I read this when it was first published and it was worthwhile reading it again. I am pro-life but can understand some of the arguments of the pro-choice. Your point of having a conversation is key. I could, with clear conscious but opposed to my beliefs, accept abortion within limits. It comes to a matter of consensus that our society will not fully agree with but can live and abide by. Would that create “harmony”, doubtful and both extremes will push for their beliefs but the large majority of citizens could live by an achieved collective agreement.
I pointed out the arguments of both sides for just that reason - they both have validity to those who support them. But this issue, like capital punishment, can't be split down the middle (much like Solomon's decision about the baby) - a person can't be half dead or half pregnant, so decisions in these matters are absolute.
So while it is certainly distasteful, any compromise, I feel, must weigh the balance or "value" of the baby's life against the ramifications of bringing it into the world. I can say "In a perfect world,...", but it is not a perfect world. So where do we find that balance?
I acknowledge that life does, biologically, begin at conception. But in a practical sense in our imperfect world, my personal view on that balance is the point in which thoughts and dreams and physical feelings have been developed - once a fetus can sense what is happening to it, I feel all bets are off. To me, that seems the most reasonable compromise to respect women and society while protecting the defenseless as much as possible.
Of course, not everyone sees things the way I do. All we can do is work to share our perspectives intelligently, and hope to convince as many as we can.
Hallelujah…. But I often ask in the comments, how do we get the word out, how do we get this dialogue to start? As one individual, not in a influencer position, I have to rely on those that have a taller soap box than mine.
All most of us can do is continue to write, and share what we read with as many people as possible. My soapbox is tiny - I probably have less than 50 Substack subscribers, and I've written 2 books, which I am proud of, but which nobody has read. I'm not a social media presence or self-promoter, so your guess is as good as mine. But mostly, when I read stuff I find compelling, I share not only the article but also recommend the writer's page to everyone I know, and hope they do the same to some degree. Grassroots. I've discussed this with a few other writers as well, who have shared the same frustrations. It's hard to break through.
I read this when it was first published and it was worthwhile reading it again. I am pro-life but can understand some of the arguments of the pro-choice. Your point of having a conversation is key. I could, with clear conscious but opposed to my beliefs, accept abortion within limits. It comes to a matter of consensus that our society will not fully agree with but can live and abide by. Would that create “harmony”, doubtful and both extremes will push for their beliefs but the large majority of citizens could live by an achieved collective agreement.
I think you're right, Dave.
I pointed out the arguments of both sides for just that reason - they both have validity to those who support them. But this issue, like capital punishment, can't be split down the middle (much like Solomon's decision about the baby) - a person can't be half dead or half pregnant, so decisions in these matters are absolute.
So while it is certainly distasteful, any compromise, I feel, must weigh the balance or "value" of the baby's life against the ramifications of bringing it into the world. I can say "In a perfect world,...", but it is not a perfect world. So where do we find that balance?
I acknowledge that life does, biologically, begin at conception. But in a practical sense in our imperfect world, my personal view on that balance is the point in which thoughts and dreams and physical feelings have been developed - once a fetus can sense what is happening to it, I feel all bets are off. To me, that seems the most reasonable compromise to respect women and society while protecting the defenseless as much as possible.
Of course, not everyone sees things the way I do. All we can do is work to share our perspectives intelligently, and hope to convince as many as we can.
Thanks for commenting. ZL
Hallelujah…. But I often ask in the comments, how do we get the word out, how do we get this dialogue to start? As one individual, not in a influencer position, I have to rely on those that have a taller soap box than mine.
All most of us can do is continue to write, and share what we read with as many people as possible. My soapbox is tiny - I probably have less than 50 Substack subscribers, and I've written 2 books, which I am proud of, but which nobody has read. I'm not a social media presence or self-promoter, so your guess is as good as mine. But mostly, when I read stuff I find compelling, I share not only the article but also recommend the writer's page to everyone I know, and hope they do the same to some degree. Grassroots. I've discussed this with a few other writers as well, who have shared the same frustrations. It's hard to break through.