H: Being against abortion is not like being against an economic policy or drug policy. It is completely illogical to be against abortion, or to think it is wrong in any way, but not want it outlawed. What makes it wrong [in your eyes]? If you believe it is the ending of life, there is a moral obligation to outlaw it.

J: I believe it is like being for/against and economic policy or drug policy. My issue, personally, is I don’t know if “life” beings at conception. For one, a fertilized egg does not always equal a live birth. [HvySlpr], we are just on opposing sides on this one.

H: An abortion never ends in a live birth.

J: That’s not what I mean. A woman can have a fertilized egg in the uterus, but in some cases the egg is releases thru menstruation and sometimes miscarriage occurs.   In those instances, would the same response [from you] occur?

H: If the woman did that on purpose (i.e. drank alcohol to abort) I would investigate just like any other homicide; motive, murder weapon, intent, etc. Obviously that would be hard to prove, but it would be proven sometimes. Abortion is an intended act. An accident, by definition, could not be abortion. I do think that both cases are tragic, yes.

J: [T]his is why I question the numbers too, because for sometime a miscarriage was reported as abortion, I can’t remember the exact time frame. I know what you are going to say, “the number is still large despite some discrepancies.” Also, think of this scenario in regards to life: a person is on hospitalized and connected to a respirator; they only can “live” on this machine… is that “life.”

END MAY 8, 2008 - BEGIN MAY 9, 2008

H: I don’t know why anyone, especially a professional, would characterize a miscarriage as an abortion. Again, abortion is the purposeful and premeditated act of ending a pregnancy and a miscarriage is an accidental death due to extenuating circumstances beyond her control. Don’t get me started on euthanasia; a purely selfish task done to rid people of guilt and burden. Even so, dying on a respirator (euthanasia) and being killed (abortion) are two totally different things. I would venture to say that 100 years ago, many people were buried alive because of poor technology, and many babies born to term died as well.   I have a horrible feeling that we think technology has past our morality; that when a machine says “your dead,” that’s all we need. To define when life ends and to witness it are two different things, the same goes for the beginning of life. We are relying on what are eyes can “see” instead of what may be there. If it was my call, err on the side of life…always.

J: The question is not about the difference between euthanasia and abortion. But my question is what “life” in beginning and ending stages is. I believe it is arbitrary. If a machine is keeping someone alive, is that truly “life?” I can’t say it is. Just because an egg is fertilized, is that “life?” I can’t say that is either.

H: Err on the side of good judgment and life. [Name] is a paraplegic who can’t chew his own food or go to the bathroom unassisted. Is that “life?” We wouldn’t kill him, would we? When life, or the definition of, becomes arbitrary and meaningless, anything is possible. When life is given a rating on usefulness, we are in trouble. That type of thinking is what started eugenics projects in Hitler’s concentration camps and Stalin’s gulags. The most logical definition says life begins at conception. There is no moral or scientific reason to believe it begins anywhere else. The only arguments for life beginning after conception are purely political, reeking of moral relativity and linguistic semantics. Life ends with zero brain, heart, and lung activity, without the possibility of resuscitation. This is obviously more difficult and arguably changes with technology. Again, when there is a question, err on the side of life. Can you honestly say, using logical arguments not based on political leanings or pressures, that those statements are faulty?

J: Honestly, I can’t say. You’re asking me to give you an answer to questions that I’m not sure I have and absolute answer for. I see your point, but don’t know if I agree. The issue here is; we are having different understandings of what “life” is. I am not arguing about value of life, any and all life is valuable. But what constitutes “life” in the beginning and ending phases? I think in this discussion/context that you and I have subjective views of “life.” Is it wrong that we think differently about these issues? I say no. And I can’t say if there is an objective view of what constitutes “life.” In this instance, it is life. He can’t function in a “Normal” sense, but his vital organs function without outside assistance, so it is life. I’m getting the impression that if a woman does not produce life from a fertilized egg without an abortion or intentional harm it is death or murder. It is also murder when a machine can assist with vital organs and it is not used? Am I correct in assessing that?

H: You don’t have an absolute answer to the afterlife, but you believe in Christ, God, heaven, the crucifixion, etc. You have faith. A man who believes in god, and turns out to be wrong, is a fool. A man who believes in nothing, and turns out to be wrong, is a fool’s fool. Such is the question of where life begins and ends. Better to err of the side of good judgment, is it not? Even if you don’t have as strong an anti-abortion view as I, you can argue that it may be the taking of an innocent life, and therefore should be avoided where possible. [Name] cannot sustain life without his breathing machine or feeding tube. The muscles he needs to breathe, chew, and swallow are largely paralyzed. The machine is keeping him alive. We can see [Name], talk to him, and hear him speak. That is why we haven’t “pulled the plug.” A person who chooses freely not to be hooked up to a machine (DNR) is probably hypocritical at best, stupid at worst, however, they are taking their own life into their own hands. Negligence on the part of others (doctors, nurses, loved ones, etc.) can and does constitute murder or manslaughter in some cases. Death and murder and not synonymous, as kill and murder are not synonymous.

J: You keep using “to err on the side of good judgment.” This is different for each of us. What you believe is good judgment; I may not view as good judgment. For the sake of this on-going debate, I will say “it may be the taking of and innocent life,” but ultimately this decision (abortion) is a personal choice. And the Good Lord did give us free will. Do you propose any woman that has had an abortion be punished? The scary truth is, many women have decided this, some you probably wouldn’t think, but it happens. The fact is, I believe it is the woman’s/couple’s decision to decide and I will not judge them for that decision.

END OF PART 3