problem loading posts

au mieux

(for the best)

Well tumblr you have caused me undue stress and allowed me to waste time ruining my once sunshiney mood and distracting me from more pressing things this evening so you are as of now added to my list of Lenten boycotts. Byebye.

in response to politically charged posts from someone who gets very very queasy from talking politics but does it anyway on occasion bc she’s a passionate masochist

guess what it’s me guys

(Source: everlytrue, via moonandtrees)

chiarc-morn:

lotrlockedwhovian:

baby-dahlia:

Here’s the thing about being pro choice that people don’t get…
You don’t have to morally agree with abortion to be pro choice. That’s why it’s not called pro abortion. It’s an understanding that you can’t make that choice for someone else and they have full control over that not you. It’s pro I’m not the boss of everyone else.

This is important.

Slight problem is that this sidesteps the issue and is a weak defense of the pro-choice position. 

There are three ways to come out pro-choice in a way that is consistent with basic schools of reason. 

1) A fetus isn’t a person (at least up until a certain point), so it has no rights.

2) A fetus is a person but has no right to my body. 

3) A fetus’ personhood is uncertain and the benefit of the doubt must be given to the pregnant woman to prevent unjust claims on her person.

The standard line of “agree or not, it’s my choice” could be predicated upon the final position but usually simply skips over the question of pre-birth personhood status. But from a pro-life perspective, abortion is murder. It is not an option, from any conventionally acceptable ethical stance, to allow murder based on personal choice. So when people say “I don’t have to agree with abortion to be pro-choice” they are missing or deliberately sidestepping the core debate. 

It’s not sidestepping, it’s a valid facet of the argument that gets overlooked in light of the whopper of a core debate. There has to be other ways of approaching it, because no one can agree on whether or not it’s murder or at what point it would be murder.  It’s not lazy of me to step back from that argument, because I’m not about to make it my life’s project and it requires an immense amount of biological, theological, and philosophical study to even begin to chime in coherently to the core debate. “Is it or is it not murder?” Like, that’s a hell of a question and I’m not equipped to answer that for anyone else but myself. Very few people are. So why not let them answer it for themselves, to what extent they can? The few hell bent on answering for other people don’t seem to like entertaining any healthy amount of doubt about their positions. But that’s a generalization, and I haven’t had the privilege of listening to many intelligent abortion debates.

lotrlockedwhovian:

baby-dahlia:

Here’s the thing about being pro choice that people don’t get…
You don’t have to morally agree with abortion to be pro choice. That’s why it’s not called pro abortion. It’s an understanding that you can’t make that choice for someone else and they have full control over that not you. It’s pro I’m not the boss of everyone else.

This is important.

(via maplehoofs)