Comments for The Design of Legislation: Searching for the Key at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 6 out of 6 comments http://www.thecatholicthing.org Sat, 18 May 2013 21:23:26 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/the-design-of-legislation-searching-for-the-key.html#comment-4386 Abortion laws do not deny the personhood of the unborn. They ignore the unborn's personhood. The question of personhood simply does not matter. All that matters is the raw will to power. Might makes right is the pro-abortionist's creed. - Mark Wed, 23 Jun 2010 03:56:13 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/the-design-of-legislation-searching-for-the-key.html#comment-4384 It is exceedingly important that we call things by their correct name. Failure to do so is a major contributing factor in failing to cause others, at least those who are not already blind to all arguments, to simply dismiss moral arguments. The opposite of pro-life is not pro choice, because the opposite of life is not choice, rather, it is death or homicide. We should assist in always rejecting the false dichotomy between choice and life, and should instead insist on calling everything by one of its accurate names. The mildest expression of this principle in the case of abortion is probably "pro-abortion" vs. "anti-abortion." Failure to do this concedes the ground of conflict to the opponent, who is thereby permitted to euphemise their position, essentially engaging in dissimulation. Pax et bonum, Keith Töpfer - Martial Artist Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:30:24 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/the-design-of-legislation-searching-for-the-key.html#comment-4383 Professor Arkes, With all due respect from a layman (both as a Catholic and someone with very little legal education). I start from the assumption that the law, assuming we live in a society which attempts to follow the Rule of Law. It seems to me that there is an internal contradiction within our statutes, at least at the state level. The contradiction is as follows: A woman may obtain an abortion, killing an unborn infant, for any reason, based on the inference that the unborn infant is not a person. However, if the pregnant woman is the victim of a physical assault that results in the death of the unborn infant, the perpetrator is, in some jurisdictions, liabled to be charged with the homicide of the unborn infant. Such a charge is logically inconceivable unless the unborn infant is considered, under the law as a person. It so clearly violates the law of noncontradiction that the same infant could both be a person and not be a person, that I cannot imagine any sane and rational judge not seeing the inherent contradiction in this situation, at least in those states, California comes to mind, that have statutes permitting the prosecution of homicide for the killing of an unborn infant. Is this not an avenue that ought to be pursued in the courts to, at a minimum, create a breach in the so-called "right" of a woman to take the life of an innocent unborn infant? Keith Töpfer - Martial Artist Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:23:15 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/the-design-of-legislation-searching-for-the-key.html#comment-4382 The vein you choose, professor, is alas in vain, given the fact that no matter how you cast the premise, the conclusions of the aborters have been unshakably established in the mindset of Roe v Wade. "Reproductive rights," "planned parenthood," "the right to choose" are phrases that trump vague notions of "when life begins." With no moral compass, those who deny personhood in the womb cannot be persuaded to sail on the sea of truth. I applaud you for your persistent and heartfelt attempts to recast the debate in new terms, but I fear you will run into the same old rhetoric in the public square as well as the courts of law and the state legislatures. The abortion issue has been mired in hazy polemics for so long that arguments based on morality and religious grounds are secondary to politics. And politically, the nation has been and always will be divided over this issue, as it is on many others. "...one nation indivisible..." is not reality in America. - Joe Tue, 22 Jun 2010 05:19:58 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/the-design-of-legislation-searching-for-the-key.html#comment-4381 Thank you, Professor Arkes, for reminding us that we can at least call things by their right names. Perhaps we should place these columns in time capsules and hope for their discovery in times to come. - Ars Artium Tue, 22 Jun 2010 04:44:37 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/the-design-of-legislation-searching-for-the-key.html#comment-4380 Professor, an excellent article! This thing growing in the human womb is certainly not a tumor. So then what is it? We now have the legal license to remove this thing for whatever reason, be it Down's syndrome or any other genetic defect. We don't even need a reason. The mantra of action is a woman's right to choose. When does this thing assume personhood and then of course incur protection from murder? Is is two days before birth, two weeks before birth of the day after birth? It is not difficult to see the day approaching when human personhood is not the issue necessitating protection by law but rather that all purpose vindicator of evil,"the right to choose." Whether it be the unborn, the born, the defective or the elderly will the "right to choose" be one of our freedoms for a better lifestyle? - Willie Tue, 22 Jun 2010 03:14:51 +0100