Charter Member of the Sub-Media

June 08, 2004

The Brainfertilizer Challenge « Social Issues »

I've offered this challenge several times...no one has taken me up on it, that I know of:

I can make my arguments against abortion using abortion terminology (i.e., pro-choice, fetus, etc)*. I would really like to see a Pro-Choice advocate attempt to make their arguments using Pro-Live terminology. I'm thinking that an obvious cognitive dissonance would result, but I'd be interested in seeing the attempt. Anyone got the guts? Post in the comments. I'm not really trying to start an argument, although I will probably challenge specific points if I think you attempt to sidestep/ignore obvious ramifications arising from your words. On the other hand, I might just sit back and moderate any discussions that result.

*It is not my intention to make that argument at this time. I do not support the complete banning of abortion, even by constitutional amendment. I would like to see it severely restricted, however. And that's all I'm going to say right now, although I may eventually post my full views later, depending on how/if this thread develops.

Posted by Nathan at 11:07 PM | Comments (2)
Comments

Actually, Ted Rall's done exactly what you're asking for. He published a piece a few years ago entitled "An Anti-BS Abortion Manifesto" that began, "I believe that women ought to possess the legal right to murder their unborn babies." The gist of it was pretty much the same as what you're hinting at: abortion is a nasty, evil practice, but shouldn't be prohibited by law.

There are all sorts of things you can call Ted Rall, but timid and afraid of controversial language isn't one of them.

Posted by: Alex at June 10, 2004 07:24 AM

Well, tell him to stop by my site [grin].

Posted by: Nathan at June 10, 2004 07:33 AM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?