arndt@lymph.DEC (06/15/85)
Er, do I trust my eyes? I believe I saw Ken Montgomery say, "Experimentation on live aborted fetuses is wrong and should be stopped. But that does not imply that abortion should be stopped also." TRYING TO THRUST YOUR MORALS DOWN OUR THROATS, KEN???? Why should such experiments be stopped? "Wrong"?? Whatever does that word mean? If you mean YOU think it's wrong, I don't care. If you mean it's wrong for EVERYONE, why then WHY???? On what basis? What do you say to the doctor who wants to experiment? And what pray tell happens to the fetus when aborted 'alive' that makes it worthy of your comments. Should the good doctors not notice anything of medical interest while performingan abortion so that they don't 'experiment'?? What to DO with the little bugger! Damn! It's alive OUTSIDE mommy! Now you know where all the Christians get their morals. WHERE DO YOU GET YOURS to make such a statement "Experimentation on live aborted fetuses is wrong . . ." What's a matter Ken, can't stand the sight of little bodies squirming under the knife? Himmler had the same problem. His ideas worked great at headquarters but he threw up at the killing site. Weak sister. Oh dear, I'm raving again. Must have read the Bible last night. But please, tell us WHY it's wrong. Keep chargin' Ken Arndt
kjm@ut-ngp.UTEXAS (Ken Montgomery) (07/13/85)
[] From arndt@lymph.DEC Fri Jun 14 16:06:17 1985 >Er, do I trust my eyes? I believe I saw Ken Montgomery say, "Experimentation >on live aborted fetuses is wrong and should be stopped. But that does not >imply that abortion should be stopped also." > >TRYING TO THRUST YOUR MORALS DOWN OUR THROATS, KEN???? Nope, merely expressing personal revulsion, and trying to be clear about the limits of its implications for me. Ethical imperative was not intended; sorry if I came across that way. >Why should such experiments be stopped? "Wrong"?? Whatever does that >word mean? If you mean YOU think it's wrong, I don't care. If you mean >it's wrong for EVERYONE, why then WHY???? On what basis? What do you say >to the doctor who wants to experiment? See above, and below. >And what pray tell happens to the fetus when aborted 'alive' that makes it >worthy of your comments. Gee, I don't know "what happens to" it -- I don't work in a clinic. Next? >[...] >What to DO with the little bugger! Damn! It's alive OUTSIDE mommy! If you want to care for it, I won't stop you. (I won't require you to care for it if you don't want to, either.) >Now you know where all the Christians get their morals. I've been thinking about this little gem :~> for about three weeks now, to the exclusion of most other network activity. The best I can figure is that christians of Ken Arndt's ilk get their morals by opposing what they find personally revolting. I found this conclusion highly unlikely (even for Ken Arndt :-)), but finally could not come up with any other, given the context of the rest of the article. Is that really all there is to (Arndt's variety of) christian morality?! >WHERE DO YOU GET YOURS to make such a statement "Experimentation on live >aborted fetuses is wrong . . ." They are no longer in violation of another person's rights. Ergo any initiation of force against them is wrong. >[Attempt by Arndt to argue by intimidation deleted]. > >But please, tell us WHY it's wrong. See above. >Keep chargin' I prefer to pay by cash or check, thank you. >Ken Arndt -- The above viewpoints are mine. They are unrelated to those of anyone else, including my cats and my employer. Ken Montgomery "Shredder-of-hapless-smurfs" ...!{ihnp4,allegra,seismo!ut-sally}!ut-ngp!kjm [Usenet, when working] kjm@ut-ngp.ARPA [for Arpanauts only]