[net.abortion] Your Favorite Subject

mn@dscvax2.UUCP (Matt Noah) (06/26/85)

>> Since I said "not animal ... human" it should be obvious, even to
>> Don Steiny, that I had in mind a definition like 2a, above.

>	What distinguishes them?     In the Bible there is a distinction,
>but the Bible is self-serving.    I don't believe in souls, fetuses
>have little intelligence, what is so special about them?  You say
>"but they are human!"  BFD - there are billions of humans.

First, Don, you say that there is a distinction between humans and
animals and that your source is the Bible.  You have used an
authorative source which many people believe as the basis for your
statement that humans are different than humans.  You then say that
the Bible is self-serving.  What do you mean?  How can a book be
self-serving?  What does the Bible gain from making the mentioned
distinction that it wouldn't gain otherwise?  How can a book gain
anything?  It seems that if anyone or anything is self-serving it
is you.  You state your beliefs in the next line, among them the
belief that things with little intelligence are not "special".  
Since you advocate abortion one can imply that you don't regard as
"special" anything with little intelligence and that since it is
not special it is extinguishable.  Yes, there are billions of
humans and in this country, we protect humans with laws and morals.
Would you like it if I killed someone "special" to you and then
used as my excuse, "BFD - there are billions of humans - find
anothere special one".

>> 
>> But how come you didn't say anything about the first part of the
>> statement?  About the fact that fetuses are sometimes alive when
>> experiments begin?  That must be why you deliberately misinterpreted
>> me; to divert the discussion (?) from the topic.
>> Gary Samuelson
>> ittvax!bunker!garys

>	I did.  I mentioned that the whole notion of what constitutes
>life is an iffy one.   The discovery of Prions have shown us that
>there is much we have yet to learn.   A 12 week old fetus is about
>as alive as a prion, despite the movie.   If there is no good reason
>to experiment on fetuses that are "alive" I suppose that they should
>stop so that people will feel better.   Life is for the living!
>Don Steiny - Computational Linguistics

Life is a mystery.  Because something is not completely understood
does not make it right to kill babies.  You have defined value in
life by equating a prion with a 12-week-old fetus.  How absurd!  What
is the basis for your comparison?  Is there nothing that distinguishes
the degree of life between the two or are you afraid to admit that
there is?  I seriously believe that you should look in to your value
structure for gross inconsistencies.  Your later statements reveal some
hideous ideologies.  Fortunately there are people you will help you
before you do damage to someone.

Matt Noah