In any other case, that would be true. The main difference in this case and the others where people refer to blatant and intentional murder of another living person is a simple one: abortions are legal.
Our government is for the people, by the people. Some might argue this, but when all is said and done, that's how it works.
When the subject of abortions came up to the supreme court, they obviously made a wise choice in deciding that it really isn't their place to tell others what they should/should not do in this area. It was too much of a grey area to make such a decision, and rightfully so. Yes, it presents a plethora of moral questions as well as shares common ground (on some level) with murder, but it's really not the same. If it was, it would've been made illegal. To them, there clearly wasn't enough there to make them decide that abortions should be illegal... and trust me, all the moral questions that others have brought up have without a doubt been thought of by the justices.
The truth of the matter is: it's too much of a grey area.
So yes, that's how OUR society works. Again, you might not agree with it, but the cold hard truth is you have to live with it whether you like it or not and chances are, it will NOT change anytime soon.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: what's morally wrong to you might not be morally wrong to someone else. You may think/feel they're wrong and can have all the arguments against it you want, but until the law dictates otherwise or god himself appears and tells people "abortions make baby jesus cry", they aren't.
__________________
I love lamp.
Last edited by Stompy; 05-12-2004 at 04:28 AM..
|