Rhetorical? No. I mean this. The mental strain of being truly pro-life is overwhelming. To be pro-life is to accept that up to 2,000,000,000 innocent children have been thoughtlessly killed over the past fifty years. To be pro-life is to believe the person who may have been your husband or wife was killed before their first breath. To be pro-life is to accept that large groups of kids are getting slaughtered by the thousand every day. Pro-lifers are expected to vote for politicians who treat the issue with a mere shrug. To be pro-life is heartbreaking. And I want out of this.
From a young age I have always questioned my beliefs. Never satisfied to just “accept” a belief based on feelings, I need the logic and reasoning behind a principle to accept it. I work in health care, and it doesn’t do to have an opinion. I must studiously research that opinion, and back that opinion with facts and figures – if I don’t, someone could die. The same is true with abortion. We can all agree that the pro-life/pro-choice debate is a debate of life vs. death. One side says the baby is a person, the other says it isn’t. Which is true?
I want to know which is true. I realize that most people go with their feelings and their ideas – this won’t cut it. I need objective truth and logic. The lives of two billion babies are at stake – feelings will have to wait.
Here’s my problem – the more I seek to find some dirty pro-life secret, the more I become pro-life. The more I seek to disprove pro-lifeism, the more I fall into it’s clutches.
I’ve read many arguments from both sides. I go to pro-choice sites and try to rationalize their arguments. I also go to pro-life sites and try to rationalize their arguments. What’s confusing is the pro-choice sites typically try to discredit the pro-lifers, instead of attacking their argument. They attack the person, and not the argument. – which seems silly. The pro-lifers do their fair share of trying to discredit the pro-choicers, but I find that many pro-life sites (Abort73.com in particular) offer logic based arguments. I want these arguments to be refuted, so I go over to the pro-choice sites (NAF, NARAL) and see what they have to say – know what I find? Not much. They keep attacking the person, and not the argument. I believe the world of logic calls it ad hominem – and it’s a fallacy.
Go on to Abort73.com and read some articles. Then, find some resources that demonstrate the sites arguments to be logically inconsistent, and we will have a discussion. But it is difficult when all pro-choicers do is attempt to discredit a source instead of clearly explaining why the sources argument is invalid. Please, for the sake of people like me who would rather be pro-choice. . .
Truly, I would rather be pro-choice. I’d also rather the world rained gumdrops on Mondays – the grass is green, whether I like it or not. Until I can get a cohesive, logic-based, biblical argument as to why the unborn are not human beings, then my mind won’t liberated from this land where the most innocent among us are killed by the billion.
Please – help.
(If you are a pro-choicer, I’d ask that you leave your logic-based argument against the unborn being human life in the comment box – thanks)
(If you are pro-life, I ask that you leave the toughest argument against pro-lifeism in the comment box – thanks)