Help Please


I need all the help I can get. I need pro choice advocates to go to this site and check the box that indicates that this debate is important. I have a pro life advocate of stature that has previously agreed to debate and now is slow at confirming the debate. Please help. The debate is on http://www.debate.org just hit this link:

http://www.debate.org/debates/Newly-revealed-natural-scientific-laws-govern-the-morality-of-abortion/1/

Here is the issue:

This debate will test newly revealed natural scientific laws that govern the impact that abortion has on society. If any of the laws are valid, then the generally accepted conclusions of the pro life movement are invalid.

Natural laws are self evident once brought to light and backed up with theory. Natural laws are not invented, they are revealed. This debate will be about revealed natural scientific laws and the theories that surround the laws.

There are obvious natural laws that govern the issues surrounding abortion. These laws are like other natural scientific law in that they are simple and obvious yet these abortion related laws have profound impact on the way society should judge the abortion issue.

The first law: “If a woman is forced to carry to term one fetus, then she cannot normally become pregnant with another fetus in the same time period.”

This simple law leads to what I call “The Law of Hindered Birth”. I shorten the law to say: “a forced birth precludes a willing birth.” The theories surrounding the law lead to insight into the moral effect of forcing birth. One theory is that forcing birth of a unwanted child denies life to another potential child.

The second natural abortion law states: “a person that engages in sexual intercourse will likely cause an abortion.”
I call one derivative of this law the “Pro Life Conundrum”. It is a fact that most conceptions end in natural abortion. Because women know that abortion is a possibility, they are responsible for any abortions, regardless of intention, that result from their choice to have unprotected sexual intercourse.

A third natural law states: “there are more people that will die than can be saved.” This law leads to the theory that if a person spends money to save a fetus then that money cannot be spent to save another person. Therefore spending money to save fetuses leads to a lack of money to save already born humans. The theory is supplemented by the fact that saving fetuses requires a person to invest in an attempt to save a life with a low possibility of living through birth. Therefore the theory predicts that most attempts to save fetal life fail and will lead to more deaths than normally would be expected.

Finally natural scientific law shows that “it is impossible to determine if life starts at conception.” The theory is that science shows DNA code is like computer code. For that reason it is impossible for the Code of the zygote to be positive for a living human until the “program” that is constructing life has run all of its code. It is therefore impossible for life to be confirmed at conception.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with rccrawford@swbell.net please contact Communications Director Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.