Actually misread the post on mobile and thought you were responding to kpt saying you assign BS motivational agenda to people when you said "verifiably not true." You have not pronounced where life begins that I have seen. You have certainly pronounced that anyone who believes it begins before birth is ignorant and/or motivated by some ulterior motive, and that abortion could not ever be equated with the taking of life. I only equated the two because I believe them to be the same thing. My bad, asshole.
If one's stance of "pro-life" is to be taken to mean all life is sacred and to be preserved-- that every person's existence is cherished and loved by God or whomever, taking up arms with the intention of them to be used against other humans in certain situations would run counter to this. Is a thief's life no longer sacred or his soul no longer redeemable if he's caught in the act? Is the use of deadly force even an option? It is hard to understand how one can see life as absolutely sacred, while simultaneously making sure one is in a position to deal out lethal force at any time (to generalize pro-gun folks for conversational purposes, which I realize will lead to some folks calling me a shithead or something). I'm called pro-gun by some people and anti-gun by others. There's no doubt I'm pro-choice. I can see why some people see a conflict between pro-gun and pro-life. Like there would be a conflict in being a strict vegetarian who keeps bacon in their fridge just in case.
I think there's a ton of people in this country who consider themselves pro-life but would happily sling buckshot at the thief coming in the door. I know it's the position of some, but there should be no presumption that people who are "pro-life" must consider all life sacred. In a purely black and white sense, all pro-life means is anti abortion.
I could have killed a terrorist right before he suicide-bombed thousands, but I'm pro-life so I figured I'd let all those people die.
There are indeed a ton of people who consider themselves pro-life and would happily shoot a thief, coming or going.
That's an awfully specific example. What if it is a thief who just stole the family candlesticks and is running out the door?
This is actually where I am. I believe in force only when it will ultimately save lives. I think being against abortion except when the mother is in jeopardy is fairly consistent with that.
Coming, you have no way of knowing whether he's there to rip off your DVD collection or to smash your baby to pulp.
shooting said thief is absolutely wrong, IMO. I do think that the sentence would/should be mitigated in that circumstance.
I guess I grab a baseball bat or something. Why does that even matter? What about a guy that cuts me off in traffic? Obviously there are certain situations where use of guns isn't warranted. That doesn't mean they should be illegal.
I understand the rhetoric but don't necessarily agree. To me, the gun issue is an empirical question. If we knew we could really put a dent in murder, I'd be for all kinds of laws/restrictions. If that meant changing the constitution, I'd be for that.
I don't think they should be illegal, but there is a segment of people who think it is perfectly acceptable to blow a hole into the back of the head of thief escaping or what have you who simultaneously maintain all life is sacred. I'm purposefully omitting the sort of judgement decisions of home invaders kicking in the door, assailants brandishing lethal force with bad intentions, etc. It is perfectly reasonable to defend life while being pro-life-- but property? Not so sure (though I guess it depends, when one considers livelihood stuff).
I know you're being sarcastic, but you can easily make the argument that the automobile has increased life expectancy.
Being pro-gun does not mean you are for improper usage of guns anymore than being pro-car means you are OK with driving onto a crowded sidewalk and crushing pedestrians. Silly argument.
The purpose of a car isn't the same as the purpose of a gun. You can't be an environmentalist who drives to climate protests by yourself in a Chevy Suburban.
It's not silly when the premise you're rejecting is a widespread belief. YOU don't advocate shooting a person in the back for petty theft, but it isn't hard to find people who find it more than justified but consider themselves pro-life.
