How does this abortion argument make sense?

Question

Some say abortion laws are the government legislating morality:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/;_ylc=X3oDMTBxcDMxYWk4BF9TAwRzZWMDbWFpbHRvBHNsawNzdWJqZWN0;_ylv=3?qid=20080903180607AAFSA93

So why don't people make the same argument about murder? The government says it's not legal for me to murder another human or steal someone's car. How is that not seen as the government legislating morality?

Answer 1

Abortion does not make sense.  No matter how you look at it it is killing.  It almost happened to my oldest niece and I thank God for intervening so that it didn't happen.  

(((Bobby))))

Another Pro-Life Christian.

Answer 2

This is the reason for making sure that those who are in office with the power to make laws, judge laws or veto laws are God fearing Christians so that this nation follows what God commands.

Answer 3

Of course the government legislates morality.

Who else is going to legislate it?

Or would people prefer that any moral issue was left up to the individual?  That would be anarchy.

250 years ago Britain and the US deemed that slavery was moral.

150 years ago Britain deemed it immoral but the US deemed it moral.

100 years ago both deemed it immoral.

Did the morality of slavery change?    Yes it did, because the societies of those countries changed, and the societies changed at different times because the economic requirements changed at different times.

For some reason many American have a hard time seeing that morality is changeable, but consider it something cast in tablets of stone.  (In fact usually two tablets!)

The 'society has lost a potential great person' argument does not hold water.   How many serial killers has society been saved from because they were aborted?   How many Hitlers and Stalins would we have been subjected to?    The truth is that someone in Miami having an abortion has zero effect on you living in Seattle.   Any effect is purely in your mind.

Do you really think that the world is underpopulated?  Pull the other one, it has bells on.

People in comas that have zero chance of recovery are allowed to die.

Answer 4

There is consensus on murder.  There is no consensus on abortion.

Answer 5

For abortion:

When women become pregnant after being raped, this is when abortion is seen as being a good thing.

Against abortion:

When women just don't want to be pregnant.

Some people see it as murdering the life of someone, but can you remember being a fetus? Usually abortions take place early in the pregnancy when the baby hasn't developed.

I'm sitting on the fence with this one. I believe if you've been raped and you're pregnant then you have a reason to have an abortion. But I think it should be made illegal for this reason only.

Answer 6

Another respondent said that abortion does not affect more than one person. This is not true. My mother aborted a child when I was 15. Her reasons were very sound and logical, according to the logic pro-choicers use. She and my father just didn't want to be burdened with another child. For years I felt that it would be disloyal to her for me not to support pro-choice. But inside, I couldn't stop thinking about that child, my brother who was never born. I even prayed that God would let me give birth to that child someday. And over the years I have come to feel that there is a hole in the world where that child should have been. The classes he never sat in. The friends he never made. The goofy art class projects he never did. The girl he never had a crush on, or who might have had a crush on him. The books he never read. The people he never got to help. He would be a young man now, possibly in college, living his own life. But where he should be, there is a vacancy. Like an empty chair in the middle of a crowded room. Finally God made me aware of the conflict in my own heart: how could I support the "right" to abortion and yet grieve for my brother? God forbid!  Never tell me that abortion affects only one person.

**Ben G- "can you remember being a fetus?" Can you remember being a twelve-month-old?

Answer 7

The answer revolves around the question of when life actually begins...

Many from the Pro-Choice camp,do not view a non-viable fetus as being a genetically distinct being and therefore argue that the host(mother), has the right to discard it,as a common parasite....

I could not disagree more....I consider the appalling apathy and ignorance toward the act of abortion,to be inexcusable and a very weak,selfish and evil attempt, to justify mass genocide on an unparalled scale,in an egotistical,arrogance for convenience sake ....To think that a civilized people,could turn a deaf ear to the silent screams of the innocent and carry on,as if nothing had happened.....I don't get it....

I was very gracious in my answer....I wouldn't push me,at this point...

Adopted,Pro-life Christian...

Answer 8

Government legislating morality is hardly new. Someone has to.

Answer 9

Simple, murder is an act which affects more than one person, and quite negatively.  Thus, the government has a right to legislate for the common good.

Abortion does not.  Thus, it isn't societal and should not be the government's business.  Possible life is not the same as life.

Individuals should have the right to determine their own reproduction.  They should not have their biology regulated by other people's beliefs.

Edit:  The government should only be responsible for legislating things that are social in nature, that is, where there is conflict between people.  What they do in their personal lives that affects no one else, should not be legislated and forced to conform to the morality of the majority.  

Liberty comes not from legislating the beliefs of the majority, but by protecting equally the rights of EVERYONE.  Might doesn't make right.  The individual should be allowed to live free of interference as long as they are not interfering with others.

And abortion doesn't affect ANY children.  It affects a bundle of undeveloped cells inside a woman.  And society cannot loose what it has never known.