<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Framing the abortion debate (part 1):  What is the missing premise?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dangerousintersection.org/2006/04/20/framing-the-abortion-debate-part-1-what-is-the-missing-premise/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2006/04/20/framing-the-abortion-debate-part-1-what-is-the-missing-premise/</link>
	<description>Human Animals at the Crossroads of Culture, Science, Religion and Media</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 06:06:47 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Erich Vieth</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2006/04/20/framing-the-abortion-debate-part-1-what-is-the-missing-premise/comment-page-1/#comment-47</link>
		<dc:creator>Erich Vieth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Apr 2006 05:46:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=107#comment-47</guid>
		<description>Isn't the anti-abortionist going to claim that the missing premise is something like:  Abortion involves killing a (post-conception human) life?  Then they add another premise, something like "Killing a human life is murder."  

My focus on this debate has long been the baggage that slips in with "Premise 1."  It begs the question by assuming that a 2-day old zygote has the same legal rights as a 8-year old child that can walk and talk.  In reality, the big part of the debate has been over what rights that zygote (or embryo or fetus) has.  Life forms don't come pre-tagged showing the rights  they have; society has to decide this.  And on this issue, it's very difficult to get a consensus in the U.S. 

For this reason that there is such widespread disagreement, I would largely leave the decision with the woman and her doctor.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Isn&#8217;t the anti-abortionist going to claim that the missing premise is something like:  Abortion involves killing a (post-conception human) life?  Then they add another premise, something like &#8220;Killing a human life is murder.&#8221;  </p>
<p>My focus on this debate has long been the baggage that slips in with &#8220;Premise 1.&#8221;  It begs the question by assuming that a 2-day old zygote has the same legal rights as a 8-year old child that can walk and talk.  In reality, the big part of the debate has been over what rights that zygote (or embryo or fetus) has.  Life forms don&#8217;t come pre-tagged showing the rights  they have; society has to decide this.  And on this issue, it&#8217;s very difficult to get a consensus in the U.S. </p>
<p>For this reason that there is such widespread disagreement, I would largely leave the decision with the woman and her doctor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
