marco@andromeda.RUTGERS.EDU (the wharf rat) (07/23/86)
>Note that this argument only justifies abortion for the handicapped and >minority children, I beg your pardon ? My justification for allowing abortion is that a person can do what she wants with her body, and that a non- viable embryo is *not* a human being. re: When is it a baby ? >Maybe you could explain why you set these two criteria as alternatives? >[...] >vague criteria. I'm sure you would wan't more precision in the criteria >that your right to live would be judged with Sure. Independent survival is one of the criteria I use to seperate "human" from "human being". As in my liver is human, but is not a human being. As to the second criterion, I would accept the brain wave patterns characteristic of dreaming or active thought. By the way, if *I* ever get to the point where *I* am neither capable of independent survival nor exhibit any signs of brain activity, I hope someone is brave/caring enough to end my "life" . >> Please understand that we (the non-ignorant >>ones) do not support abortion, merely a woman's right to choose. > >So you *do* support abortion if woman choose it. > NO. I SUPPORT A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE. Are we caught in a loop here or what ? >on from there. Since the fetus is human offspring, it makes sense to >consider it innocent of being "non-human" (with regard to a human's right >to life) until proven guilty. The pro-choice camp has never proven the >fetus guilty. This is an a priori condemnation. From what I've seen >they are very unwilling to even consider the idea that the fetus might >be innocent after all. I don't understand all this guilt and innocence stuff. The simple fact is that a teaspoonful of partially differentiated cells is not a human being. As to the idea that someday we might prove that the things are "human" in the way you use the term, and should treat them accordingly, what if they prove cows have personal lives someday ? Better not kill any more cows. What if someday a cockroach talks ? We'd have to give them a seat at the U.N. See ? That kind of argument ("But maybe someday in the future...") is false since carrying it out to its logical conclusion leads to an absurdity. (This is <dis>proof by reductio ad absurdum) re: Poor & large families: >also reasons that they don't particularly *want* birth control as well >as abortion. Organizations like Planned Parenthood have to go in and >*convince* these people that they should use it. The reasons they >give don't convince me that they have the best interests of the poor >in mind. They just want fewer poor people around. And organizations like the Peace Corps have to go in and *convince* them to keep the village well sanitary. And other organizations have to go in and *convince* them to have their kids vaccinated. Unfortunately, ignorance is often coincident with poverty. I refuse to believe that all those pregnant 14 yr olds did it on purpose to provide for their old age, nor will I believe that a young mother of 6 on welfare did it because she loves children. How can such a person pull themselves out of poverty ? Why is it wrong to teach them that they should learn to wait, get a skill,get a job, get *financially secure*, and then you can have a family ? You've got a wire crossed somewhere, bub. re: Whose choice and whose responsibility : >it gives the woman almost as much power over the man as she has over >the fetus. Sometimes I think the last sentence holds the (a) key to the anti-choice stance: These guys resent the power given to women by the ability to bear children, and thus seek to control it. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The day he can have the baby himself is the day he gets to decide whether or not it's born to term. It's *her* body, not his. But it's *his* kid, too; so he should help raise it. >what if your girl-friend becomes pregnant, refuses to get >an abortion (or changes her mind and decides not to). Will you support >her without feeling trapped by her desires instead of your obligation The only time this happened to me, I was perfectly ready to help her in any way she chose. Yes, I did feel trapped. But I wanted her to be at peace; if I didn't care that much we wouldn't have (almost) had a child together. W.rat And it's *not* killing a baby. (What t-shirt ?)
apc@cblpe.UUCP (Alan Curtis) (07/28/86)
In article <470@andromeda.RUTGERS.EDU> marco@andromeda.RUTGERS.EDU (the wharf rat) writes: > By the way, if *I* ever get to the point where *I* am neither >capable of independent survival nor exhibit any signs of brain activity, >I hope someone is brave/caring enough to end my "life" . > > W.rat What if you would have to live on machines, totally, for nine months and then would be able to continue your usual life? I believe that someday (fairly soon at that) this technology will exsist for newly conceived children. Then what does abortion become? Alan Curtis