Comments on: Obama Declares Gitmo Detainees ‘Fetuses’

By: G.A.Phillips

G.A.Phillips — Fri, 22 May 2009 22:53:36 +0000

"would you rather kill fetuses or convicted criminals?"

You can only kill a fetus by accident.

Why are people who go to college so dumb, oh ya cause they been taught by liberals.

By: Rick Almeida

Rick Almeida — Fri, 22 May 2009 17:51:25 +0000

Thanks for the reply.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Fri, 22 May 2009 17:42:06 +0000

Out of curiosity, James; at what point in fetal development would you (personally) say that human rights attach to the fetus?

No later than week 5, certainly. By that point, there's no real question that a human being exists.

By: Rick Almeida

Rick Almeida — Fri, 22 May 2009 17:37:01 +0000

Out of curiosity, James; at what point in fetal development would you (personally) say that human rights attach to the fetus?

By: JKB

JKB — Fri, 22 May 2009 16:11:48 +0000

Being declared a "human fetus" by Obama would give a whole new and terrify aspect to the promise of universal healthcare.

By: FranklinTest

FranklinTest — Fri, 22 May 2009 15:11:00 +0000

This is similar to an argument presented in our college daily years ago that mocked pro-life people for generally being pro-capital punishment. A letter to the editor a day or two later simply asked, "would you rather kill fetuses or convicted criminals?" But I agree with Herb in general that these issues are so different that there's very few overlapping arguments to be used. While I'm somewhere in the middle on the abortion issue (if it's possible to be so), I'm convinced that torture is ineffective, immoral, and illegal, in addition to stoking anti-Americanism unnecessarily. Only one or two of those arguments could apply to abortion.

By: Herb

Herb — Fri, 22 May 2009 14:15:56 +0000

Apples and oranges.

If we're concerned with exposing pro-choice anti-torture types as hypocrites, great. If we're concerned with exposing philosophical weaknesses in the pro-choice, anti-torture position, there's more work to be done.