Results from Herek, Janis, and Huth
Killing a fetus is murder.
Abortion is the murdering of an innocent child.
I would not want to have been aborted.
The practice of abortion will reduce respect for human life elsewhere.
Abstinence is the best method.
How can you decide its fate?
Late abortions (≈6 months) are immoral because they are the murdering of a person. However, a day after the egg is fertilized, the ‘fetus' does not have any consciousness. It does not think or feel.
Women should have power over their own bodies.
I believe women have the right to do whatever they want with their own bodies.
The ‘morning after' pill only can be considered extinguishing a human life in a very abstract sense. If it were considered murder of a potential life, then any form of birth control could be seen as preventing a potential life as well.
Are we splitting hairs here? Every month a woman's egg is menstruated away. More frequently than that, the man's sperm are ejaculated away ‘unused' …. Suddenly conception takes place (maybe) the night before, and the whole ball game changes. Fertilization has taken place, and it's no longer egg and sperm, but ‘life' – hence a moral issue. Really, the facts may be plain, but the moral issue is: are there ‘life-wise' any differences between the 1-day-old fetus and the unfertilized egg and sperm?
The pill is ‘killing' less of an organism than a fully formed fly.
Overpopulation is already a problem. We don't need more kids, especially unwanted ones.
Yes, the embryo is dependent upon the mother …. But, similarly, the mother is dependent upon many other people for her life: the farmer, doctor, police, etc. If they end their services and the mother died, are they committing a moral offense?
The child is not yet an independent, thinking human. It's still being carried by the mother. Therefore, it's her choice whether or not to continue carrying it.
A couple should be able to decide what decision are best for them without the coercion (governmental or moral) of any other person.
It's a personal decision, and this person must decide if they themselves feel it is morally wrong or not.
Also, it is not for anyone else to label it as moral or immoral, since it is the pregnant woman who can make that judgment based on her own measures of morality and the conditions surrounding the situation.
No living animal is born (or conceived) with an intrinsic ‘right to life.' Any ‘right to life' to anything exists because we humans posit it, not because of any a priori circumstance or condition. Positing this right is arbitrary, therefore the existence of a ‘right to life' is arbitrary.
People have no right to force their morals on someone else. Who is to decide what is morally right or wrong?
The morning after pill is largely a preventive measure – you don't know whether conception has occurred or not.
There is very little chance that you would know if you were pregnant.
Morality involves consciously recognizing right and wrong. In the case of the morning-after pill, the woman does not know if she is pregnant. Therefore, the moral argument does not apply.
Lord, Ross, and Lepper (1979) 24 proponents and 24 opponents of death penalty.
Subjects: Proponents Opponents -------- ---------------- ---------------- Study D.P. D.P. does D.P. D.P. does suggesting: deters not deter deters not deter ---------------------------------------------- How well conducted? +1.5 -1.6 -2.1 -0.3 How convincing? +1.4 -1.8 -2.1 +0.1But... `Our subjects' main inferential shortcoming ... did not lie in their inclination to process evidence in a biased manner...' (p. 2107)
Change in belief in deterrent effect of d.p.
by: Proponents Opponents
---------- ---------
After |d.p. deters +1.9 +0.7
results|
|doesn't deter -0.9 -1.6
After |d.p. deters +0.7 -1.0
details|
|doesn't deter +0.7 -0.8
`Our subjects' main inferential shortcoming ... did not lie in their inclination to process evidence in a biased manner ... Rather, their sin lay in their readiness to use evidence already processed in a biased manner to bolster the very theory or belief that initially ``justified'' the processing bias.' (p. 2107)
Complications per million children
UNVACCINATED VACCINATED
Cases of Whooping Cough 101,900 9,700
High-pitched Unusual Crying - 4,900
Temporary Hospitalization 11,100 1,100
Temporary Unconsciousness/Confusion
From Whooping Cough 25 2
From Vaccine - 40
Convulsions - 2,600
Long-term Brain Damage
From Whooping Cough 8 1
From Vaccine - 15
Death
From Whooping Cough 130 13
From Vaccine - 5
Source: A. R. Hinman and J. P. Koplan.
Journal of the American Medical Association, June 15, 1984.
Desire to have been right all along
vs.
Desire to be as right as possible now.
``choices are easier since all considerations are seen as pointing to the same conclusion. Nothing has to be sacrificed. But, since the real world is not as benign as these perceptions, values are indeed sacrificed'' (p. 130)
When do people avoid value trade-offs? Jervis speculates:
| Proponents | Opponents | |
|---|---|---|
| Feel that the death penalty is a more effective deterrent than life imprisonment |
93% | 8% |
| Do not feel ... | 7% | 92% |
| Society has a right to get revenge ... | 45% | 7% |
| It is immoral for society to take a life regardless of the crime... |
10% | 82% |
Yet, 66% of proponents claimed that they "would still favor capital punishment even if it were proven to be no better than life ... as a deterrent." ... 48% would favor it if it were no deterrent at all.
Only 3% of opponents would favor it if it were shown to be a deterrent.
Your initial thoughts are:
"I'VE DONE A TERRIBLE THING. HOW CAN I FORGIVE MYSELF? I'M
SUCH A TERRIBLE DRIVER."
... What further thoughts do you have?
It's really terrible, it's all my fault.
But, what could I do, I didn't see this stupid dog.
Why wasn't it penned or tied up?
Anyways, this doesn't mean I am a biad driver.
It was just bad luck.
What would you then do (if anything)?
I'd try to be more cautious in my driving.
Dale's premise or justification for belief:
Congressional salaries are very high, and cutting them would make a
significant step towards paying off the huge national debt.
Critic's counter-argument: The national debt is so
large that totally eliminating all congressional salaries would
still hardly make a dent in it. (Assume statement factually
correct.)
Dale's rebuttal to Critic's counter-argument: The
members of congress, whose actions are to a considerable extent
responsible for the huge national debt, earn salaries several
times higher than the national average. (Assume statement
factually correct.)
Indicate the strength of Dale's rebuttal...
1 = Very weak ... 4 = Very strong
There is a movement in society which seeks the destruction of the church. One method these individuals use is to buy up companies, corporations and businesses after which putting themselves out of business and or laying off catholic employees. This layoff procedure for Catholics occurs to a great extent in the U.S. school systems, police departments, fire depts. etc. The catholic church is being floored financially.
Why do the free masons persecute the catholic people? Because their good at it. The catholic church is dealing with a group of people who are intelligent, mean, nasty and judicious. These individuals run society and have a good system for themselves but seek to keep the catholic church from printing a currency and having the same system.
John Salvi III, accused of murdering several workers in an abortion clinic in Brookline, Massachusetts, in 1994.
Boston Globe, January 6, 1995. Misspellings are Salvi's.