carnes@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP (Richard Carnes) (03/31/85)
T. C. Wheeler writes: > Convenience is the heart > and soul of the abortion issue. If it weren't for the > self-centered, egotistical attitudes which prevail amoung > our most vocal pro-choice people, the abortion rate would > drop by 90%. All I hear is "What's in it for me?" This is paranoid thinking. Note that TC is not saying, "I disagree with your moral principles or your ethical reasoning." He's saying, "You're morally worse than we are because you're selfish, egotistical, etc., but we're not." The word for a person who sees himself as surrounded by a sea of evil, self-centered people who are up to no good, is "paranoid." This is the mentality that underlies prejudice of all kinds and leads to the persecution of the "bad" people. A person who takes the point of view expressed by Wheeler, all too common in the pro-life camp, has conceded the debate and cut himself off from civilized debate and discussion. Such persons should be ignored. It is futile to argue with paranoids; the more you argue, the more they are convinced that you're evil. Richard Carnes
wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (03/31/85)
I see that the debate has hit home with Mr Carnes. Any deviation from his point of view is labled "paranoid". My, my Mr. Carnes, who is it that is paranoid? Who is it that is self-serving? By your own admission, you are one of those I seem to have goaded. So, you are a self-centered, What's in it for me type, right? Now that we all know where you are coming from, we can ignore your postings. You seem to think that the whole issue of abortion rests on only one tiny point, where life starts. Your wrong, Carnes, there are a multitude of issues, all interconnected and varied. People in your category seem to be hung up on the debate over when life begins. Others are hung up on morality. Still others will only debate the economics of the problem. For you and your group, I say it is time to come out of the woods and look at the broader issues. Face the facts. Examine your position. I and many others can see your position even if you can't. Your position, plus that of several others on this net is Convenience, pure and simple. No thought is given to anything other than what a child is going to do to your lifestyle. You choose, however, to ignore this basic premis in your life and debate issues outside this circle. I don't think the people who continue to ignore their own inner thoughts and keep attaching non-relevant reasons for their behaviour are many, but thet sure are vocal. Now, as I have often said before, and I will say again, ABORTION FOR THE PURPOSES OF BIRTH CONTROL IS MURDER. I will and do support birth control education, awareness, and use. I do not support mindless intercourse with no thought to what might and could happen. The attitude that " Oh well, if I get pregnant, I'll just get it aborted." is self-serving and irresponsible. One more thing, I have the distinct felling that some of the guys on this net who are such rabid defenders of abortion, are doing so to impress some woman. How are ya doin fellas? Didja get her in bed yet? Your sick, you know. Finally, to Mr Carnes, since my last posting seems to have struck a chord in your mind, I suggest you see a doctor. For the record, I belong to no church, I march at no clinics, I do not support any anti-abortion groups, I do not applaud bombings. I do abhor abortion for convenience, I support birth control, I do support education in the schools, I do support abortion in some cases, I do support counseling for pregnant women, I do see more than one side to the story. As for you, Carnes, all I can see is one ridgid, selfserving argument, "I want abortion on demand because I don't want to upset my lifestyle or have to exert any responsibility for my actions." There are others on this net who do not echo this attitude. I have no argument with them. They, at least, can see other points of view. It is when someone like yourself sets themselves up as the supreme authority on what's good for everyone else, that I get my dander up. If you want to debate abortion, then get off the birth control kick and debate the whole issue. Convenience is part of that issue. T. C. Wheeler
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Dr. Emmanuel Wu) (04/01/85)
> I see that the debate has hit home with Mr Carnes. Any deviation from his > point of view is labled "paranoid". My, my Mr. Carnes, who is it that is > paranoid? Who is it that is self-serving? By your own admission, you are > one of those I seem to have goaded. So, you are a self-centered, What's in > it for me type, right? Now that we all know where you are coming from, we > can ignore your postings. [T. C. WHEELER] So, now that we know that you're a self-righteous, holier-than-thou who sees in himself the power to determine what's justifiable in other people's lives, we can ignore your postings, too. At least those of us who have a concern for personal freedom. > For you and your group, I say it is > time to come out of the woods and look at the broader > issues. Face the facts. Examine your position. > I and many others can see your position even if > you can't. Your position, plus that of several > others on this net is Convenience, pure and simple. I said this before, and got no reply: So? All personal freedoms are based on convenience. Isn't it more convenient to choose one's own mode of worship/non-worship than to have the government decide for you? Isn't it more convenient to choose what books you wish to read and what forms of art you wish to appreciate than to have the "correct" ones imposed upon you? Isn't it more convenient to choose what you want to do with your own body that to have the choice foisted upon you? The buzzword of "convenience" is simply your buzzword: it is applied by you onto all things (apparently) that you don't think other people should have the choice to do. You claim that whether or not the fetus is a living thing while inside a womb is NOT the issue: it's the only issue. You drag in convenience simply because you don't like what other people choose to do, and belittling them for choosing things out of "convenience" rather than taking waht (to you) is the correct and more responsible thing to do. Well, that's just your opinion, and all it's good for is being your opinion! It's truly self-centered on *your* part to believe that you have some sort of moral edge that allows you to determine such things. The issue continues to rest on the question of the fetus as a living thing or not, something which I thought was already answered in the negative after some long debate. Which may be the reason why the anti-abortion side has taken to arguments like "abortionists are all out for profit, so it should be banned", "it's disgusting to talk about in the manipulative terms we use to incite, so it should be banned", or "they're doing it out of convenience and not taking the responsible action as I see it, the way I had to do when I was a kid walking to school three miles a day uphill both ways... (YAWN) ... so it should be banned". Such arguments stem from desperation. They have no substance in the overall scheme of the discussion. -- "Discipline is never an end in itself, only a means to an end." Rich Rosen pyuxd!rlr