Which Is Worse: Waterboarding or Abortion?

I am not necessarily condoning waterboarding in asking this question. It is just a curious thing to me that the people who are most opposed to waterboarding (regardless of intent, etc) are seemingly the same folks who cherish abortion (even partial-birth abortion) as a “human right”.

Let me get this straight, some wish to come to the aide of certain terrorists who are unapologetic about their efforts to kill civilian lives…viewing controlled waterboarding interrogations as way beyond the pale and would prefer that these enemy combatants are afforded “habeas corpus”, 3 square meals a day, comfortable sleeping quarters, etc ALL THE WHILE NOT coming to the aid of a baby, who hasn’t committed any crimes, and would actually support that they be MURDERED, even if the procedure inflicts pain?

AND I, like all other “pro-life” activists, are singled out as potential domestic terrorists because we actually think that babies should be afforded 3 meals a day, comfortable sleeping quarters, and habeas corpus. What you (anti waterboarding, proabortion types) want for terrorists, we want for babies. Is this really so radical an idea or is God giving people over to a reprobate mind to see evil as good and call good evil? I know that this is a diatribe…I am not neccesarily advocating torture, but just pointing out the arguments and coutnerarguments from both sides and how this is relevant to the abortion debate.

As for the waterboarding, torture, habeas corpus, etc issues, I am actually thinking through some of these issues and may present them in later posts…but what I say here has more to do with abortion and the logic of a particular segment of this country’s constituency.

© 2009, Rick Hogaboam. All rights reserved.

, ,
7 comments on “Which Is Worse: Waterboarding or Abortion?
  1. The pro-abortion crowd simply sees this waterboarding as being used against a human life that has rights. Since they don’t consider an unborn child as a human life there is nothing to be concerned about in murdering it because it has no rights (except when Mom wants the child, then someone can be held criminally responsible for taking that human life unlawfully).

    As a pro-life person I believe both are wrong because of the fact they both are used against a human life.

    • Thanks for your feedback. I understand the rationale. Prochoicers generally want enemy combatants afforded constitutional rights, which have been reserved for citizens. They are essentially wanting constitutional rights for these folks in no man’s land. In essence, they are contending for their personhood within a constitutional framework. We are fighting for constitutional rights for the pre-born. Both groups are arguing for more “personhood” within a constitutional framework…I just find it curious the logic employed and how it denies the same rights to the pre-born.

  2. Rick, I’m glad that you pointed out the contradiction here. Like the first commenter, I’m against both.

    One thing that also comes up with waterboarding and other forms of torture is that not everyone that we hold is a proven terrorist but rather terror suspects. It’s my understanding that there are also people that have been wrongfully detained and even tortured.

    But on the main point, you’re absolutely right to point out the glaring inconsistency.

  3. I am also against both abortion and water boarding.
    However, I would like to see some presuppositional apologetics busted out on the left using this to beat up Republicans. By what standard is anything ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ in their eyes? International law? What flimsy reed does that stand on? If the will of man is the source of law, then whomever is in power gets to invent right and wrong.

  4. DUH. Abortion is utterly worse & offensive. Although I’m sure Keifer Sutherland is prob pro-choice, I support Jack Bauer to save the day!

Leave a Reply