I seem to have gotten into a pissing match with some liberal women on one of their sites regarding the Bush Admin's attempt to classify fetuses as unborn children in order to afford them insurance benefits and pre-natal care. It seems that we have reduced it to a semantic battle over the term "fetus." As usual, I am right, using the AMA's definition of fetus as an unborn child from the end of the eigth week after conception until birth. One of them wants to liken a fetus to sperm, or deny what it obviously is; an unborn child. Another seems convinced that this classification is "insane." Anyhow, quite amusing. I find it funny that they will go to such great lengths to avoid using the words "child" or "baby." One of the keys to the acceptance of the brutal attempt by the Nazis to exterminate the Jews was very similar. By de-humanizing the Jews, calling them parasites, sub-human, human garbage, etc., it became possible and acceptable to murder them. Language is very, very important.
On my way to work this morning, I was thinking of another way to pose it to these die-hard pro-choicers. They are mad that "the Bushies" have made this fetus classification in order to extend pre-natal care to poor women. Maybe if they thought of it in a different sense, they'd see how ridiculous they are being. What if one removed the abortion aspect for a second and imagined that pre-natal care to poor women and fetuses already existed and Bush wanted to end it? Can you imagine how fast they'd be screaming that W doesn't care about women and children?! Suddenly, it would be a child, simply because it fits their agenda. In the meantime, they'll continue to think that a fetus isn't a child because to admit that would be tantamount to admitting that abortion actually kills a real live child. As long as they can call it something else, they'll feel justified and morally safe to continue aborting children. It's also like the issue of slavery. Southern slave owners felt justified in owning slaves and treating them as their property, denying the slaves their rights and humanity, and using the time tested technique of language control. Abraham Lincoln said to Stephen Douglas regarding slavery, "We never have the right to do a wrong."
On my way to work this morning, I was thinking of another way to pose it to these die-hard pro-choicers. They are mad that "the Bushies" have made this fetus classification in order to extend pre-natal care to poor women. Maybe if they thought of it in a different sense, they'd see how ridiculous they are being. What if one removed the abortion aspect for a second and imagined that pre-natal care to poor women and fetuses already existed and Bush wanted to end it? Can you imagine how fast they'd be screaming that W doesn't care about women and children?! Suddenly, it would be a child, simply because it fits their agenda. In the meantime, they'll continue to think that a fetus isn't a child because to admit that would be tantamount to admitting that abortion actually kills a real live child. As long as they can call it something else, they'll feel justified and morally safe to continue aborting children. It's also like the issue of slavery. Southern slave owners felt justified in owning slaves and treating them as their property, denying the slaves their rights and humanity, and using the time tested technique of language control. Abraham Lincoln said to Stephen Douglas regarding slavery, "We never have the right to do a wrong."
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home