harold@hp-pcd.UUCP (03/15/84)
I agree with the fears that Liz has raised here. I, too, fear the "progressive complacency" which has been going on for a number of years and which, I feel, will continue to be with us in the future. That is why it is so important for us to define in legal, precise terms what "human" really is. This definition MUST be applied to ALL issues involving life and death situations- abortion, infanticide, mercy killing, euthanasia, ........ Harold !hplabs!hp-pcd!harold
liz@umcp-cs.UUCP (03/16/84)
Jumping into the fray... One of the problems in the discussion here is that there are a couple of issues at the bottom of this that seem to be confused. That is, there are two values that pro-lifers hold -- one or the other of which is not held by the pro-choicers. They are: 1. The fetus is a human being. 2. All human life is worth preserving. Most of the pro-choicers on the net are disagreeing with number 1 although some agree with number 1 but disagree with number 2. The ones who disagree with number 1 are puzzled at the pro-lifers when they make analogies to Nazi Germany. That connection is not so hard to see if you consider the people who disagree with number 2. It is simply that the more people who believe that taking a human life is justified in some situations, the closer we are getting to allowing things like euthanasia, infantacide for deformed infants, killing of severely mentally handicapped, killing of the less severely handicapped, and killing of other "undesirable" groups of people. I've deliberately listed these in the order that I have from "more acceptable" to "less acceptable" to make a point. You should realize that this is not as far out as it seems. The belief that euthanasia is sometimes necessary is becoming more widespread and there are several people fairly respected in our society (I can look up who if you want to know) who have called for such things as not declaring a newborn a human until s/he is 3 days old in order that defective newborns may be killed without it being considered murder. Some have even gone so far as to say that all newborns should be required to pass some kind of tests before they are allowed to live. Please understand, too, that many of the leaders of the pro-choice movement are focussing on disagreeing with number 2 and even sometimes admit they believe number 1. So, that leaves the pro-lifers needing to argue two different points. Trying to prove that the fetus is human will draw remarks from people who disagree with number 2 that this is irrelevant while talking about Nazi Germany will draw flames from those who disagree with number 1 and who don't see the relevance. I guess I'm involved with the pro-life movement for a number of reasons. One is that I see a lot of babies being killed and I believe that is wrong. Second (and this is the one that propelled me into action), those who disagree with number 2 are quite likely to substitute the ethic of quality of life for the one that all life is worth preserving and begin permitting more and more killing to be justified. And third (and a lot of you are not going to like this one), I'm afraid that a lot of people who now just disagree with number 1 but who still believe number 2 are going to stop believing number 2. This I'm afraid will happen as more and more pro-choicers emphasize what they think is the problem of unwanted children and that the quality of a person's life (as they see it) is the supreme consideration over one's right to live. I'll be posting more articles as I find the time. I have just touched on a number of these topics here. And there are a lot of other things about this issue that worry me -- a lot of which is as a result of my working for a place called the Pregnancy Aid Center and my experiences in counseling women in crisis pregnancy there. -Liz -- Univ of Maryland, College Park MD Usenet: ...!seismo!umcp-cs!liz Arpanet: liz%umcp-cs@CSNet-Relay