Sunday, November 6, 2011

Jon Huntsman on Personhood... A Rational Postion

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny


Jon Huntsman, a pro life republican shows himself to be both rational and at the same time principled.

Watch...



Huntsman deserves huge kudos for "living" his principles and yet recognizing the wide ranging views rational people hold as to when life begins.

It does seem reasonable, to most anyway, that the moment a fetus can survive outside the mothers womb, with {or without} life support the fetus has achieved the status of personhood.

Personally I am pro life. Pro life is by far the dominate position of the individuals making up the human race. There are of course exceptions to the rule.

Rational laws must be in place that set the ethical and legal boundaries with respect to reproductive issues. On this our nation should revisit the current realities tat we may have gone a bit too far. However, rolling back time to the Dark Ages is not the answer.

Huntsman has it right. He lives his principles yet recognizes the movement to criminalize {what is now legal) abortion in the US, and outlaw contraception is going way to far. Plainly speaking this movement, if I may call it that, is being driven by religious ideologues that are as much a threat to liberty as any politician running for office today.

Kudos to Mr. Huntsman.

Here are some links to check into:

Gov. Barbour May Vote Against Mississippi’s Personhood Abortion Ban: It ‘Concerns Me, I Have To Just Say It’

Mississippi Catholic Bishop, Religious Leaders Denounce Personhood Anti-Abortion Bill

Anti-Abortion Groups Push To Outlaw Contraceptives By Redefining Personhood

Personhood USA Confirms That Mississippi Abortion Ban Would Outlaw Birth Control Pills

‘Pro-Life’ Measure Advancing In Several States Could Ban Some Couples From Conceiving Children

The links are to liberal sites. The commentary is rational. I may be wrong. However, the positions are worth considering. Before accepting something on faith or ideology alone.

Via: Memeorandum

21 comments:

  1. The guy is a breath of fresh air. Even when I don't necessarily agree with him, he always comes across as reasonable, measured, and genuine. It's just too bad that the fellow can't seem to get over that 1% barrier (actually, I saw one poll in New Hampshire that had him at 4%). An insufficient quantity of red meat, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Pro life is by far the dominate position of the individuals making up the human race."

    Les, could you please clarify this statement, because I'm not sure what you mean by "Pro Life" here, and I'm not sure why you think it's so universally popular. Abortions - and worse - have been going on for thousands of years all over the world, after all.

    Huntsman is BY FAR the best candidate among all in this cycle. BY FAR. I disagree with him on a wide host of issues, but he is the most qualified, most well-rounded, most open-minded of all the field.

    Ron Paul is highly intelligent, wise, and good. his positions, however, seem just impossible to imagine to bring to fruition.

    It may well be that a Ron Paul world wouldn't be a bad place, but I can't imagine how we'd go about creating that world. It seems an obviously, incredibly, insurmountable challenge.

    Romney is the establishment, again. Gingrich and Bachmann and Cain and Santorum are thinking about their futures in the right wing media.

    Perry is a joke.

    People just aren't listening to Huntsman, and it's a shame. He could be better than Obama, who at least has proven competent and intelligent, but is still a very establishment president.

    Maybe that's the problem. Maybe the establish is a little afraid of Huntsman, and so they keep him out of the spotlight.

    It looks like it's going to be Romney. Yeesh.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jersey said: "Maybe the establish is a little afraid of Huntsman, and so they keep him out of the spotlight."

    Things just don't work that way. If someone is popular they get airtime. Conspiracy theories don't work in the real world.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I fully endorse the "personhood" argument, since it would destroy the notion of abortion as not being murder.

    This is what the pro-abortionists fear. If the personhood truth makes it to the SCOTUS and causes the Justices to re-evaluate their 1973 stance on what makes a person a human, it would devastate the abortion industry.

    The one thing we all have in common, regardless of "politics", is that we were, at one time, the result of sperm meeting egg and BOOM!, there we got started. Sperm meets egg = personhood.

    Abortion, (as espoused by the pro-abortion feminist crowd), is not a political talking point or a campaign hot-button. It's murder.

    ReplyDelete
  5. dmarks, if you think the establishment is a conspiracy theory then you simply do not understand what I'm talking about. And if you believe the popularity of candidates and issues is enough to move them through the established two parties, then you are completely and totally ignorant of US history.

