Sep 11, 2021 02:46 AM
(Sep 11, 2021 12:35 AM)Leigha Wrote: Good points and agree, that either choice would be daunting. When it comes to ideologies, I want to know what motivates people to make the decisions they make, when it comes to anything really. It would be refreshing to see an honest dialogue for once between politicians on the left and right - instead of the right saying ''it's murder'' in response to the left saying ''it's a woman's right to choose.'' Each side talking past one another. It never seems to go past a variation of those two themes.
And what, pray tell, would that look like? The right tries to use the scientific definition of when a life begins (unique DNA), and the left just changes the terms to "personhood," as a dodge. Do you think anyone can have a productive discussion when one side always uses slippery terms to obscure things? The second you validate their framing, they've already won, as they control what they "mean" by personhood. They patently will not discuss that a fetus will try to fend off the dissections implements and vacuum tubes during an abortion. They will, however, discuss the need to abortion up to and including immediately after birth, which by definition is infanticide, but they've blithely deny that term with no sensible justification.
They are selfish children, you want their own "choice" regardless of who else it may harm. How do you have an honest dialog with people who will not be honesty, with themselves (intellectual honesty) much less with anyone else? And how do you pretend that killing a living human isn't exactly that, without tacitly agreeing with the left, that it may not be? Reality and humans just don't work like your naive optimism would have you believe.
The only thing that gets through is mandated education, like viewing ultrasounds, listening to heartbeats, seeing images of development at each week in the process, counseling, etc..