regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard) (04/11/85)
>>Subject: Re: $$$ - logical, eh? >>ANSWER: No. >Refute it. You can't! Sure he can. Does the judge who orders the death penalty for a criminal make money from murder? No. He is hired by the state to uphold the laws of the state. The doctors and nurses who work at clinics perform a number of medical services -- and make their living as doctors and nurses. Not murderers, pirates or profiteers. Similarly, other employees of non-profit organizations make a salary -- yet the organization is still not-for-profit. >>> The fact is this: ACTIVE Pro-lifers get no money for their efforts. >>> ACTIVE Pro-choicers make ALOT of money for their efforts. >>> Take away the profit from abortion and see how many pro-choicers stay ACTIVE. >>> Matt Noah >>The "fact"? How about "the opinion"? Given the large numbers of people >>unrelated to the "industry" of abortion (do you know of ANYTHING that >>people engage in and render money for that does NOT become a money-grubbing >>profit-motive "industry"?--end of argument about "abortion industry") that >>actively support the right to abortion, I fail to see where your "fact" >>comes from. >>-- >> Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr >What's your argument? There is no large number of people who ACTIVELY support >abortion who are not related to the industry. Do you consider posting to the >net as being ACTIVE? Net activity is known as "lip service" and if I did >nothing besides post my beliefs to the net I would be guilty of "paying lip >service" to the issue. Your statement in parentheses is clearly subjective >and can't be addressed without a definition of "fair profit", "excess profit" >or some similar term. In fact, it depends on such other factors as undue >influence, misrepresentation and other circumstances. >Matt Noah Matt, do you know Rich Rosen's activities? Do you know what he does or does not make within or without the abortion industry? Is voting "ACTIVE" or just lip-service? Do you know how he votes? Do you know to what causes he donates his time/services/efforts? Your argument is without any basis. You don't like his definition of active, but you don't pose one of your own except the circular If they make money, then they are active unless they are anti-abortionists, and then it's reversed. Comparing _only_ the people who render a legal medical service to _only_ the people who picket for free is specious. (What else is new). Try comparing the ones who make money to the ones who make money and the ones who don't to the ones who don't -- or does that blow your argument right out of the water?