Inconsistent reasoning on abortion

For years, I don't understand how many hard-core anti-abortion people think. I feel that some of them use inconsistent reasoning to convince themselves. At least it is true for Sen. Ron Paul, according to his CNN interview with Piers Morgan lately. I cannot see consistent logical reasoning from the conversation below.

• Morgan: So life doesn't begin at conception?
• Paul: Life does begin at conception.
• Morgan: Then you will be taking a life. (Paul was talking about giving the woman a shot of estrogen if she goes to emergency room immediately after the rape)
• Paul: Well, you don't know if you're taking a life either, because this is an area that is -- but to decide everything about abortion and respect for life on this one very, very theoretical condition, where there may have been a life or not a life.

So, ``you don't know if you're taking a life either.'' Then how can you give that woman a shot of estrogen if in fact you are taking a life? How can you make decisions before clearly knowing the consequences?

Stop showing off your high moral standard by ignoring facts and beating around the bush! You at least need some probabilistic reasoning for non-deterministic problems.

Here is the interview.



What's my opinion to abortion? I don't know. I believe this is the only honest answer.

It's not easy to choose your side on this issue, unlike choosing a restaurant for lunch. In some cases you have to make that painful choice, e.g., honest rapes. But from the bottom of my heart, killing a baby is really not what I feel comfortable to do.