    If you ban abortion again, all you do is ensure that poor girls women will suffer and die. It just goes to show how little the right really cares about people.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
  6. JMJ,

    You said:
    "If you ban abortion again, all you do is ensure that poor girls women will suffer and die. It just goes to show how little the right really cares about people."

    Weak argument, and you know it. Totally baseless and emotionally-driven rhetoric. Abortion in today's America is about convenience or establishing femininity.

    You're attempting to use emotion to cloud the issue that abortion is murder. Two people walk into an abortion clinic, and one walks out while the other is thrown out with the trash. You cannot paint this picture any other way.

    You are alive. You were not aborted. Need I say more?

    Chakam @ The Conservative Guild

    ReplyDelete
  7. Although I disagree with Huntsman on many issues, he is by far the only candidate in the field who does NOT scare away moderates, liberals, and independents. And I will give him credit where credit is due: His statement took courage and probably cost him the support of the Republican base. Most candidates are too gutless to take a reasoned stand - especially when it costs votes.

    Please note, Pro-Life does not necessarily mean Anti-Choice, and this is precisely Huntsman's point. Anti-abortion sentiments are too heavily infused with religious doctrine to allow it to become public policy. What ecc102 regards as murder is an extremist position not shared by most women and a significant number of men. Saying so does not make it so.

    The concept of fetal 'personhood' is a modern construct that has no basis or origin in Biblical texts. The Biblical definition is simply: Life begins with the first breath.

    Most people in the medical community (and Mrs. Octopus is a doctor) will tell you: A human genome completed at conception bears to more relationship to an actual person than a blue print resembles a fully constructed building, nor does a blastocyst or any other form of embryogenesis. Furthermore, there are misconceptions (no pun intended) about what constitutes third trimester abortion. Most late stage abortions involve fetuses that are anencephalic (meaning the absence of a brain) or dead. Such pregnancies ABSOLUTELY threaten the life of the mother, and to call these abortions 'murder' is just bogus.

    As long as there is controversy and a reasoned and reasonable lack of consensus, it is wrong to criminalize women and their doctors. I respect Jon Huntsman for his position.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Octo,

    You said:
    "What ecc102 regards as murder is an extremist position not shared by most women and a significant number of men. Saying so does not make it so."

    Hmm. Okay, let us then go to an abortion mill and see if the dead and torn-apart human baby can get up and walk out with us. It was alive at one time. Now it is dead. Against its will, since it cannot speak for itself, but surely unless it was suicidal from the womb, it didn't want to die. Last I knew, killing someone that is alive against their will is murder. We have laws against this kind of thing.

    So, abortion renders a once-live human baby into a dead one. Murder.

    I would invite you to view the countless photos of a aborted human babies and rationalize it as being anything less than murder. It is not as if a magic wand is waved over the woman's belly and the baby disappears, no harm no foul.

    If it is "extreme" to wish to protect human life, then so be it. All of us deserve life, Octo. All of us. Abortion is the antithesis to life. It is, in today's America, a quick and easy legalized form of murder, and is not anything to be protected or trumpeted as noble or as a "right".

    We agree to disagree, sir.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Most late stage abortions involve fetuses that are anencephalic (meaning the absence of a brain) or dead [my bold]. Such pregnancies ABSOLUTELY threaten the life of the mother ..."

    Either you have a reading impediment or you are tone-deaf.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @Octo,

    Not tone deaf at all, nor do I have a reading impediment. In the cases you mentioned, abortion becomes an actual medical procedure, completely on the books, and while I find it sad that it happens, it is not the same mindset as the 16-year old chick who gets pregnant due to banging their boyfriend of last month.

    Abortion, to actually save the life of the mother, is not the same thing. You know this. My hatred of abortion on demand is based in the pro-abortion/feminist mindset of convenience and the loose morality of sexual exploration for the sake of identity.

    While I detest abortion, to perform one in a safe medical environment, after tests and x-rays or the like have determined it necessary, is to be considered an unfortunate conclusion to some pregnancies.

    Shall you now throw the rape/incest card at me, to see what I will say? Or how about forced sex slavery resulting in a pregnancy? Or, better yet, what about a crack addict or other hopeless junkie who gets pregnant? What about birth defects detected in utero? What if the baby is determined to have three arms? Or Down's Syndrome?

