I’m wondering, however, what your objective was, for this week’s column?
I thought well of the parts where you called out the hypocrisy of a “Pro-life” stance held alongside a rejection of climate science and the anti-life aspects of our consumptive economy and culture.
I’m afraid that I heard the rest of the piece as an (atypical for you) example of echo chamber content for the perceived progressive tilt of your audience.
The issue of abortion raises complex moral and ethical questions for everyone.
There may be facts available relating to fetus viability, but anyone who claims to know when human life begins is delusional, or is just trying to manipulate the emotions of their audience.
You, of course, did not make such a claim, but my point is, there are many other factors besides viability that one may consider when one is developing a position on abortion.
Not everyone who is pro-life is a self-serving, power-hungry, nature-hating ideologue.
My solid pro-choice position is accompanied by deep conflicts and moral questions.
I've considered the facts, checked in with my conscience, and made the best decision that I can make under the circumstances.
Others who do the same may arrive at a different conclusion.
I place a high value on your weekly posts, because I always learn something about climate change.
They are reasonable, well-researched, fact-and-science-based, and informative.
They help motivate me to action in the face of huge swaths of bad news that tend to paralyze me.
I hope that you’ll return to that formula going forward.
Well said, Jason.
Hi Jason:
Well-written and researched, thank you.
Just for the record, I’m solidly pro-choice.
I’m wondering, however, what your objective was, for this week’s column?
I thought well of the parts where you called out the hypocrisy of a “Pro-life” stance held alongside a rejection of climate science and the anti-life aspects of our consumptive economy and culture.
I’m afraid that I heard the rest of the piece as an (atypical for you) example of echo chamber content for the perceived progressive tilt of your audience.
The issue of abortion raises complex moral and ethical questions for everyone.
There may be facts available relating to fetus viability, but anyone who claims to know when human life begins is delusional, or is just trying to manipulate the emotions of their audience.
You, of course, did not make such a claim, but my point is, there are many other factors besides viability that one may consider when one is developing a position on abortion.
Not everyone who is pro-life is a self-serving, power-hungry, nature-hating ideologue.
My solid pro-choice position is accompanied by deep conflicts and moral questions.
I've considered the facts, checked in with my conscience, and made the best decision that I can make under the circumstances.
Others who do the same may arrive at a different conclusion.
I place a high value on your weekly posts, because I always learn something about climate change.
They are reasonable, well-researched, fact-and-science-based, and informative.
They help motivate me to action in the face of huge swaths of bad news that tend to paralyze me.
I hope that you’ll return to that formula going forward.
Respectfully and in good faith,
Bob McKillop