You say How can I logically be told that I am wrong about it being a living child, but then also be told it is a horrible decision and that we can all agree that reducing the number of the procedures is best. If it is as simple as I am understanding you believe it is....not life..not a child...then why the concern about how often it happens?1.) In my original post I laid out my case for why I believe that abortion is wrong, as as you mentioned in your reply, my argument hinges on my belief that what was being aborted is a child. My understanding is that you believe it isn't a child, rather a non-viable fetus. Again, I don't want to argue or convince...just to understand....to me, as I mentioned in my post, I think about my son...the ultrasound pictures we saw...the heart beat that began at 3 weeks which we eagerly listened to each week....and the defined clear human images we watched grow week by week, month by month, until he was born. I guess I don't understand what a non-viable fetus is....what makes it non-viable...why a fetus instead of a child....does non-viable mean not alive? How can it not be alive when it is proven to have a heartbeat...sense light..feel pain...recognize voices..etc. When do you believe viability begins and why?
2.) I agree with you that sex education, contraception, help, etc. are all valuable tools..and I support using each of these tools to reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies, support families, and assist in adoptions. However, while I wouldn't disagree with your comment that using these tools to reduce abortions is something that most people want....a line that I have often heard pro-choice individuals use in similar conversations...I fail to see the logic in making such an argument as a non pro-life advocate. Again, I would like to understand....not to insult or argue. I await your answer to my first question above to clarify what you personally believe....but I have heard others who have said they thought that it wasn't a child...it was not viable...it was a fetus....but that we can all agree that it would be great if education, etc, etc, could reduce the number of abortions. Every time I hear that, it strikes me as non-logical, but I haven't been able to ask the follow-up questions that would help me understand why people believe this. Simply put...if you don't believe it is a child, if you don't believe it is viable, if you really don't believe it is alive despite the items I listed above (heartbeat, sound, sight, pain,etc), if you believe it is an acceptable elective medical procedure to simply remove tissue....then while I would strongly disagree, I ccould logically understand why it would follow that YOU would believe abortion should not be restricted. What I don't understand is why someone would believe this, but then say it is a horrible decision...and that we can all agree that reducing this procedure is a good thing..etc. Is it appeasement? centrism? How can I logically be told that I am wrong about it being a living child, but then also be told it is a horrible decision and that we can all agree that reducing the number of the procedures is best. If it is as simple as I am understanding you believe it is....not life..not a child...then why the concern about how often it happens?
If hope you take the time to reply! I really am interested in your response and understanding your point of view.
Again, another well written, well thought out post--kudos. You have mastered the art of not being too accusatory and yet asking a very good question in a very respectful way.
But unfortunately, I doubt you will get many answers because I don't think many people will really want to think of how they could possibly argue a response to this.
I'm curious to see what someone like Mellers, ZenBirdist, or Fed up would respectfully say.