Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Abortion, it's a slippery slope.

There is a trial in progress in the US that has received little publicity there and none here in Australia, yet it is critical to the abortion debate everywhere. A doctor known as Kermit Gosnell has been charged with eight murders. I don't have the time or talent to go into detail a pretty good precis is here - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324030704578422883948238160.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion

To me the point is that abortion like euthanasia seems always to lead to results which the original proponents thought would never happen. Well it has happened, read what Gosnell called 'Snipping'. Moral questions are always difficult and none more so than abortion. Never underestimate the ability of humans to act in an inhumane manner. People wonder how ordinary people became Nazis and ran the Death Camps. How did the Rwandans and Tutsis get to stage of wholesale massacre? Well how does a well educated person do what Dr Gosnell is charged with? It happens by degree, every little step leads to another and another further. Suddenly what seemed unimaginable becomes commonplace.

I feel sick

3 comments:

Mark Bolton said...

Poor Old Tasmania seems awash with dogooders at the moment. If they cant curette you in the womb they will snuff you out in the old folks home. The makers of these momentous decisions haven't put much ground between themselves and the old high school debating team. Their moral compasses need no more honing than the occasional dinner party hypothetical and remain unsullied by a reading of history let alone ~gasp~ first hand experience.

Why shouldn't a human being intervene in the life of another with the express purpose of extinguishing that life?

"We are pure of motive and are convinced we are right and good.

What could possibly go wrong ?"

sfw said...

"What could possibly go wrong?" Exactly. It nevers enters their smug minds that they could be in error.

Mark Bolton said...

Hare brained idealists tinkering with the law needn't resort to lethal force. The so called "Rape Shield" laws like Section 36 of the Evidence Act WA is instructive. (Every state has similar). They mean that even if the defendant has evidence of consent in writing, the jury may never get to see it. The feminists who fought to get the law passed didn't care because all men are rapists anyway, so it doesn't matter which ones go to jail. The DPP thought it was brilliant because the conviction to indictment ratio went up. The Prosecutors loved it because it adds tremendous kudos to get innocent men convicted (any shmuck can get a conviction if the guy in the dock is actually guilty). Only poor bugger doesn't like it is the accused and their family and who cares about them since they are in jail?

We conservatives, far from garumphing about "bring back the noose" are the true defenders of the Common Law and due process.