[net.politics.theory] On impugning others' motives

garys@bunker.UUCP (Gary M. Samuelson) (02/27/85)

Tim Sevener writes:

> In that vein, instead of whining about abortion, I would suggest that
> right to life advocates go to the heart of the problem and support birth
> control and access to sex education in the public schools. (this most of them
> will not do: the reason is that their opposition to abortion is *not* due
> to any concern with human life but prudishness regarding sexuality and the
> sexual revolution that occurred  in the 60's)

(I hesitate to do this in this forum, since it might lead to
a flurry of abortion articles, but my subject is *not* abortion.)

If *I* say that my reason for opposing abortion *is* due to concern with
human life, who are you to say otherwise?  The practice of impugning
the motives of those who disagree with you (plural; many people do this)
has several detrimental effects:
	1. It diverts the discussion from the real issue to character
	   assassination.
	2. It leads those whose motives have been impugned to respond in kind.
	3. It prevents the impugner from considering the opposing view
	   on its merits, possibly preventing said impugner from learning
	   something new, or at least understanding the opposing view.

For example, I don't think much of the way public schools (in the general
case) teach anything these days; if they do such a lousy job of teaching
children to read, how could anyone expect them to teach children how to
be sexually responsible?  So, while I do not oppose sex education in the
public schools in principle, I do not believe that under current conditions
they could implement such a program acceptably.  And this concern is not
due to "prudishness."  At this point, you have the option of killing the
discussion by saying, "Yes, you are so prudish," or of nurturing the discussion
by showing me cases where public school sex education, or free access to
contraceptives, has led to a decrease in unwanted pregnancies.

> If the media put on ads about drunk driving, why not ads about the problems
> of teenage pregnancy?  And the *importance* of birth control?

Good idea, but let's use the term "conception control;" even if you don't
think abortion is wrong in principle, it's a rotten method of "birth
control."

Gary Samuelson