The Political Response

Have you ever heard a politician respond to the abortion issue? There are a few who are strictly pro-abortion or pro-life, but most fall in a category that attempts to please both sides. When faced with this issue they will usually say, “Personally, I’m opposed to abortion, but if a woman wants to have one that’s her decision.” Often they will respond with, “I think abortion should be rare, but I can’t stop a woman from having one. It’s her choice.” This type of logic is also shared by quite a few Americans. When they take both sides of the argument it seems that their real purpose is to avoid the issue completely because they don’t have to passionately debate either side.

This response sounds foolproof and a very “nice” way of answering the abortion issue. But if you think closely about the response, it could be asked, “Why do you personally oppose abortion or why do you think it should be rare?” It seems that their answer would be that it is the taking of a life, or a similar response. The rebuttal would be “So you’re against abortion because it takes a life, but it’s perfectly fine for someone else to take a life.” “You’re against the killing of a human, but also for the killing of a human.”

What if we settled other issues this way? “I’m personally opposed to murder, but if a person wants to commit it that’s their decision or choice.” In 2001 Andrea Yates killed her five young children. Using this logic one could say “I’m personally opposed to Andrea Yates killing her children, but it’s her decision, her choice.” We basically could use this logic concerning any law in this country.
Click here to read more of my articles at

Posted by Monte Harms on 05/17 at 11:13 AM
M40o93H7pQ09L8X1t49cHY01Z5j4TT91fGfr M50o93H7pQ09L8X1t49cHY01Z5j4TT91fGfr

<< Back to main