Nazis demanded forced abortion upon women deemed "unAryan" (i.e. Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, etc.) and "Aryan" German women who were thought to be feeble-minded, or have hereditary diseases. (Abortion in the New Europe, p.114) I'm wondering if the pro abortion advocates here would have praised Hitler's policy of forced abortion in the weeding out of the unwanted and undesired, or if they would have approved of their idol Margaret Sanger's (creator of Planned Parenthood) wish to weed out the black race via abortion. http://www.angelfire.com/mo/baha/nazis.html
Guilt or not, weren't those babies being slaughtered via abortion? Guilt or not, aren't the over 1 million babies being slaughtered in America yearly done via abortion?
Guilt by association means that the argument rests on the assertion that the the opponent's views are associated with someone or something undesirable. It's a logical fallacy. The fact that Hitler used abortion doesn't make it wrong. There's a missing premise here - namely that abortion is wrong. You're back to square one. It's also a strawman because the position of pro-choicers is that abortion consented to by the mother should be legal, not forced abortion. Attack their position, not a mischaracterization of it.
No, I prefer to use the term 'baby', and perhaps in doing so create an image in the mind of these emotionally screwed up women that what they're about to do is not only horribly immoral, but that it will get them to realize that their own life (as miserable as it may have obviously been) was spared the abortion axe by a caring mother.
Its no surprise that you leftists rely on the game of semantics when you find yourself backed into a corner supporting the undefenseable. I don't see any difference between Hitler's forced abortion to an American abortionist's or an American woman's unforced abortion, do you? The fact remains that the upshot to the decision to abort be it forced or unforced is that we're left with over 1 million dead babies per year. Deal with that statistic.
So it really isn't a baby yet but you want them to see it as one. Thing is NOTHING you post here will even change one persons mind on the issue.
You leftists? I'm a libertarian. I'm about as far from the left as it's possible to be. I advocate the abolition of all taxation, not just 2% reductions like the establishment right. Now we're getting somewhere! The next step is to realize that pro-choicers do see a distinction here, and criticize that. The pro-choice crowd generally feels that either; Fetuses have no right to life because they don't meet the requirements, or... The mother has a right to abort regardless of the fetuses' right to life because the fetus is violating her person So go ahead and criticize these positions. Don't beat around the bush - address their position head on. That's all I'm asking for. Again, this skirts the issue. Remember the pro-choicers either think that fetuses have no right to life, or are parasites upon the mother. If you want to challenge this then go ahead, but ignoring the distinction doesn't help your cause at all. Just trying to help man. It's better that someone who's sympathetic makes these objections, they'd just make them eventually anyway.
Never said that I alone could change the minds of those insisting on exercising their right to to perform immoral and criminal acts on mankind as well ensuring their own emotional state to be forever damaged. But believe me, GOD has their number.
My bad in calling you a leftist, and I'm with you in abolishing all taxation. Look, I've placed my many responses to the pro choicers here with my opposition to their ungodly acts of abortion, but that's not what my OP is about. I'm simply comparing Hitler's use of forced abortion with today's woman's decision to abort her child. I don't see that there is any distinction here. A slaughtered baby is a slaughtered baby whether someone is forcing you to do it or you've decided to do it on your own accord. My belief that these women deciding to abort their potential offspring for selfish reasons is comparable to my belief that Hitler decided to abort those groups of people for selfish reasons as well.
Cool Always good to find some common ground. That's fair enough that you don't see any distinction, I just think there are better ways of articulating that. If your goal is to convince them then you're best off attacking the crux of their argument, because otherwise they'll shrug you off as just stating an opinion. Sort of like if a leftist started quoting gun control statistics at you - this misses the crux of our argument - that regardless of any dire consequences individuals have the liberty to own firearms without being harassed. We'd brush that off as just expressing an opinion, because it doesn't address what we see as the core of the issue.
