[Vision2020] Palin Candidacy Helps Planned ParenthoodFundraising

[joekc at roadrunner.com]

A few things.

No one is claiming that the fetus is not a human being, or at least anyone who does 
claim that doesn't know what he or she is talking about. "Human" is a species term and a 
human fetus is a member of the species, so a human being. The point is whether it is a
person, whether it has rights, and whether it deserves protection from the government 
for these reasons. The fetus can't have a right to life unless it has a right in the first 
place and that depends on whether or not it is a person.

According to an on-line medical dictionary, here is the definition of "fetus": "The unborn 
offspring from the end of the 8th week after conception (when the major structures have 
formed) until birth. Up until the eighth week, the developing offspring is called an 
embryo." A child is a human being between birth and puberty. No fetus is a child, at least 
if you'd like to use biological precision and not try to beg substantive questions with 
misused terminology and cheap appeals to emotion.

Second, the argument below is a slippery slope fallacy. You could use the same type of 
argument to show that everyone is sane (or insane), that nothing is flat, that there are no 
heaps, that no one is bald, etc. Unless you are willing to accept those other claims there is 
nothing about the argument itself that should get you to endorse the conclusion that you 
hold. So why do you endorse it? What are your real reasons? So far I can't tell.

The issue is not where you or Sarah Palin want to draw the line, or how you or Ms. 
Palin should think about this fetus. The issue is what makes you and others think that 
your bad arguments are reasons to tell me, or my daughter (were I to have one), where to 
draw the line, how to think about the issue? In a previous post you talk about taking "Ms. 
Palin's deeply held moral position in favor of life and step[ing] all over it" with the recent
Planned Parenthood fundraiser. But how, exactly, is the radical right view that you and Palin endorse not showing an even greater lack of respect for the "deeply held moral 
positions" of your political opponents? For you not only disagree you don't even want to 
allow them to decide this complex issue for themselves. You think you know better than 
them but so far I have not seen one good reason to support your confidence in your views.

Lastly, I don't have a problem with the fundraising campaign nor with the fact that 
donators are asked to "list the address of the McCain campaign headquarters or the 
Alaska governor's office." For crying out loud the woman is running for VP of the US. 
Citizens have the right to let her and McCain know how they fell about the topic. I am 
sick of the request that we treat Sarah Palin with kid gloves, as if she couldn't take the 
normal abuse that comes with running for office in these times, abuse that is perpetuated, 
in fact, by the very radical rightwing fraction that Palin represents. If Palin can't stand the 
heat, she should get back in the kitchen. (Sorry, I couldn't resist the turn of phrase!) And 
I am not being disrespectful. I'm being very respectful. She should be treated the same as 
everyone else running for that office. It is a shame, given the current state of incivility, 
what that entails but one need only check out McCain's adds to find out.

--
Joe Campbell


---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote: 
> For someone who derides others for engaging in this sort of discussion you 
> sure do chime in with amazing frequency.
> 
> It seems to be that it is your "brain use" that is in question. If human 
> life is not created at conception, when is it? At 91 days, at 24 weeks, or 
> at 9 months? When do you superstitiously and arbitrarily deem what is 
> unquestionably a living entity "human." By your system there would have to 
> be an argument to be made for bestowing the title at year 1, 5, or perhaps 
> 18. I don't think that any amount of brain power can determine the exact 
> moment that a child meets your criterion (whatever that might be. I've never 
> received a satisfactory answer.) As a conservative, I prefer to err on the 
> side of caution. No magic required.
> 
> Now perhaps you could polish up your soup spoon and dip me an answer out of 
> dworshak reservoir to the question of the day. When does your mighty brain 
> (and the impoundment) tell you that humans come into being? Please be as 
> specific as your rational mind allows.
> 
> g