Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Another winner of the coveted Illogic Awards

Dr. Tiller's Murder: Tragic, Not Senseless

Ted Rall tells his fellow abortion supporters that they need to learn to talk TO prolifers, not PAST them. While he blunders on with his unquestioned assumptions in exactly the way he's telling his fellows not to. And most telling is his idiotic presumption that prolifers "prioritize the fetus over the mother."

How is saying "These lives are of equal value" prioritizing one over the other?

And I'm gonna say this again about the "bodily integrity" argument: If the right to bodily integrity is paramount, that's actually an argument against abortion:

1. The fetus is "commandeering" the mother's body temporarily; the mother is seeking permanent action against the fetus. A "demand" for a temporary stay of execution is much more reasonable than a demand that the other party die.

2. The fetus actually needs the mother's body for his very survival; the mother's claim isn't a survival claim but a claim of simple personal preference. The fetus's bodily integrity claim in abortion is absolute, for if he is denied his rights in this case he has no further possibility of bodily integrity; the mother's bodily integrity claim is partial, since she can go about her business while pregnant.

3. The fetus is not in that situation from an act of his volition; the mother is. Negating the fetus' bodily integrity rights is to say that the person who creates a conflict should automatically have precedence over the rights of the person who her actions have placed in the conflict situation in the first place. Generally responsibility falls on the person whose prior acts created the bad situation, who is expected to make due compensation to the person that her actions have harmed.

If a right to bodily integrity is absolute, the fetus' claims of a right to bodily integrity clearly trump the mother's, since his need is temporary, based on a greater need, and due to a situation that the mother's actions placed in in to begin with.


Tlaloc said...

"If a right to bodily integrity is absolute, the fetus' claims of a right to bodily integrity clearly trump the mother's..."

Except it has no body integrity in the first place which is why it needs the mother. Thus any claims to its body integrity are false.

Anonymous said...

Excellent reasoning. It is difficult but not impossible to get past deviously constructed slogans like "pro-choice" or a "woman's body is her own".

I didn't know much about Tiller or even about abortion until recently, even though I've been around for 5+ decades. His being taken down put this issue in the spotlight. I don't think I would have noticed if a person like that just lost his licence. So whoever says that his death was a blow for the pro-life movement should think again.

I was so moved by what I read and saw over the internet, forced myself to see the realities of providing this "service", although I don't think I can bear anymore pictures without losing considerable serenity. O'Reiley made a point when he asked how a person like Sebelius, who was supported by Tiller to the extent of hosting at least one lavish dinner party for him, can sleep at night.

Anyway, I wanted to do my bit so I wrote two articles at

Thank you for your blog. It sure helps to foil the despicable coverup of the media and unfortunately up to and including the highest office holders in the US. This makes me VERY ashamed.