I submit the argument is -- and from a couple of comments I need to note this is an attempt to honestly try and imagine the perspective of a certain pro-life consistuency that results in being pro life before birth and more or less after that you're on your own-- which I do not share, but have actually heard expressed by people I know who are not, in most respects, monsters --
"Unlike murderers and rapists and other criminals, fetuses haven't done anything deserving of being killed. So I am perfectly justified making it illegal to have them aborted.
"On the other hand, the mothers of the fetuses haven't done anything to make them deserving of my help through their pregnancies. In fact most of them got pregnant due to their own bad decisions, so the government has no right to ask me to help pay the cost of bailing them out. Speaking as a man, nobody bailed me out because I had an unintended pregnancy. So responsibility.
"And after birth, until the babies have done something to deserve my support and maintenance like joining the army or police to protect me and my family, I see no reason I should be taxed to pay for their food, shelter, clothing, or education any more than we already do. Because freedom."
----------------
In fairness -- this is also wrapped up in a sincere moral problem because if fetuses are humans with human rights, it is not hypocrisy to try by law to protect those rights.
Since you will never be pregnant or give birth, you should not be allowed to force someone to go through those processes. I don't care if you think the fetus is a person or not. I agree that the woman who got pregnant was stupid, and I absolutely believe in birth control. But I've had two children and I believe it would be heinous to force someone to go through that against her will.
Apparently I was more successful imagining and attempting to summarize the mindset of a certain kind of "pro-life" male than I thought. Not my sentiments by any means. But I do think this is how some people justify what to me is an obviously morally contradictory congerie of opinions. I should have put quotes around it...
Basic human rights (and the Declaration of Independence) - that the fact that you are BORN means you are deserving of support and maintenance. Yo, ding dong, babies are HELPLESS and can't do a one damn thing for themselves. Sometimes the parents are NOT able to give them the care they need through NO FAULT of their own or because of their decisions. That is a causality fallacy.
Ignorant and arrogant. Also, ever heard of dead beat dads. There are many men who abdicate ANY responsibility WHATSOEVER and it happens to MILLIONS of women. But you still BLAME the woman. What a load of SHIT
Have you listened to yourself? "And after birth, until the babies have done something to deserve my support and maintenance like joining the army or police to protect me and my family, I see no reason I should be taxed to pay for their food, shelter, clothing, or education any more than we already do." How many babies do you know in the army or police?
This was my slightly tendentious take on the perspective of what I think is probably the vast majority of those who think of themselves as pro-life but don't want to think of themselves as inconsistent, sincerely have no inkling that there could be an element of unconscious hypocrisy involved, and (like all of us) want to believe everything they enjoy is due to their own merit and effort, but they are surrounded by undeserving people trying to live the high life at others' expense.
I think we see this in the pro-death penalty facet of this social opposition. "Pro life" and "pro death penalty" are perfectly compatible if cast in the context of personal responsibility. Execution is justified because criminals have chosen to commit crimes. Abortion is unjustified because babies have not chosen to be aborted. Welfare and public assistance is only minimally justifiable because the beneficiaries haven't worked hard to deserve it. Children caught in the middle are tougher -- my hypothetical pro-lifer has to squirm a little here, but fudges it by saying parents have responsibilities, and if a person has a child, it's that person's duty to care for it, not everyone else's.
This is certainly not my perspective. It's interesting that what I wrote as an obvious posited expression of a different viewpoint could be taken as being plausibly sincere. This implies perhaps that I'm on target, more so than I wish were the case.
I did think that writing "speaking as a man, nobody ever bailed me out because I had an unintended pregnancy" was over the top in this regard!
It is famously said, never criticize another until you have tried walking a mile with his foot in your mouth. Or something like that.
I submit the argument is -- and from a couple of comments I need to note this is an attempt to honestly try and imagine the perspective of a certain pro-life consistuency that results in being pro life before birth and more or less after that you're on your own-- which I do not share, but have actually heard expressed by people I know who are not, in most respects, monsters --
"Unlike murderers and rapists and other criminals, fetuses haven't done anything deserving of being killed. So I am perfectly justified making it illegal to have them aborted.
"On the other hand, the mothers of the fetuses haven't done anything to make them deserving of my help through their pregnancies. In fact most of them got pregnant due to their own bad decisions, so the government has no right to ask me to help pay the cost of bailing them out. Speaking as a man, nobody bailed me out because I had an unintended pregnancy. So responsibility.
"And after birth, until the babies have done something to deserve my support and maintenance like joining the army or police to protect me and my family, I see no reason I should be taxed to pay for their food, shelter, clothing, or education any more than we already do. Because freedom."
----------------
In fairness -- this is also wrapped up in a sincere moral problem because if fetuses are humans with human rights, it is not hypocrisy to try by law to protect those rights.
Since you will never be pregnant or give birth, you should not be allowed to force someone to go through those processes. I don't care if you think the fetus is a person or not. I agree that the woman who got pregnant was stupid, and I absolutely believe in birth control. But I've had two children and I believe it would be heinous to force someone to go through that against her will.
Apparently I was more successful imagining and attempting to summarize the mindset of a certain kind of "pro-life" male than I thought. Not my sentiments by any means. But I do think this is how some people justify what to me is an obviously morally contradictory congerie of opinions. I should have put quotes around it...
Basic human rights (and the Declaration of Independence) - that the fact that you are BORN means you are deserving of support and maintenance. Yo, ding dong, babies are HELPLESS and can't do a one damn thing for themselves. Sometimes the parents are NOT able to give them the care they need through NO FAULT of their own or because of their decisions. That is a causality fallacy.
Ignorant and arrogant. Also, ever heard of dead beat dads. There are many men who abdicate ANY responsibility WHATSOEVER and it happens to MILLIONS of women. But you still BLAME the woman. What a load of SHIT
Have you listened to yourself? "And after birth, until the babies have done something to deserve my support and maintenance like joining the army or police to protect me and my family, I see no reason I should be taxed to pay for their food, shelter, clothing, or education any more than we already do." How many babies do you know in the army or police?
This was my slightly tendentious take on the perspective of what I think is probably the vast majority of those who think of themselves as pro-life but don't want to think of themselves as inconsistent, sincerely have no inkling that there could be an element of unconscious hypocrisy involved, and (like all of us) want to believe everything they enjoy is due to their own merit and effort, but they are surrounded by undeserving people trying to live the high life at others' expense.
I think we see this in the pro-death penalty facet of this social opposition. "Pro life" and "pro death penalty" are perfectly compatible if cast in the context of personal responsibility. Execution is justified because criminals have chosen to commit crimes. Abortion is unjustified because babies have not chosen to be aborted. Welfare and public assistance is only minimally justifiable because the beneficiaries haven't worked hard to deserve it. Children caught in the middle are tougher -- my hypothetical pro-lifer has to squirm a little here, but fudges it by saying parents have responsibilities, and if a person has a child, it's that person's duty to care for it, not everyone else's.
This is certainly not my perspective. It's interesting that what I wrote as an obvious posited expression of a different viewpoint could be taken as being plausibly sincere. This implies perhaps that I'm on target, more so than I wish were the case.
I did think that writing "speaking as a man, nobody ever bailed me out because I had an unintended pregnancy" was over the top in this regard!
It is famously said, never criticize another until you have tried walking a mile with his foot in your mouth. Or something like that.
OK! I tried to hit like but it wouldn't let me!