|
CuriousLord -> RE: Louisiana bans partial birth abortion (7/18/2007 10:30:59 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DSwriter
No one here is going to be able to answer the question: When does life begin? One person says it starts as conception. Someone else argues it happens at birth. There is no easy answer. All you have is your opinion.
Why the communal obsession with "where does life begin"? Bah. It's silly. And, no, it's not an opinion. It's usage.
Say a gargage is small. You put up a sign, "Only cars may enter", as they are the only ones that won't take damage/damage the gargage. One might have a van, which, as we all know, can also be referred to as a car. (A "car" may be more of a sedan-like model, specifically, or it may, in general, refer to an automobile, depending on usage.) This one may claim, "But I have a van, which, by the 'automobile in general' definition of 'car', meets your requirements." This one fails to understand that different definitions of a word form different words, even if they carry the same spelling, pounciation, grammatical usage, etc.
Therefore, one can define (vaguely, to spare myself unnecessary typing) a human's life as "starting at conception" or as "starting at birth". One definition is not more correct than the other. And it's not a god damned opinion. It's the usage on the part of the speaker. And to hell with any listenor who may intentionally mistake usage- he can cover his ears and say "la la la" all day, and not hear a thing, and it would be to similar effect.
If you use life, in the conception form, then use it as so. Base morals around it, whatever. If you use life, in the birth form, ditto. You can use it as both, and have different morals around each, or the same, if such suits.
Now, I realize a simple-minded, likely prevalent, notion of "murder" is "to end a human life without the consent of state" ('consent of state' is affixed to modify such things as self-defense killings, war-time combat killings, executions of the state, etc.). Then one asks, "What is life, in this definition? Is it a life that begins at birth, or one that begins at conception?" The answer to this is not a matter of opinion, either; it's simply undefined, not clarified by the law, nor agreed upon. To draw analogy, a group of men, running a bridge, may come together and agree that only cars may cross this bridge. Do they mean "cars", as in "automobiles", or as in, "sedan-like automobiles"? Neither. It wasn't defined. They simply never agreed on it, whether this was due to lack of agreement, forgetfullness, assumption, failure to consider alternate meanings of the word, or otherwise. Therefore, when one drives a van over such a bridge, did he break the law? The law isn't clear. While the courts claim, in such cases, to be "interrepting the law", they are actually defining it, adding to it- making it.
---
In any case, I have a test to attend, and a bit of last-minute cramming. Damn Chemistry and all the damn memorization is requires. I'll try to answer more posts later on this evening.
While I realize this is more thinking and consideration than most are accustomed to, I would like to invite all to do so. I haven't provided many answers yet- just points of consideration. It is not typical of my form to actually state my conclusions- I feel conclusions tend to be self-evident when the thinking is understood. This form is not for eurditicity's sake, but to give accurate answer, as the form of answer is rarely so simplistic as societial generalizations would have one come to indulge in the use of so often.
|
|
|
|
