When a person's 'sign of life' quits.....it's because of one of the following reason:
-
They suffered from natural causes and no longer had the ability to continue surviving in their aged body.
-
Because of some medical reason in which they couldn't overcome.
-
Murder.
There's nothing natural about removing parts of a baby out of a woman and therefore killing it. There's nothing medical about removing parts of a baby out of a woman and therefore killing it. There is, however, something called murder when you end a person/baby's 'sign of life', by removing their body parts and therefore killing it.
It doesn't take intelligence to figure this out. Just morals. We unfortunately lack a massive amount of both nowadays.
Unfortunately this dialogue and line of reasoning has been used as amplification to the point of extreme noise.
In a society of grounded morals and sound reasoning this discussion can actually occur, but this is hardly the case.
The main issue is the minds that want abortion have already made up their mind, to them that goal is immovable. So then, the process of subversion is the ammo that is used.
The playbook is to turn attention and focus on the extremes, why? Because the extremes is where the ambiguity is most pronounced and emotion reign supreme. So if you’re debating against each other from each extreme… then it’s easier to divide. The only way to counter act the extreme is to meet it with an equal and opposite force…
Dark v Light
Good v Evil
Life v Death
…
The next step is to then sow confusion by inserting fallacy and relativism in the argument.
For us who are grounded on Christian morals, the foundation is strong and many miles deep.. the immovable object. But if your foundation is free-moving, doesn’t this appeal to those who see it as progression, ‘keeping up with the times?’, of ‘open-ness’, etc?
True progress is building on-top of a strong foundation.
False progress seek to create NEW foundations… which is far easier to do.
A battle as old as when the first of us walked in the garden.