Other ways of tackling the abortion issue

[Timothy Leary]

Does anyone know if there are groups that are tackling this issue in a manner similar to Abortion: A Market Solution (http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/davies/davies7.html)? Not neccessarily paying them, but are there any groups going around trying to save potential abortees by speaking to the young mothers and offering adoption?

[Pilgrim]

Does anyone know if there are groups that are tackling this issue in a manner similar to Abortion: A Market Solution (http://www.strike-the-root.com/51/davies/davies7.html)? Not neccessarily paying them, but are there any groups going around trying to save potential abortees by speaking to the young mothers and offering adoption?

Crisis Pregnancy Centers do that.

[Leroy]

Pregnancy Resource Centers (http://www.prcmo.net/)

[dizzle]

That is really an awful blog, not even a clever bit of sophistry.

How much should we have bid per Jew to the German government? Per slave to the Confederacy?

[Jedidiah]

That is really an awful blog, not even a clever bit of sophistry.

How much should we have bid per Jew to the German government? Per slave to the Confederacy?

Have to agree with this evaluation.

[Storico]

Services and information for pregnant women who'd like to consider giving their child a chance via adoption:

http://www.christianadoptiononline.com/

http://www.lifetimeadoption.com/for_birtmothers/services.html

http://www.friendsinadoption.org/if_you_are_pregnant/resources_for_pregnant_women_couples.asp

[Smokering]

Well, yes and no.

It's kind of bizarre, but we are dealing with human life here. One could make an argument that doing something weird in order to safe a life is justified. I imagine there were people who bribed the Nazis to let Jews escape; I imagine there were people who bought slaves and then gave them their freedom. In fact, I've read about instances of the latter.

It doesn't make the Nazis or the slave owners better people, but it does save the life (well, the freedom at least) of some innocent human beings. If activism at the political or religious level doesn't work, why not do whatever it takes to fend off the evil consequences?

I'm not saying his blog demonstrates the 'right' way to go about it. I do know, however, that if my husband were being held prisoner, and if I couldn't appeal to the conscience of his guards or the law of my country, I would RUN to the bank to get that bribe.

[dizzle]

The blog is a poor attempt to be clever to claim that anti-abortionists who aren't paying millions are being hypocrites. It is not suggesting a possible way - read the whole thing, carefully.

[Smokering]

Well, yeah, the blog itself is rather unhelpful. But it *is* a possible way, nevertheless. Not the best way, but a possible one.

[dizzle]

A possible way is also to kidnap all women considering abortion. Not the best way, but a possible way.

That blog is nothing but a completely stupid attempt at slipping in a back door hypocrisy charge. I for one oppose any abortion apologetic that appeals primarily to the selfishness of the woman.

[Smokering]

Doesn't it come down to how much we really believe a foetus is a human being?

Pretend we're talking about adults instead of foetuses... would you kidnap a murderer to stop her from killing an adult, if it seemed like the best option at the time? Would you bribe a man not to kill your husband? Would you appeal to the selfishness of your neighbor, if by giving him money you could persuade him not to kill your husband?

I'm not saying that either kidnapping or bribing pregnant women is the best way--even, necessarily an acceptable way--to prevent them having abortions. But if the target is simply to save a human life--rather than to convert the mother, change her opinions, or whatever--what means are justified?

As silly as that blog entry was, it did (unwittingly) bring up some interesting points. How much do we *really* believe that a foetus is a human life? How far would we go to save that life? As far as we would go to save an adult life? Would we, should we commit morally-questionable acts in order to save a life, either adult or pre-birth? How far do we go? How far SHOULD we go?

Sorry if this hijacks the thread somewhat, I just think it brings up some fascinating ethical conundrums.

[KingsGambit]

The first problem I see with this is that it assumes in the first paragraph that some monetary value can be placed on one's amount of trauma. This is akin to attempting to place a value on one's life, but at least some economists have placed as an arbitrary value of one's life the amount of capital they might have accumulated over a lifespan (not that I would agree with this at all). I can only classify this misguided attempt to intertwine two completely separate thought systems as an example of a market failure.

[Timothy Leary]

That is really an awful blog, not even a clever bit of sophistry.

How much should we have bid per Jew to the German government? Per slave to the Confederacy?

The blog is a poor attempt to be clever to claim that anti-abortionists who aren't paying millions are being hypocrites. It is not suggesting a possible way - read the whole thing, carefully.

Don't get me wrong - the author of that paticular article was very clearly biased against pro-life'ers. However, that does not make his suggestion any less plausible. If it will saves lives, then why not?

If you had the means and the resources, would you have refused to pay money to people - as greedy and/or evil as they may be - if it would have meant saving the lives of people destined for concentration camps?

[KingsGambit]

If you had the means and the resources, would you have refused to pay money to people - as greedy and/or evil as they may be - if it would have meant saving the lives of people destined for concentration camps?

One has to at least consider the danger of it leading to extortion-for-life. However, it might be worth paying because you probably wouldn't have a lot of leverage in this case anyway.

[Darth Executor]

Don't get me wrong - the author of that paticular article was very clearly biased against pro-life'ers. However, that does not make his suggestion any less plausible. If it will saves lives, then why not?

If you had the means and the resources, would you have refused to pay money to people - as greedy and/or evil as they may be - if it would have meant saving the lives of people destined for concentration camps?

What if people start getting pregnant to leech money off you and when you don't have enough to pay, it results in even more deaths? You of all people should know why appeasement is so dangerous.

[Timothy Leary]

I hate to put it in these terms, but there's no PC way to do it.

It'd be like any other 'product' on the market, being subject to the laws of supply & demand. Eventually the 'market' would balance out. Wouldn't be perfect, but better than what's happening now. However, given the 9 months of agony that a woman has to endure, I highly doubt anyone would pay a girl so much money that she'd be willing to go through it just for a few bucks.

[Smokering]

'9 months of agony'? That's a bit extreme.