Posted by
HvySlpr on Tuesday, June 17, 2008 10:07:04 PM
This started as a response to my e-mail and blog about Planned Parenthood’s acceptance of money to abort, exclusively, black babies.
You can read it here.
What ensued was an epic seven day debate, via e-mail, amongst me and a friend, denoted as “J.” It turned out to be pretty interesting, ranging from definitions of life, to discussions on moral relativity, euthanasia, and much more. What follows is a fundamental difference between conservative and liberal thought, analysis, and core belief structure.
My plan is to break this debate up into multiple blogs, over a week or so span, as to make it easier to read. I have not changed any words or punctuation that resulted in a change in meaning or emphasis. Enjoy.
BEGIN MAY 6, 2008 – Blog distributed
J: What is the truth here? I don’t’ know which side to believe. There’s no doubt racism still exists. I don’t know what to say.
H: What sides are you talking about? Planned Parenthood has acknowledged the people on these recordings work for them.
J: Have they? That was unclear to me. It’s the internet; anyone could post fake/exaggerated material. As for PP, it doesn’t surprise me. They’re a “business.” Funds supporting their “business” is a major priority. That’s the way the game is played these days. Few have morals or ethics; it comes down to the bottom line. PP claims that only (approximately) 3% of its services are for abortions. This does not negate the recordings, but it raises a lot of questions.
H: Most states require a record to be kept. The Alan Guttmacher Institute is a liberal sex-ed and research org. (actually Naral links the website on their home page), but it keeps pretty decent stats (like the fact that incest, rape, and health of the mother make up only ~4% of all abortions). To Planned Parenthood, there is nothing wrong with abortion. They will only take action in this case because of the negative press and racist association, not because what they are doing is reprehensible. Margaret Sanger is not someone they run away from. Google her name and you will find websites made just to fawn over her “accomplishments.” P.S. If only 3% of the population was killed, nine million lives would be lost. That is more than the entire U.S. Jewish population.
J: You are correct. PP is in the business of giving abortions, this is their “purpose,” so why would they think something is wrong with it? By its nature, PP is pro-choice. And yes the negative and racist exposure will probably cause them to do something because again this may affect its image and funds, which it all boils down to. You know I can’t really get mad. This is the reality of the world we live in. People will say and do as they please. All I can do is what is best for me and my family. Personally, I am pro-choice. It is the woman’s/couple’s decision. The woman/couple have to still deal with their decision(s) for a lifetime.
END MAY 6, 2008
BEGIN MAY 7, 2008
H: Less “funds”, more “image.” If they were a pure business, and not a political movement, they wouldn’t need millions of dollars in donations every month, and they wouldn’t be giving away so many free services. They are in this business to advance a political agenda – that agenda just got exposed – eugenics.
H: One, life cannot logically begin anywhere but at conception. Two, the taking of a life for personal gain is unacceptable. How can you be pro-abortion or “pro-choice” as the P.C. crowd has dubbed it, and accept these two premises? It is illogical to say that taking life is bad (murder, genocide, manslaughter) and then say “it’s up to [the woman]” when it comes to abortion. Abortion is the ending of life; a yet unborn life, but a life. People often ask “How could Hitler have killed all those Jews?” The citizens of the world probably said; “this is the reality of the world we live in. People will say and do as they please. All I can do is what is best for me and my family.” I am very libertarian when it comes to private business, but when your private business breaks thousands of years of accepted moral and legal code, it must be stopped by force. Freedom is NOT anarchy.
J: I have to say; I believe there is a difference between Hitler’s genocide or any genocide vs. a woman’s/couple’s right to abortion. Abortion is a personal choice that should be made by individuals/couples, whereas genocide is somewhat “forced.” Citizens are not being “forced" to have or not have abortions, there is a choice. On the other hand, if I was told or forced to do something I didn’t believe in, than I would stand up. Decisions about abortion become/is: “This is the reality of the world we live in. People will say and do as they please. All I can do is what is best for me and my family.” I meant this quote to apply to personal issues, not larger societal issues. Our choice to have an abortion is none of society’s business, so to speak. But a plot to destroy a race of people or impede on civil liberties should become everyone’s problem.
END OF PART 1