january, 2012

i'd rather they kept this closed.

personally? i'm both pro-choice and accept the catholic doctrine of life at conception, albeit for genetic reasons. i think the mp is correct to point out that modern scientific concepts of 'life' uphold the traditional view of conception.

that doesn't factor into my decision to be pro-choice, though, nor should it factor into the law. i'm pro-choice because i accept the mother's right to not be inconvenienced - and i've stated it in those terms on purpose - in any way by an unwanted pregnancy or an unwanted child, right up to the point of umbilical cord separation when the child gains rights of it's own.

in order for me to be intellectually consistent, the piece of christian dogma i need to throw away is not life at conception but the sanctity of life. i would need to throw that away to stay consistent on other related issues as well, such as legalized suicide (assisted or not) and euthanasia for people that can't exist without the aid of machines.

so, this is an irrelevancy for me, personally, and i suspect it is for most people on both sides of the debate.

http://nationalpostnews.wordpress.com/2011/12/21/tory-mp-calls-for-abortion-debate-using-modern-medically-accurate-evidence/