to implement their views.
However, I would have liked to see the discussion develop to include people’s visions of abortion policy, i.e. (1) In criminalizing abortion, what line(s) should society (or the commenter, as a hypothetical benign dictator) draw? This is a more practical necessity than moral distinctions that have been the focus so far. And, (2) what penalty should society impose on violations of this law on doctors, mothers, and others?
biwah (f5ca22) — 2/21/2006 @ 8:04 amDespite our clashes, biwah, I agree with you that that’s a thorny question, and quite honestly, despite my conviction that abortion is murder, I don’t know the answer.
CraigC (4525c5) — 2/21/2006 @ 11:55 pmDespite the fact that I used the word “despite” twice in one comment, “despite” is not necessarily one of my favorite words, despite the fact that “despite” isn’t necessarily one of my least favorite words.
Oh, Christ, now I’m gonna have to do a post about “necessarily.”
CraigC (4525c5) — 2/22/2006 @ 12:00 amYep Craig, no matter where you’re coming from, the issues change when the rubber hits the road.
I think that once people start grappling with practical implementation of more abstract concepts (not saying either a fetus or a woman is a concept – just the various distinctions) they often wind up not too far apart. And, their differences are at least quantifiable, not unbridgeable moral gulfs.
It just would be interesting to see if that held true in this case, once the conversation began to zero in on policy.
Alternatively, it would be interesting to see this process take shape on guns. There, I really think most people would end up so close together that we’d look back and wonder what all the fuss was about.
biwah (f5ca22) — 2/22/2006 @ 7:22 am