The public's opinion regarding abortion has been fairly stable over time. This leads to argumentation being aimed at two distinct groups. First, is the young who are forming their opinions on the subject, and second, those who have a divided opinion (legal only under certain circumstances.) This latter group constitutes a majority of the population, but also tends to move in the opposite direction of the abortion legal at all times group (ie, the only certain circumstances group moves in and out of the at all times group.)
This leaves the right to life movement in a bind. The arguments being put forth are keeping the "base" happy, and helping to keep public opinion relatively static, but are not winning the hearts and minds of the persuadable population.
Simply arguing that the baby is "life" and therefore shouldn't be aborted is a facially flawed argument. Anyone who has had a bacterial infection knows that a single cell constitutes life. It's good to kill bacteria if it is causing an infection. Even a variation of the argument that life has value and shouldn't be killed is likewise easily batted away. We can kill a pig for bacon with no moral reservation (assuming the slaughter method is humane.)
This leaves the argument that we shouldn't allow abortion because it is "human life." This is true, and from the moment of conception the baby is human. That's also self evident in that nothing is added or taken away from the fertilized ova, so it may be rudimentary and not viable, but it's still human.
What then can be argued that would start to persuade the persuadable under certain circumstances crowd? Presumably, the under certain circumstances crowd is so aligned because of two main reasons. Either they believe abortion should be allowed until viability (or some other defined point) or they want exceptions for rape/incest/life of the mother.
Since the humanness of the baby isn't enough of an argument to persuade on abortion beyond levels already present a focus on the warrant is the next most logical place to adapt argumentation. Often times the argumentation on the humanness of the baby fails to persuade because the warrant isn't defined. Solution: define the warrant. For this I would suggest ensoulment as the underlying warrant as to why the humanness of the baby is what should prevent abortion.
Although the moment of ensoulmet has never been established - and likely cannot be established as science is incapable of testing for a soul in the womb - the metaphysical writings generally accept ensoulment at a very early stage of development and since the publication of Paulo Zacchia's Quaestiones Medico-Legales, question 9.1 ensoulment upon fertilization is the prevailing viewpoint. After all, something that can be added can be taken away and the soul is not viewed as separable form the body so long as the body lives.
While arguing ensoulment will not persuade the baseline quarter of the population that believes in abortion under any circumstance, they are not the target audience. The majority who believes in limited abortion is the audience since they already at least partially accept limitation of abortion.
Thursday, February 12, 2015
Wednesday, February 4, 2015
What the GOP Should do in 2015
Now that the new Congress is sworn in here are some things the GOP needs to do in order to be viable in 2016.
Both parties poll badly on favorability ratings, so start with the proposition that the vote was more of an antiObama vote rather than an endorsement of the GOP. Not all of the ideas here will be popular, but this is about 2016 not whipping up the ideological base.
1) Pass legislation and send it to Obama. He either signs it or vetos it, but it shows that there is a path forward and the GOP is trying to move the country beyond the inactivity of the past few years.
2) Offer a plan on immigration. Ideally the plan will be the same as what Reagan and the dems worked out, but in reverse order. Give each illegal immigrant an "L" number (for lottery) and a 3 month window to register for the L number. If no L number, no chance for amnesty. As the border is secured and benchmarks are met there is a lottery to decide which L numbers become lawful permanent residents. If an L number holder commits a crime, they are deported and the L number is forfeited.
This removes immigration from the table. With that moderate Hispanics are more likely to vote with the GOP based on shared social values since the issue of immigration has been nullified.
3) Tie the minimum wage to the Social Security COLA adjustment.
This takes the issue off the table and also keeps the minimum wage in line with what the government has calculated is necessary to keep up with inflation.
4) Work on an omnibus energy security bill. This will include both carbon based and renewable resources.
This blunts the environmental argument since renewable sources of energy are involved and helps to insulate the country against the whims of the Middle East. It will also likely create jobs as fracking and the Keystone pipeline will doubtless be a part of the plan.
5) Enter into trade agreements with Africa.
This will create an alternate to China as a source of production thereby insulating the country from ill effects of a trade crisis as well as overall weaken the Chinese economy and reduce their ability to be a superpower.
6) Earmarks. Hear me out on this one. Use earmarks creatively to restrict the budget Obama is able to use. For example as part of the budget earmark some for expanding the strategic oil reserve. This would be in tranches with date certain releases. If the date arrives and there is no activity towards expanding the strategic oil reserve then the budget bill dictates the amount to be released in the tranche is to be evenly split between servicing foreign owned debt and supplementing the Social Security trust fund.
This allows for the ability to compromise with Obama (knowing he will not act on earmarked portions he disagrees with) while at the same time reducing the national debt (thereby lowering future interest payments) as well as helping to fund Social Security.
Both parties poll badly on favorability ratings, so start with the proposition that the vote was more of an antiObama vote rather than an endorsement of the GOP. Not all of the ideas here will be popular, but this is about 2016 not whipping up the ideological base.
1) Pass legislation and send it to Obama. He either signs it or vetos it, but it shows that there is a path forward and the GOP is trying to move the country beyond the inactivity of the past few years.
2) Offer a plan on immigration. Ideally the plan will be the same as what Reagan and the dems worked out, but in reverse order. Give each illegal immigrant an "L" number (for lottery) and a 3 month window to register for the L number. If no L number, no chance for amnesty. As the border is secured and benchmarks are met there is a lottery to decide which L numbers become lawful permanent residents. If an L number holder commits a crime, they are deported and the L number is forfeited.
This removes immigration from the table. With that moderate Hispanics are more likely to vote with the GOP based on shared social values since the issue of immigration has been nullified.
3) Tie the minimum wage to the Social Security COLA adjustment.
This takes the issue off the table and also keeps the minimum wage in line with what the government has calculated is necessary to keep up with inflation.
4) Work on an omnibus energy security bill. This will include both carbon based and renewable resources.
This blunts the environmental argument since renewable sources of energy are involved and helps to insulate the country against the whims of the Middle East. It will also likely create jobs as fracking and the Keystone pipeline will doubtless be a part of the plan.
5) Enter into trade agreements with Africa.
This will create an alternate to China as a source of production thereby insulating the country from ill effects of a trade crisis as well as overall weaken the Chinese economy and reduce their ability to be a superpower.
6) Earmarks. Hear me out on this one. Use earmarks creatively to restrict the budget Obama is able to use. For example as part of the budget earmark some for expanding the strategic oil reserve. This would be in tranches with date certain releases. If the date arrives and there is no activity towards expanding the strategic oil reserve then the budget bill dictates the amount to be released in the tranche is to be evenly split between servicing foreign owned debt and supplementing the Social Security trust fund.
This allows for the ability to compromise with Obama (knowing he will not act on earmarked portions he disagrees with) while at the same time reducing the national debt (thereby lowering future interest payments) as well as helping to fund Social Security.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