    Again, we will agree to disagree. I will not see abortion as you do, and you will not see it as I do. Sometimes that's just how it goes. But I would be curious to see if you could hold an aborted human baby in your hands and say, "Hey, this is no big deal. It's not like it was a person or anything."

    Our mothers chose life, Octo. Had they chosen abortion, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

    ReplyDelete
  12. JMJ: "dmarks, if you think the establishment is a conspiracy theory then you simply do not understand what I'm talking about."

    Then try saying something that makes sense.

    "And if you believe the popularity of candidates and issues is enough to move them through the established two parties, then you are completely and totally ignorant of US history."

    Actually, that is the way it works. To think otherwise is to be ignorant of US history. Unpopular candidates just don't get as far.

    Though I have seen it countless times that backers of extremely unpopular candidates just can't deal with the fact that hardly anyone agrees with them. So they make up fictional excuses...anything but the reality that the candidate appeals to hardly anyone.
    -------------

    Octo said: "Anti-abortion sentiments are too heavily infused with religious doctrine to allow it to become public policy."

    The same can be said of sentiments in favor of abortion. I've been around Protestant sects that officially take the "pro-choice" side on abortion in their doctrine.

    ReplyDelete
  13. dmarks,

    A majority of Americans want universal healthcare, higher taxes on the wealthy, demilitarization, fair trade, no cuts in SS or Medicare, and on and on. So how exactly has the system worked???

    Half of Americans don't even vote! They don't think their matters! And a good part of the time those that do vote have to hold their noses when they do!

    I really don't think you know what you're talking about here.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
  14. JMJ said: "A majority of Americans want universal healthcare, higher taxes on the wealthy, demilitarization, fair trade, no cuts in SS or Medicare, and on and on. So how exactly has the system worked???"

    First, free trade IS fair trade. The people trading decide what is fair or not. The best way. Your idea in which only the ruling elites make trade decisions would plummet to zero once people realized that the policies you propose would take away jobs, and perhaps cause a new Depression..

    As for the rest of it, it all depends on how you label the polls. "Universal healthcare" might sound like a nice way to package it, but it is rather unpopular when you tell people it really means government controlling all aspects of healthcare.

    "Higher taxes on millionaires" sounds nice. But it would deflate this demand if you told the fact that the rich pay a lot more in taxes than everyone else already. Of course, the OWS folks would rather beg for money from those who work and are successful than do anything productive themselves.

    There are underlying reasons that issues labeled deceptively as you did really aren't that popular.

    I not only think you have no idea what you are talking about, JMJ. I know it. Because among other things you are making the mistaken assumption that your fringe views are actually popular.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dmarks: "The same can be said of sentiments in favor of abortion. I've been around Protestant sects that officially take the "pro-choice" side on abortion in their doctrine."

    So now Protestants are sects and no longer denominations? Can you think of any other religions deserving of downgrades or devaluation? And why is there now an implied religious test for public office or public policy when the Constitution states otherwise?

    Ecc102,
    Emotional appeals do not impress me. End of discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Octo:

    I missused the word "sect". Looking at the definition, it's clear I needed a review of it. I did mean denomination.

    "And why is there now an implied religious test for public office or public policy when the Constitution states otherwise?"

    What does this have to do with?

    ReplyDelete
  17. @Octo,

    Yep, I figured the thought of you holding a dead baby in your hands would silence you.

    As always, I am right.

    ReplyDelete
  18. ecc: I oppose abortion also, but tend to shy away from such language.

    ReplyDelete
  19. @dmarks,

    With respect, I reckon it is grossly irresponsible of me to speak of abortion in such graphic terms. I mean, where are my manners?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Jersey and Octo endorse Huntsman. Two more reasons why he should join the democrat party and challenge Obama.

    I find it hilarious when liberals make statements like this about republicans they have no intention of ever voting for:

    Although I disagree with Huntsman on many issues, he is by far the only candidate in the field who does NOT scare away moderates, liberals, and independents...

    ...who are high on hopium and will nonetheless still march in lockstep and vote for Obama come hell or high water.

    ReplyDelete
  21. those who are in support of abortion are using very deterministic arguments to justify it.

    those who declare that person-hood begins at birth give no supporting argument thus cannot be considered as a reasoned argument.

    as for the fully developed argument goes, that falls short also. it could be argued that we are still developing after birth. in fact it could be argued that a person is in a continuous stage of development all of his life.
    thus. this argument cannot be called a reasoned argument either.

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.