So like many Americans my first exposure to the rapper Macklemore was the song "Thrift Shop". I enjoyed the song, it was kind of catchy, kind of fun, and unlike many rap songs I've heard recently it wasn't about sex. It is actually about goodwill hunting for lack of a better term. So basically it was endorsing ideas and things that I had been raised on. So I was all for it and would be on the lookout for more of his songs. Well then came "Same Love". Suddenly I wasn't such a fan. For those of you who don't know the song "Same Love" it is the so called "gay marriage anthem". It says that basically, gay and straight "love" is literally the "same".
So apparently Macklemore decided to take it up a notch at the Grammys by singing "Same Love" while 33 couples got married on stage. Not just gay couples, a few straight ones as well (I don't know the exact numbers).
Honesty, I'm more disappointed in the straight couples who got married alongside the gay couples. When I heard that Macklemore had performed that song during some weddings I figured they were gay "marriages". The Bible quite clearly defines marriage as the union between a man and a woman. Therefore gay "marriages" aren't marriages at all in the biblical sense. However, those "straight" marriages at least have the potential to be biblical marriages. yet they still chose to erode the definition of marriages by participating alongside the others. Maybe I'm wrong, but to me that causes more problems. It supports the erosion of marriage more. Thoughts?
On the positive side Stephen Colbert won the Grammy for best spoken word. At least something turned out positive.
Monday, January 27, 2014
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Roe v Wade a little late.
So I hadn't realized till this year that I was born 1 day after the anniversary of Roe v Wade, I feel like that's a little ironic. So I figured I'd celebrate my birthday, in a way at least, by taking a look at some of the most common arguments I've come across in favor for abortion.
In no particular order.
"A woman should have control over her body". Yes, yes she should. Sometimes people get smart on this one and refer to it as body autonomy. I prefer that term actually. I'm a political scientist of sorts. We discussed in my various classes autonomy, and levels thereof, as a measure of a state's independence, power and stability. In these studies autonomy is defined as control over and responsibility for its territory. Let's transfer that to body autonomy and take a look at what it means for a moment. Control over your body, well yes you should have control over your body. I don't think I know a single pro-life person that has ever argued otherwise. But just as important in the autonomy statement is responsibility for. That's where being pro-abortion falls apart under the idea of body autonomy. They argue that it is a woman's right to have control over her body and the decisions she makes with that body. That's fine. But then a woman also has to be responsible for those decisions. And if those decisions include having sex, especially unprotected sex, then on of the possible responsibilities of that decision is having, and caring for a child. "Well having an abortion can be the responsible decision for someone who can't take care of a child economically". False. How is ending a life, when it isn't threatening another life, a responsible decision? Be responsible in regards to your decisions first.
"A fetus isn't a human being". Ok why not? Because it can't feel until a certain time? If that's your argument then why is that your argument? Why that arbitrary end point? The easiest way to define a child, a living human being, scientifically truly is at the moment of conception, because that's when all of the physical characteristics of that child are there. The DNA is all there, now it just needs time to grow.
"Why should we care what people do in their own lives?" Take that argument all the way through and see where it gets you. I don't think anyone needs me to provide an example to see where that causes problems.
In the end abortion boils down to 1 thing and 1 thing only in the vast majority of cases. A desire to avoid responsibility, a get out of jail free card if you will. It gives you an easy way to avoid taking responsibility for your decisions if your decisions lead to something you don't want. I'm not saying that is the case in every single possible abortion, sometimes people have abortions due to medical reasons or rape or incest, those need to be addressed more specifically. But most abortions aren't due to any of those reasons. And those are the ones that boil down to a desire to avoid responsibility.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0QSO7yJl2Q
In no particular order.
"A woman should have control over her body". Yes, yes she should. Sometimes people get smart on this one and refer to it as body autonomy. I prefer that term actually. I'm a political scientist of sorts. We discussed in my various classes autonomy, and levels thereof, as a measure of a state's independence, power and stability. In these studies autonomy is defined as control over and responsibility for its territory. Let's transfer that to body autonomy and take a look at what it means for a moment. Control over your body, well yes you should have control over your body. I don't think I know a single pro-life person that has ever argued otherwise. But just as important in the autonomy statement is responsibility for. That's where being pro-abortion falls apart under the idea of body autonomy. They argue that it is a woman's right to have control over her body and the decisions she makes with that body. That's fine. But then a woman also has to be responsible for those decisions. And if those decisions include having sex, especially unprotected sex, then on of the possible responsibilities of that decision is having, and caring for a child. "Well having an abortion can be the responsible decision for someone who can't take care of a child economically". False. How is ending a life, when it isn't threatening another life, a responsible decision? Be responsible in regards to your decisions first.
"A fetus isn't a human being". Ok why not? Because it can't feel until a certain time? If that's your argument then why is that your argument? Why that arbitrary end point? The easiest way to define a child, a living human being, scientifically truly is at the moment of conception, because that's when all of the physical characteristics of that child are there. The DNA is all there, now it just needs time to grow.
"Why should we care what people do in their own lives?" Take that argument all the way through and see where it gets you. I don't think anyone needs me to provide an example to see where that causes problems.
In the end abortion boils down to 1 thing and 1 thing only in the vast majority of cases. A desire to avoid responsibility, a get out of jail free card if you will. It gives you an easy way to avoid taking responsibility for your decisions if your decisions lead to something you don't want. I'm not saying that is the case in every single possible abortion, sometimes people have abortions due to medical reasons or rape or incest, those need to be addressed more specifically. But most abortions aren't due to any of those reasons. And those are the ones that boil down to a desire to avoid responsibility.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0QSO7yJl2Q
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)