gadfly@ihu1m.UUCP (Gadfly) (07/26/85)
--
Saying "abortion is murder" doesn't get us anywhere, because
irrespective of the is-the-fetus-really-human issue, most
people will admit there's times when killing a person is OK,
or at least morally defensible. Usually such soon-to-be-dead
individuals have to do something to deserve it, though. To
distinguish fetuses from these bad guys, fetuses are often refered
to by anti-abortionists as "innocent human life". Well then,
what exactly is innocence?
If any war is ever justifiable, then the killing of "innocent"
human life is justifiable. Wars' casualties always transcend
the actual combatants, and all the principals know it before
the shooting even starts. There's inevitably all sorts of marginal
support personnel, and of course civilians, who never asked for
the hostilities, but were simply in the wrong place at the
wrong time. We grieve for them, sometimes, but we kill them anyway.
Often these casualties come about essentially for reasons of military
convenience. To be more selective in targetting would be too
risky, endanger too many troops, prolong the war, etc. It's a messy
business, but, that's life. And death.
The analogy must by now be clear. Somebody tell me what it is
about a state that intrinsically possesses the right to kill purely
for convenience that the individual does not. You may quote Hegel.
(Yeah, go ahead Mr. "Bomb-Lover" Arndt. Do it. Make my day :-)
If you say that all war is wrong, that the state does not have
such a right, that no one ever, jointly or severally, has such a
right, I applaud your moral utopianism. Alas, all states do claim
such a right, and have back to the beginnings of history. And this
doesn't seem to bother anybody either--especially alleged "pro-lifers."
Thus, even if a fetus were a human being (and notice the subjunctive
indicating a condition contrary to fact), aborting one is perfectly
consistent with the rest--and the best--of human ethics. Functionally,
anyway.
So please, let's not dwell too long about abortion "cheapening" human
life. It's already so dirt cheap the bottom long ago fell out of the
market. In this world there is no "innocent"--only lucky.
--
*** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI ***** *****
****** ****** 25 Jul 85 [7 Thermidor An CXCIII]
ken perlow ***** *****
(312)979-7753 ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!iwsl8!ken *** ***steiny@scc.UUCP (Don Steiny) (07/27/85)
> > So please, let's not dwell too long about abortion "cheapening" human > life. It's already so dirt cheap the bottom long ago fell out of the > market. In this world there is no "innocent"--only lucky. > ken perlow I agree with that. Anyway, abortion does not cheapen human life! It is simple supply and demand, the more people there are, the greater the supply, the less the demand and the cheaper the price. Abortion INCREASES the value of human life. -- scc!steiny Don Steiny @ Don Steiny Software 109 Torrey Pine Terrace Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060
gadfly@ihuxn.UUCP (Gadfly) (08/07/85)
--
Saying "abortion is murder" doesn't get us anywhere, because
irrespective of the is-the-fetus-really-human issue, most
people will admit there's times when killing a person is OK,
or at least morally defensible. Usually such soon-to-be-dead
individuals have to do something to deserve it, though. To
distinguish fetuses from these bad guys, fetuses are often refered
to by anti-abortionists as "innocent human life". Well then,
what exactly is innocence?
If any war is ever justifiable, then the killing of "innocent"
human life is justifiable. Wars' casualties always transcend
the actual combatants, and all the principals know it before
the shooting even starts. There's inevitably all sorts of marginal
support personnel, and of course civilians, who never asked for
the hostilities, but were simply in the wrong place at the
wrong time. We grieve for them, sometimes, but we kill them anyway.
Often these casualties come about essentially for reasons of military
convenience. To be more selective in targetting would be too
risky, endanger too many troops, prolong the war, etc. It's a messy
business, but, that's life. And death.
The analogy must by now be clear. Somebody tell me what it is
about a state that intrinsically possesses the right to kill purely
for convenience that the individual does not. You may quote Hegel.
(Yeah, go ahead Mr. "Bomb-Lover" Arndt. Do it. Make my day :-)
If you say that all war is wrong, that the state does not have
such a right, that no one ever, jointly or severally, has such a
right, I applaud your moral utopianism. Alas, all states do claim
such a right, and have back to the beginnings of history. And this
doesn't seem to bother anybody either--especially alleged "pro-lifers."
Thus, even if a fetus were a human being (and notice the subjunctive
indicating a condition contrary to fact), aborting one is perfectly
consistent with the rest--and the best--of human ethics. Functionally,
anyway.
So please, let's not dwell too long about abortion "cheapening" human
life. It's already so dirt cheap the bottom long ago fell out of the
market. In this world there is no "innocent"--only lucky.
--
*** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI ***** *****
****** ****** 06 Aug 85 [19 Thermidor An CXCIII]
ken perlow ***** *****
(312)979-7753 ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!iwsl8!ken *** ***