Pro-lifers, how do you explain Romania under Ceausescu?

[DC Al Fine]

Why should the US restrict abortion access to that extent, given the historical consequences of restricting abortion access?

"Blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crime, especially young black men. Therefore black mother's should be allowed to smother their 5 year olds in order to prevent them from growing up into criminals."

The above argument is wrong because the 5 year olds are persons. Regardless of their future potential to cause harm, they have a right to life because they are persons. Unless you're a utilitarian or something similar, the question of abortion ultimately boils down to one question "When does one become a person?".

I agree that the pro-life movement needs to have a broader agenda, but the social consequences argument doesn't really address the pro-life movement's issues and it has the potential to lead to monstrous results.

[DC Al Fine]

Why should the US restrict abortion access to that extent, given the historical consequences of restricting abortion access?

"Blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crime, especially young black men. Therefore black mother's should be allowed to smother their 5 year olds in order to prevent them from growing up into criminals."

The above argument is wrong because the 5 year olds are persons. Regardless of their future potential to cause harm, they have a right to life because they are persons. Unless you're a utilitarian or something similar, the question of abortion ultimately boils down to one question "When does one become a person?".

I agree that the pro-life movement needs to have a broader agenda, but the social consequences argument doesn't really address the pro-life movement's issues and it has the potential to lead to monstrous results.

Except that we already know 5 year olds are persons. There's nothing disputable about that. We know beyond the shadow of a doubt that personhood begins when one is born. That's why we have birth certificates and start counting our age from the day we were born. We don't celebrate our "conception day" or issue a certificate of conception to a pregnant woman.

You're missing my point. Pro-lifers don't have to answer for Ceausescu's Romania because it's irrelevant to the abortion issue. If the fetus is a person, then it should be protected under the law just like any other person. If it isn't, then the mother should be able to kill it.

That's a debate that we can have, but social consequences have nothing to do with whether something is a person.

[DC Al Fine]

What I've never understood is how anyone who is truly pro-life could ever support an exception for rape. If an abortion is truly equivalent to a murder, I don't see how it would be justified in a rape situation.

I don't think that's fair to say, but I do understand where you're coming from. I've heard arguments opposing abortion in cases of incest and rape. You're pro-life as well?

No, I'm pro-choice. I just think it's ideologically inconsistent to claim that abortion is murder but then try to say that there should be situations (other than self-defense, or in the case of abortion, a threat to the the life of the mother) where said murder would be acceptable.

Ideology should be non-existent in all issues. It's about doing what's right based on the issue at hand.

If abortion truly is murder (as I'm assuming you believe), how can it be "right" to provide an exemption for rape?

I myself find it wrong in all cases unless we're talking about the life of the mother or a dead fetus. However, I don't think it's right for government to ban abortion in cases of incest and rape.

How could it be wrong for the government to prohibit murder?

There's a realpolitik element for some. I know a coupe of conservatives who support a rape exception, and early term abortions and defend it as "it's better to have severely restricted abortions than no abortion restrictions at all"

I don't agree with it, but I can see their point, given the opinion polls.